Netgate Discussion Forum
    • Categories
    • Recent
    • Tags
    • Popular
    • Users
    • Search
    • Register
    • Login

    5 pcs, 5 Static ip's one game with one port

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Gaming
    12 Posts 4 Posters 8.9k Views
    Loading More Posts
    • Oldest to Newest
    • Newest to Oldest
    • Most Votes
    Reply
    • Reply as topic
    Log in to reply
    This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
    • B
      bkblood
      last edited by

      Ok well i did what you suggested and removed 1:1. I have each box setup to route to the static ip's and 28960 is succesfully opened on all 5 box. BUT still when we try to join each other it just sits and says trying to join host.. does nothing after that.. Nat reflection is enabled. I will attach screenshots. So im guessing im still not able to reflect back to lan.. I didnt provide a picture of nat reflection cause its obvius if its unchecked its enabled.. What else am i missing?

      Thank You,
      BKBLOOD

      outbound.jpg
      outbound.jpg_thumb
      portforward.jpg
      portforward.jpg_thumb
      rules.jpg
      rules.jpg_thumb

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • P
        pirateghost
        last edited by

        i have a similar situation with 3 computers.  same game.  upnp works about 5% of the time.

        i REAAAAALLLLY want this to work properly, because this is the way of the future of gaming, and its just going to get more complicated unless something is done soon.

        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • B
          bkblood
          last edited by

          Yeah there must be a way to route the static ip's BACK to the lan but i thought thats what nat reflection does? :/

          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • GruensFroeschliG
            GruensFroeschli
            last edited by

            Your screenshots look right.

            Could you do a TCP-dump to see if the packets actually get redirected?

            We do what we must, because we can.

            Asking questions the smart way: http://www.catb.org/esr/faqs/smart-questions.html

            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • B
              bkblood
              last edited by

              Ok well i tried the tcpdump and i may have figured out the cause.. Let me try to explain..
              When i use my computer (lan ip=192.168.0.244 Ext. IP=70.90..35) to connect to the computer next to me (lan ip=192.168.0.243 Ext. Ip=70.90..33 < Wan ip) in Modern warfare it says Trying to join 1.. 2.. 3.. etc. ok so looking at tcpdump it shows 192.168.0.244.28960 > 70.90..33.60893: UDP, length 29… Notice the port 28960 comin from mine destination 60893??? What port is that??!! is it random? ok so i thought that might be it.. its routing to the wrong port. but wait! Trying to connect to MY routed box from the non routed box i get 192.168.0.243.28960 > 70.90..35.28960 the port is the same... WTF! im sooo confused.

              Thank you!

              Again here is a better diagram

              VIP Box: lan ip=192.168.0.244 --- Ext. IP=70.90..35
              Non-VIP box:lan ip=192.168.0.243 --- Ext. Ip=70.90.
              .33

              Connect from VIP box to Non-VIP:  192.168.0.244.28960 > 70.90.***.33.60893: UDP, length 29 (notice port)

              Connect from Non-VIP to VIP Box:  192.168.0.243.28960 > 70.90.***.35.28960

              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • B
                bkblood
                last edited by

                Still having problems waiting patiently

                Thank you

                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • E
                  Efonnes
                  last edited by

                  Which pfSense version is this?  I ask because I know that on 1.2 - 1.2.2 (versions I've used), NAT reflection is broken for at least udp for sure when you select the tcp/udp option for a port forward rule. (it got fixed while 1.2.3 was being worked on; I had found a problem in the code generating the settings for it)

                  If you aren't on 1.2.3, you can work around this by separating those tcp/udp rules into separate rules for tcp and udp individually.

                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • B
                    bkblood
                    last edited by

                    1.2.3-RELEASE built on Sun Dec 6 23:21:36 EST 2009

                    is the version i am running. How would i create these said rules if i was using port 28960 example would be awesome thank you

                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • E
                      Efonnes
                      last edited by

                      OK, that isn't the issue then.

                      Looking through the other information you've given, it seems that you don't have it using a static port for connections from the computer behind the WAN IP.  Try also making an outbound NAT rule for 192.168.0.0/24 with destination port 28960 and static port enabled, then see if it still changes the port as you described above.  Be sure to place it above that last rule, since the rules are processed top to bottom.

                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • B
                        bkblood
                        last edited by

                        I will give that a try when i get the chance. Thank you all for the help :) ill let yall know if it worked

                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                        • First post
                          Last post
                        Copyright 2025 Rubicon Communications LLC (Netgate). All rights reserved.