os-upnp plugin not working?

[bamf]

Still same problem, when second PC tries to connect it gets network error in Call of Duty, as soon as the first PC closes Call of Duty the second PC can connect and vice versa.

Yes, that's exactly what Static Port does. Read the documentation about Endpoint-Independent NAT that I linked a few posts earlier:

In particular, this behavior helps avoid issues with multiple local clients using the same source port to reach the same remote host.

Static port is not the correct setting for gaming clients.

[BondiBlueBalls]

Still same problem, when second PC tries to connect it gets network error in Call of Duty, as soon as the first PC closes Call of Duty the second PC can connect and vice versa.

Yes, that's exactly what Static Port does. Read the documentation about Endpoint-Independent NAT that I linked a few posts earlier:

In particular, this behavior helps avoid issues with multiple local clients using the same source port to reach the same remote host.

Static port is not the correct setting for gaming clients.

It is if you want to use UPnP reliably. The problem is that EIM can assign a dynamically selected external UDP port while UPnP requests a particular external port. But in this case, I agree. Use EIM and skip UPnP.

[nero355]

Static port is not the correct setting for gaming clients.

I think that's not entirely correct :

For the fun of it I tried modifying my current 'Static-port NAT Rule' to an 'Endpoint-Independent NAT Rule' and I get this ERROR :

Endpoint Independent NAT is only available for UDP.

Considering the fact that a lot of Games also use TCP connections together with UDP connections I am not sure what the best would be in such cases and what the result would be ?!

One thing is for sure : The theory so far is that you can not use both 'Static-port NAT' and 'Endpoint-Independent NAT' for the same Host(s) or Subnet(s) so that's out of the question!

/Needs more testing to understand what it does...

[AlpAne]

Still same problem, when second PC tries to connect it gets network error in Call of Duty, as soon as the first PC closes Call of Duty the second PC can connect and vice versa.

Yes, that's exactly what Static Port does. Read the documentation about Endpoint-Independent NAT that I linked a few posts earlier:

In particular, this behavior helps avoid issues with multiple local clients using the same source port to reach the same remote host.

Static port is not the correct setting for gaming clients.

So what is the correct settings for gaming clients?

[AlpAne]

Well to answer the other question first: the plugin is in community support mode and the code is still based on the static PHP pages. It's not going to get a lot of maintenance, but if patches exist like here we can do something about it.

About the NAT rule I'm not sure.  The built-in automatic rule no longer works?  Why?  This wasn't changed so it may be a FreeBSD change.  But it's also possible for people who still have a 26.1.x to test to compare the /tmp/rules.debug file to see if anything shifted between versions, which I doubt a bit, but not impossible.


Cheers,
Franco

Franco, is the problem with upnp not working logged as an issue to be fixed? Have you had any time to look into the problem a bit more in depth?

[Bob.Dig]

The theory so far is that you can not use both 'Static-port NAT' and 'Endpoint-Independent NAT' for the same Host(s) or Subnet(s) so that's out of the question!

You can use static port for TCP and EIM-NAT for UDP by making two rules. But I guess most of the time, you are good with only using static port. Unless this happens:

Still same problem, when second PC tries to connect it gets network error in Call of Duty, as soon as the first PC closes Call of Duty the second PC can connect and vice versa.

But I wonder, why are they so stupid to use the same source port...

[nero355]

So what is the correct settings for gaming clients?

You could do this :

You can use static port for TCP and EIM-NAT for UDP by making two rules.

:)

But I guess most of the time, you are good with only using static port.

Unless this happens:

Still same problem, when second PC tries to connect it gets network error in Call of Duty, as soon as the first PC closes Call of Duty the second PC can connect and vice versa.

Agree! :)

But I wonder, why are they so stupid to use the same source port...

Because all those gaming companies are stupid cheapskates in general and have to develop stupid P2P games because of the PlayStation/X-Box consoles while us PC Gamers always simply had Dedicated Servers for everything and none of this nonsense applied to us in the past! :(

#ShitHappens...

[AlpAne]

and you set Static port right?

What is this last bit exactly? Maybe is something silly I haven't done or did before but need to redo for 26.7

Static-port makes sure all used ports are mapped 1:1 instead of the default 1:random while doing NAT for IPv4 traffic.

So let's say your average game needs something like this :
LAN IP Address 192.168.1.123:27001
Processed by NAT to
WAN IP Address 68.54.148.89:27001

Strict-port will make sure that actually happens!
And that's when the game will show Moderate NAT as Status :)


Because the default is something like this :
LAN IP Address 192.168.1.123:27001
Processed by NAT to
WAN IP Address 68.54.148.89:56789

And that's when Strict NAT messages start to appear... :(


If you want Open NAT or whatever it's called these days ("Better than Moderate NAT") then you need to Port Forward all used ports (Which I am strongly against!) or use something like uPnP Dynamic Port Mapping like you are already doing.
_{(Which I don't like either, but some Console Gamers simply don't want to live without it for whatever reason ?!)}

And this is the core problem, the UPnP-plugin doesn't work correctly since the release of 26.7.

[nero355]

And this is the core problem, the UPnP-plugin doesn't work correctly since the release of 26.7.x

OK, but that's only for Open NAT and you do not need it for Moderate NAT which is enough for most people anyway ;)


By the way...


I have just done this for fun :

You can use static port for TCP and EIM-NAT for UDP by making two rules.

And going to check how it performs in the future instead of just one Static-port NAT Rule which I was using before.

[fornax]

By the way...


I have just done this for fun :

You can use static port for TCP and EIM-NAT for UDP by making two rules.

And going to check how it performs in the future instead of just one Static-port NAT Rule which I was using before.

Yeah, that's what my wife and I needed for GTA Online. With just Static Port, we couldn't both play together at the same time. Static Port for TCP and Endpoint-Independent for UDP was the solution. Hopefully it works out for you as well!