I’m still waiting for my ISP to turn on v6 so the consumers of my neighborhood ISP can get v6 service.
Going to poke them again today actually. - Jared > On Sep 28, 2020, at 8:37 AM, Justin Wilson (Lists) <li...@mtin.net> wrote: > > It is coming back to that, but you still have so much going on that you need > the open ports. I don’t gt why people fight IPV6 so much. > > > Justin Wilson > j...@mtin.net > > — > https://j2sw.com - All things jsw (AS209109) > https://blog.j2sw.com - Podcast and Blog > >> On Sep 28, 2020, at 8:34 AM, Mike Hammett <na...@ics-il.net> wrote: >> >> Why stray away from how PC games were 20 years ago where there was a >> dedicated server and clients just spoke to servers? >> >> >> >> ----- >> Mike Hammett >> Intelligent Computing Solutions >> >> Midwest Internet Exchange >> >> The Brothers WISP >> >> From: "Justin Wilson (Lists)" <li...@mtin.net> >> To: "North American Network Operators' Group" <nanog@nanog.org> >> Sent: Monday, September 28, 2020 7:22:28 AM >> Subject: Re: Gaming Consoles and IPv4 >> >> There are many things going on with gaming that makes natted IPv4 an issue >> when it comes to consoles and gaming in general. When you break it down it >> makes sense. >> >> -You have voice chat >> -You are receiving data from servers about other people in the game >> -You are sending data to servers about yourself >> -If you are using certain features where you are “the host” then you are >> serving content from your gaming console. This is not much different than a >> customer running a web server. You can’t have more than one customer >> running a port 80 web-server behind nat. >> -Streaming to services like Twitch or YouTube >> >> All of these take up standard, agreed upon ports. It’s really only prevalent >> on gaming consoles because they are doing many functions. Look at it >> another way. You have a customer doing the following. >> >> -Making a VOIP call >> -Streaming a movie >> -Running a web server >> -Running bittorrent on a single port >> -Having a camera folks need to access from the outside world >> >> This is why platforms like Xbox developed things like Teredo. >> >> Justin Wilson >> j...@mtin.net >> >> — >> https://j2sw.com - All things jsw (AS209109) >> https://blog.j2sw.com - Podcast and Blog >> >> On Sep 27, 2020, at 9:33 PM, Daniel Sterling <sterling.dan...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >> Matt Hoppes raises an interesting question, >> >> At the risk of this being off-topic, in the latest call of duty games I've >> played, their UDP-NAT-breaking algorithm seems to work rather well and >> should function fine even behind CGNAT. Ironically turning on upnp makes >> this *worse*, because when their algorithm probes to see what ports to use, >> upnp sends all traffic from the "magical xbox port" to one box instead of >> letting NAT control the ports. This does cause problems when multiple xboxes >> are behind one NAT doing upnp. If upnp is on and both xboxes are fully >> powered off and then turned on one at a time, things do work. But when upnp >> is off everything works w/o having to do that. >> >> There are many other games and many CPE NAT boxes that may do horrible >> things, but CGNAT by itself shouldn't cause problems for any recent device / >> gaming system. >> >> It is true that I've yet to see any FPS game use ipv6. I assume that's cuz >> they can't count on users having v6, so they have to support v4, and it >> wouldn't be worth their while to have their gaming host support dual-stack. >> just a guess there >> >> -- Dan >> >> >> >> On Sun, Sep 27, 2020 at 7:29 PM Mike Hammett <na...@ics-il.net> wrote: >> Actually, uPNP is the only way to get two devices to work behind one public >> IP, at least with XBox 360s. I haven't kept up in that realm. >> >> >> >> ----- >> Mike Hammett >> Intelligent Computing Solutions >> >> Midwest Internet Exchange >> >> The Brothers WISP >> >> From: "Matt Hoppes" <mattli...@rivervalleyinternet.net> >> To: "Darin Steffl" <darin.ste...@mnwifi.com> >> Cc: "North American Network Operators' Group" <nanog@nanog.org> >> Sent: Sunday, September 27, 2020 1:22:51 PM >> Subject: Re: Gaming Consoles and IPv4 >> >> I understand that. But there’s a host of reasons why that night not work - >> two devices trying to use UPNP behind the same PAT device, an apartment >> complex or hotel WiFi system, etc. >> >> On Sep 27, 2020, at 2:17 PM, Darin Steffl <darin.ste...@mnwifi.com> wrote: >> >> >> This isn't rocket science. >> >> Give each customer their own ipv4 IP address and turn on upnp, then they >> will have open NAT to play their game and host. >> >> On Sun, Sep 27, 2020, 12:50 PM Matt Hoppes >> <mattli...@rivervalleyinternet.net> wrote: >> I know the solution is always “IPv6”, but I’m curious if anyone here knows >> why gaming consoles are so stupid when it comes to IPv4? >> >> We have VoIP and video systems that work fine through multiple layers of PAT >> and NAT. Why do we still have gaming consoles, in 2020, that can’t find >> their way through a PAT system with STUN or other methods? >> >> It seems like this should be a simple solution, why are we still opening >> ports or having systems that don’t work? >
