Re: Gaming Consoles and IPv4

[Owen DeLong <owen () delong com>]

Your VoIP and Video systems are all getting paid rather well to provide Rendezvous hosts that are capable of forwarding 
ALL traffic and are not all that sensitive to the additional latency involved in doing so. From some perspectives, this 
is even considered desirable as it simplifies the process of so-called lawful intercept.

Games want to go peer-to-peer. The real question IMHO is why are game console companies so stupid about IPv6? Why don’t 
they push harder for IPv6 rollout and take full advantage of the lack of NAT and the ease with which peer-to-peer 
networking can be accomplished in IPv6 without hopping through a rendezvous host. Build the games to run native v6 
speaking to capable consoles and use rendezvous hosts only where an IPv4 console needs to be reached.

Owen


> On Sep 27, 2020, at 11:17 AM, Darin Steffl <darin.steffl () 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 <mattlists () rivervalleyinternet net <mailto:mattlists () 
> 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?