Xbone, NAT strict
-
Glad to have helped. :)
-
I really appreciate the hard work here, you guys are great.
My $500 question is will this work with "two" XB1's on the same network?
Enabling just UPnP has given our two 360s all the internet loving they could wish for, my XB1 is being a jerk and if this does the trick I am almost home free. But I need it to work for two of them.
It sounds like M$ likes Cone NATs and dislikes Port Symmetric NATs. Will the changes above make the difference?
-
I dont have two XBone's but I'm sure you wont have any issues if it's setup properly. Only real difference so far is that the XBone never really shuts off so a hard reboot is required once all the settings are setup.
-
I really appreciate the hard work here, you guys are great.
My $500 question is will this work with "two" XB1's on the same network?
Enabling just UPnP has given our two 360s all the internet loving they could wish for, my XB1 is being a jerk and if this does the trick I am almost home free. But I need it to work for two of them.
It sounds like M$ likes Cone NATs and dislikes Port Symmetric NATs. Will the changes above make the difference?
i don't have two xbone's, but just as AhnHEL stated, as long as you set it up properly, the second one should work. if you only setup 1 xbone, you should have 3 spots open on the upnp and nat-pmp page for the second xbone. proceed with creating the same rules you did for the first console and power cycle the second xbone before testing the connection for openNAT.
at this time, i don't think i will need more than 4 user specified permission rules, i wonder what happens if you needed a 5th?
-
@tomdlgns:
at this time, i don't think i will need more than 4 user specified permission rules, i wonder what happens if you needed a 5th?
I wrote about that very thing just a few weeks ago in the PS4 thread under the part where it says For More Advanced Users
http://forum.pfsense.org/index.php/topic,69319.msg384435.html#msg384435
-
@tomdlgns:
at this time, i don't think i will need more than 4 user specified permission rules, i wonder what happens if you needed a 5th?
I wrote about that very thing just a few weeks ago in the PS4 thread under the part where it says For More Advanced Users
http://forum.pfsense.org/index.php/topic,69319.msg384435.html#msg384435
yeah, that makes sense, i guess i was stuck on 1 rule is 1 IP/device, i never though about adding a range.
sometimes you miss the obvious.
thanks.
-
i don't have two xbone's, but just as AhnHEL stated, as long as you set it up properly, the second one should work. if you only setup 1 xbone, you should have 3 spots open on the upnp and nat-pmp page for the second xbone. proceed with creating the same rules you did for the first console and power cycle the second xbone before testing the connection for openNAT.
I have made my changes and confirmed that this worked to get the first xb1 online with an open nat (cone). My brother will be purchasing his new xb1 this month, so to-be-continued, so far so good.
The two 360s "did" start experiencing issues though they are in the same network range (/29) found in both the UPnP and NAT rules I created
I added two UPnP rules that would allow port 53 and 80 separately from our 88-65535 rule mentioned above, as they are required according to M$. They still didn't work after that for 20 minutes or so then automagically started working again. They both have open NATs now and appear happy. No idea, I might be able to remove those two rules but until I have a reason to I wont just in case.Big thanks to all.
-
i don't have two xbone's, but just as AhnHEL stated, as long as you set it up properly, the second one should work. if you only setup 1 xbone, you should have 3 spots open on the upnp and nat-pmp page for the second xbone. proceed with creating the same rules you did for the first console and power cycle the second xbone before testing the connection for openNAT.
I have made my changes and confirmed that this worked to get the first xb1 online with an open nat (cone). My brother will be purchasing his new xb1 this month, so to-be-continued, so far so good.
The two 360s "did" start experiencing issues though they are in the same network range (/29) found in both the UPnP and NAT rules I created
I added two UPnP rules that would allow port 53 and 80 separately from our 88-65535 rule mentioned above, as they are required according to M$. They still didn't work after that for 20 minutes or so then automagically started working again. They both have open NATs now and appear happy. No idea, I might be able to remove those two rules but until I have a reason to I wont just in case.Big thanks to all.
when i was running 360, i never did anything other than enable upnp (and checked the box for MS) and everything worked fine. no custom upnp, no custom NAT/outbound NAT….nothing. meaning, i never opened 80 and 53. personally, i dont think those are needed and i did not have to open those up for the xbone. everything i did in this thread and read in other threads was put back to how it was prior to making the xbone thread and i followed the few steps i posted on the bottom of page 1 which got me openNAT on with the xbone. i know MS states they need to be open, but i feel confident saying that they don't need to be (80 and 53) and that the issue was specifically with NAT rules, not a port forward rule.
it we are both using pfsense and a 360 and let's just assume we have a basic switch in between our 360 and pfsense box, then 80/53 should not be needed if i was able to get it to work w/o opening those ports.
again, i am not saying that will fix your problem, just giving you some more information.
good luck.
-
i know MS states they need to be open, but i feel confident saying that they don't need to be (80 and 53) and that the issue was specifically with NAT rules, not a port forward rule.
I didn't mean to get off into the woods, and I agree with you on this. In the past UPnP being enabled was enough to ensure victory for multiple 360s.
-
i know MS states they need to be open, but i feel confident saying that they don't need to be (80 and 53) and that the issue was specifically with NAT rules, not a port forward rule.
I didn't mean to get off into the woods, and I agree with you on this. In the past UPnP being enabled was enough to ensure victory for multiple 360s.
no, i don't think you did. it is important to discuss all options as long as we don't get too far off track. i think it is important to discuss what works and what doesn't work/isn't needed.
-
I've done everything described in this thread but I'm only getting my Xbox One to go from "Strict" to "Moderate" and not "Open". This is quite fuzzy as I was successful at getting it "Open" before I just had to replace a hard drive in my pfSense server and ever since I did a re-install I have not been able to get it open again.
