PDA

View Full Version : The Infamous NAT bug; Is this even recognised? Why hasn't this been patched?


nhac
8th Nov 04, 6:55 AM
Hi all,

I'm dead sure this has been covered but I think I need to post it anyway just to affirm to Relic that this bug IS REALLY IRRITATING TO A LOT OF PEOPLE. By now I'm sure some of you have tried playing direct connect games with limited success. Why?

The answer is NAT, Network Address Translation. It's what happens when your router replaces your private (eg 192.168.0.2) address with it's public IP, and lets you access the internet. NAT totally screws up DOW's direct connect games, and to be honest, I have no idea why; I'm guessing it's something to do with the joining players reporting a private IP address to the server in the software, but whatever. Point is, the bug as it appears to me, is that after a NAT'd player joins, no-one else can. So the maximum players sitting behind a router using SNAT is 2, including the one hosting. And, given that most people on some sort of broadband are (or should be) using private IP addresses and a router, this presents a big problem. Especially in the environment that I'm trying to run a server in, which is basically, hosted on a content network at an IX that only has connectivity to the networks of the participants of the multi-lateral peering, and no access to the general internet and hence gamespy.

Is this being acknowledged? I've read the 'how to beat NAT' in the faq.. doesn't work. I, and everyone else I know who've tried to make this go, have failed miserably. The last time I tried it, I couldn't even telnet to port 6112 and get a connection opened. If I, and every person I know are just giant morons and there's some trick to this that was glaringly obvious, by all means tell me to shut up, but if I'm not, should this have at least been mentioned as something that's planned to be fixed? I may not be too flash on my server coding anymore but I don't think this should be too hard to fix.

PLEASE, everyone who has experienced this problem reply or start your own thread, or all jump on me and tell me how to fix it.

Yaroujovovichou
8th Nov 04, 10:26 AM
Perhaps the thread I wrote is related to yours :

http://forums.relicnews.com/showthread.php?t=46919

thudmeizer
8th Nov 04, 12:29 PM
Here is the workaround which works brilliantly! Still dumb that this needs to be done but, hell, at least its something to tie us over until Relic fully acknowledges and fixes it:

http://forums.relicnews.com/showthread.php?t=38722&page=10&pp=15

Yaroujovovichou
8th Nov 04, 12:31 PM
Sorry, your link doesn't work. Could you post it again please?

thudmeizer
8th Nov 04, 12:38 PM
http://forums.relicnews.com/showthread.php?t=38722&page=10&pp=15

Should work now. Wierd it didn't before.

Yaroujovovichou
8th Nov 04, 4:50 PM
Is it this one : http://forums.relicnews.com/showthread.php?
p=682205&posted=1#post682205

I just answered.
Didn't help.
Still no solution...

(when the URL is too long, it is shrunked.... please, copy it on two lines)

Cat
8th Nov 04, 7:40 PM
NAT punch-through doesn't work on all routers.

EvilLlama
9th Nov 04, 4:54 AM
There is a workaround, it does work, but it does require playing with networking settings in Windows and your Router/Modem.

It has been fully discussed in the "Bug: Cannot use Direct Connect mode with more than 2 players - Details and workaround" thread. At about page 10 is the start of the discussion about the solution.

Cat:
If your router can not do port forwarding, try DMZ instead, or half-bridge mode.

As far as Relic's view, it seem that they are now completely ignoring anything to do with this bug. They have said "Use Gamespy" and shut the door on the issue. Even the simple request of making that thread sticky is too close to acknowledging that it is a bug. So I'm starting to believe that Relic no longer care about this issue and that it will never be fixed. I would love to be proved wrong.

shiver
9th Nov 04, 5:50 AM
it seems that they take that approach to anything that isnt easy to fix.

just look at the lame features included in the new patch.
they fixed all the nice easy to fix things (and took a hell of a long time, i might add) and left out everything that people actually wanted fixed. like LAN lag (yes, it does exist), router issues, etc. these are the things that should have been fixed first. not stupid balance issues!

i've asked several questions on these forums and the only people to respond have been other users....

from what i originally thought was a BRILLIANT game, I am fast changing that perspective.

looks like we will have to wait for another game....
maybe blizzard will come up with better.

thudmeizer
9th Nov 04, 6:33 AM
Well.. They have your money and my money now. Thats what it all comes down to. DoW is almost 2 months old so I'll give the devs some time to fix more things. I do wish they could do a patch a month as the first 2-3 months are critical for a game to remain getting good exposure but as the weeks roll on the pubs want development to stop and then start on a new money-making venture.

Not surprised about this NAT issue thingy: PC gaming industry simply continues to NOT get it that NATs are the way the customer base is going and it needs priority! I recommend NATs for all my hundreds of colleagues/clients.

Cat
9th Nov 04, 8:57 AM
Oh, I have no problems connecting. When I said not all routers support punch-through, I was replying to that first link where someone claimed fixing the NAT issue was simple.

Kleezs
9th Nov 04, 9:30 PM
I'm more worried about the issues regarding on two or more people trying to play on Gamespy from behind the same router. As it stands now, my brother and I cannot play at the same time, even though we have 2 original versions of DoW.

Gamespy simply does not support shared connections. I hope some changes are made for this game, playing as a team is great fun. (works fine on Bnet for example)

Regardless of this issue, I hope they fix the DC problems as well. Though I've made an exception for this game (because its so frigging good :D ), I normally boycot gamespy, as they are one of the worst online services I've ever known.