Re: Gaming Consoles and IPv4

[Jared Mauch <jared () puck nether net>]

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) <lists () 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
> j2sw () 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 <nanog () 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)" <lists () 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
> > j2sw () 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.daniel () 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 <nanog () 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" <mattlists () rivervalleyinternet net>
> > To: "Darin Steffl" <darin.steffl () 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.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> 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?