Port Forwarding
-
why not?
If his hw problems are unfixable then he knows that he can’t enjoy 100% and he must let others enjoy it and try to find a solution. In his quest he can be guided to a perfect solution.
If his problems are fixable then a teammate can guide him or do the changes for him like with teamviewer etc…what even is this “if”? its polar. either you can port forward or you cannot, there is no sometimes or somewhat involved.
-
Guys, please recognize that you have different views on allowing dubious connections.
Arty likes the option, I assume because he regularly uses it with friends who have their ports nicely forwarded, and restricting the connections to source port 2935 tells him immediately when something screwed up with one of the connections. That client won’t be able to connect, he investigates, solves the problem (it worked before), and he can be certain the mesh network will be complete again.
Blu3wolf dislikes it, because he is located behind a router over which he has no control, and as a consequence, he will never be able to jotin a server that disallows dubious connections. However, I believe not many people use this option (dubious clients are allowed by default), so he will be able to join most servers. Unfortunately, when there are other clients with non-optimal configured routers, the data between them will be routed through the host, causing some lag and bandwidth (at the server side).
AllowDubiousConnections has pros and cons, that’s why it’s optional.
-
well I understand Blu3wolf’s considerations but when an engine is way demanding then u have to comply… For instance for 1-2 years I had ISP problems disconnections and major Portforwarding issues I tried my best to make them look and solve the problem but no luck… so I was away of MP flying solo… When the contract ended (1year) I switched to another ISP hopping all will be ok but nope bad luck again… tried again but after a few months I broke the contract and gone to another ISP and all fine since then… Nowadays things are easier and u can change more easily…
In the meantime guys in my squad where flying… but I was sure that they had many many problems… When I rejoined them I was glad (and sad on the same time for them) cause I found out that they had major problems… for them was ok but for me it’s pointless to fly missions where data are fubared and the outcome is flip flop… U r allways with the question… was an error on my side… was the server? is he really that good should I do the same? and so on and so forth…When I returned back I was immediately assigned to investigate the problems and errors. When we enabled dubious block everything was sweet… when we disabled it buzinca came back… so u see the point…
It’s just what u expect and demand from the experience… For me when data are fubared u go arcade… when data are ok then it’s sim. Also I believe this is and one of the reasons BMS team changed the MP code…
-
I understand your point of view. However, it was and still is possible to have a reliable MP experience without everybody using source port 2935. In that sense, allowdubiousconnections is too strict. Also, the routing through host feature didn’t work as it should previously. This has been repaired (not sure which release, update 5 or 6 IIRC). So yes, disallowing dubious connections guarantees a good MP experience, but may end up locking out clients that could participate perfectly fine.
For instance, there are routers with a NAT implementation that will forward 2934 and 2935 if set up that way, but these will still renumber the source ports for outbound traffic. No problem connecting to clients behind such routers, but they won’t pass the allowdubiousconnection test, as their actual source port isn’t 2935 according to the server.
When two clients aren’t able to establish a peer-to-peer connection, you’ll see “routing through host” in their monologs, and in the server’s. So keeping an eye on the server’s monolog for this string will give you a good indication whether the connections are good, or not.
-
One can always establish UDP VPN for the purpose of allowing ports open
-
One can always establish UDP VPN for the purpose of allowing ports open
Never tried that. How would that work? VPN to a software router on the outside? What products could you use for that?
-
Topology
VPN -> falcon-subnet -> falcon-private-ip
connect to falcon private ip in comms.
-
I understand your point of view. However, it was and still is possible to have a reliable MP experience without everybody using source port 2935. In that sense, allowdubiousconnections is too strict. Also, the routing through host feature didn’t work as it should previously. This has been repaired (not sure which release, update 5 or 6 IIRC). So yes, disallowing dubious connections guarantees a good MP experience, but may end up locking out clients that could participate perfectly fine.
For instance, there are routers with a NAT implementation that will forward 2934 and 2935 if set up that way, but these will still renumber the source ports for outbound traffic. No problem connecting to clients behind such routers, but they won’t pass the allowdubiousconnection test, as their actual source port isn’t 2935 according to the server.
When two clients aren’t able to establish a peer-to-peer connection, you’ll see “routing through host” in their monologs, and in the server’s. So keeping an eye on the server’s monolog for this string will give you a good indication whether the connections are good, or not.
Well correct me if I’m wrong but when the port changes maybe a re connection takes place inside racknet? have u seen the log with -mono? What if this takes place in a critical moment and suddenly there is a disturbance in the data flow?
Have a flight of 20+ ppl if 2-4 guys have this during the mission then flip flop??? -
Well correct me if I’m wrong but when the port changes maybe a re connection takes place inside racknet? have u seen the log with -mono? What if this takes place in a critical moment and suddenly there is a disturbance in the data flow?
Have a flight of 20+ ppl if 2-4 guys have this during the mission then flip flop???could I have a specific example where this happened? to clarify, not a mission flop but a port change causing a game crash.
-
@sthalik this requires another pc???
-
could I have a specific example where this happened? to clarify, not a mission flop but a port change causing a game crash.
I’m not talking about game crash… u loose datalink, u have jumping airplanes or missiles, u don’t have radar contacts, ACMI recordings r fubared, missiles loose lock and go their way etc
-
Ill take that as a no, then?
-
-
-
Ill take that as a no, then?
nope… to create a good report on what I’m talking u must get synched those:
raknet log
packets log (Boy they r big)
ACMI
server network log - monitoring
clients network log - monitoring
And all clients video recording (fraps)To do so even for one mission will take a large amount of time and effort…
So in general and quick when I hear some troubles over the radio I mark the time. Then I go through the data and try and see if something went wrong about that time, I can’t be exact as Raknet time has different timing then falcon time but u have the raknet time when the mission starts… so u go along.
I hope in the future those would be synched… network time and falcon - mission time, and maybe server clock… that way admins can spot troubles easier and see if it was from client or server or which client had the problem etc etc…
-
but?
No buts. Just (relatively easy to set up, for people with relative networking knowledge) VPN software.
-
well sounds like hamachi … IIRC this was disastrous unless if all users are on this and then it’s different. Sorry as I said ignorant and searching on the subject…
And how stable r those software VPN thingies? like Open VPN?Also as I read on it VPN requires even higher bandwidth cause data goes from vpnclient to vpnserver then they go their way… so this increases server bw demands to the max… right?
wow metrics seem to cause troubles and must be set on all clients on this solution… Headache nightmare for an ignorant like me…
-
nope… to create a good report on what I’m talking u must get synched those:
raknet log
packets log (Boy they r big)
ACMI
server network log - monitoring
clients network log - monitoring
And all clients video recording (fraps)To do so even for one mission will take a large amount of time and effort…
So in general and quick when I hear some troubles over the radio I mark the time. Then I go through the data and try and see if something went wrong about that time, I can’t be exact as Raknet time has different timing then falcon time but u have the raknet time when the mission starts… so u go along.
I hope in the future those would be synched… network time and falcon - mission time, and maybe server clock… that way admins can spot troubles easier and see if it was from client or server or which client had the problem etc etc…
so, to reiterate my question, do you have such an example? or just a guess?
-
-
well sounds like hamachi …
Nonsense.
IIRC this was disastrous unless if all users are on this and then it’s different.
Nonsense.
And how stable r those software VPN thingies? like Open VPN?
Stable enough such-that my phone disables all non-vpn 3G comms.
Also as I read on it VPN requires even higher bandwidth cause data goes from vpnclient to vpnserver then they go their way… so this increases server bw demands to the max… right?
Slightly.
wow metrics seem to cause troubles and must be set on all clients on this solution… Headache nightmare for an ignorant like me…
Metrics are fine with openvpn.