UPnP - Multiple Xbox One Gaming Consoles & NAT

[cruz878]

I read a bunch all over the web prior to landing here (this thread was the most detailed and organized info I found)... I believe that particular comment relating to Xbox 1st gen and possible UPnP problems was from a Reddit post (but can't say for certain). There was no hard evidence as I recall, but it stuck in the back of my mind as I've toyed with this.

I'm still tinkering with this, but it seems as though clearing the UPnP table and soft resetting the Xbox's results in an Open NAT whenever one or both reverts to Moderate. Some games my son plays were opening secondary ports causing UPnP rules to clear so I have now increased my "Cleaning Threshold" from 3 to 10.

 

[e38BimmerFN]

Ok, thanks for the info. Ya, wanted to see where the issue may be. I'm thinking there maybe issues at the uPnP level for both game console and router FW. I've been able to get 3 consoles to OPEN NAT on dashboard and in game using semi older routers. Newer generation routers, not so much. Just seems to be a port handling issue since 3074 is the primary port for XBL and when more than one console comes online, that's when things happen, wrong if not done right.

 

[cruz878]

I'll post back in a few weeks how things are going with the increased cleaning threshold. I only enabled UPnP specifically for the Xbox console IP addresses so a value > 10 should be highly unlikely (highest I've seen to date is 4).

My router is on a UPS, but I cannot account for any power hiccups that cause a Hard Xbox reboot, a Xbox Software update, or my son hard resetting one of the consoles for any reason. Based on what I have seen so far, any one of those three items seems likely to require a manual UPnP clearing on my router.

I am not a fan of UPnP in general terms and manually port forward every other required device in my network except these Xbox. If it wasn't for the Miniupnpd configuration allowing me to only enable UPnP for specific devices I would have never allowed it on my router. Microsoft really needs to allow us advanced users more control over this at the console level.

 

[Hyper_Eye]

Well, it happened - they couldn't play in the same game together. Here's what I saw and did this time:

XboxOne#1- showed 'Open NAT'
XboxOne#2-showed 'Strict NAT'

1. Attempted the hold LT + RT + LB + RB thing. Did nothing on either xbox.
2. Attempted full-rebooting each Xbox one at a time. And attempting to join in-game again each time. No change - things still weren't working for them.
3. Left the Xboxes online, rebooted the AC87U.

• Xbox#1 then showed 'moderate NAT.' Doing the hold LT + RT + LB + RB did nothing. I I took it 'offline' via the network settings menu, then back 'online' afterwards. It then showed 'Open NAT'.
• Xbox#2 then showed 'Open NAT'
• They were immediately able to play again.

So, interestingly enough, a reboot of the AC87U without touching the xboxes (after the initial reboot but while the issue was still present) 'fixed' the problem though I had to force network off/on on one of them to get uPNP to work I suspect. Still haven't changed any router settings away from Merlins defaults.

Next time it happens, I'll be focusing on AC87U logs before/after the reboot.

Hey Bonez, I don't know if you ever fully resolved this problem but I had a very similar problem playing Destiny with my son after I upgraded from an RT-N66U to an RT-AC88U. I posted a thread about it and I was able to resolve (or workaround) the problem: https://www.snbforums.com/threads/upnp-intermittent-failure.38820/

 

[e38BimmerFN]

Would see to be a Merlin FW issue maybe reviewing your linked thread. Bonez is using OEM FW I believe. uPnP is enabled by default. Though how it's designed and implemented in OEM fw is another issue. Most of the issue is the handling of two or more gaming consoles connected to the router and how uPnP is handling the ports needed since the gamin gaming port can only be used for one console, a virtual port needs to be set up. This is one issue that uPnP may have problems with along with how game consoles are handling the ports and uPnP as well. We see it where if we disconnect the networking adapter on the console then re-enable it, the NAT status seems to go from Strict or Moderate to Open. So there seems to be some various factors here between the router and consoles that play a role in attaining OPEN nat correctly. Regardless of OEM FW or 3rd Party

 

[e38BimmerFN]

Any progress on this?

I'll post back in a few weeks how things are going with the increased cleaning threshold. I only enabled UPnP specifically for the Xbox console IP addresses so a value > 10 should be highly unlikely (highest I've seen to date is 4).

My router is on a UPS, but I cannot account for any power hiccups that cause a Hard Xbox reboot, a Xbox Software update, or my son hard resetting one of the consoles for any reason. Based on what I have seen so far, any one of those three items seems likely to require a manual UPnP clearing on my router.

I am not a fan of UPnP in general terms and manually port forward every other required device in my network except these Xbox. If it wasn't for the Miniupnpd configuration allowing me to only enable UPnP for specific devices I would have never allowed it on my router. Microsoft really needs to allow us advanced users more control over this at the console level.

 

[Hyper_Eye]

Would see to be a Merlin FW issue maybe reviewing your linked thread. Bonez is using OEM FW I believe. uPnP is enabled by default. Though how it's designed and implemented in OEM fw is another issue. Most of the issue is the handling of two or more gaming consoles connected to the router and how uPnP is handling the ports needed since the gamin gaming port can only be used for one console, a virtual port needs to be set up. This is one issue that uPnP may have problems with along with how game consoles are handling the ports and uPnP as well. We see it where if we disconnect the networking adapter on the console then re-enable it, the NAT status seems to go from Strict or Moderate to Open. So there seems to be some various factors here between the router and consoles that play a role in attaining OPEN nat correctly. Regardless of OEM FW or 3rd Party

Well it could be a bit different with two Xbox One systems. In my case with two PS3s I have no issues obtaining "open NAT" (Type 2 NAT in Sony's terms) outside of the multicast issue I had to resolve. My Xbox One and Xbox 360 systems work consistently as well even with the Xbox One in instant on mode. Eventually there will be a second Xbox One in the house and I will see how things go there. I realize that certain games could pose a problem though if they don't properly utilize a secondary port in the event that UPnP denies the request to open the primary port due to another console already having claimed it. In the case of Destiny I don't have that problem. As long as the UPnP multicast discovery is working properly the PS3s get the ports they need and we can play together.

 

[e38BimmerFN]

Ya a single xbox or single PS console wont see this issue. It's only when two or more consoles get online at the same time will you see the issue. Most of the time, if the router and uPnP is working right and you have no NAT on the ISP modem, OPEN NAT should be seen on the DASH Board of the console. Now in Game NAT status when all consoles are using same game, can report a different status sometimes. This is were it gets interesting. I've been able to get OPEN NAT while using 3 XB1s and BO3. Had to do some QoS configurations and walk thru turning on each xbox one at a time and checking NAT as I went.

 

[Hyper_Eye]

Ya a single xbox or single PS console wont see this issue. It's only when two or more consoles get online at the same time will you see the issue. Most of the time, if the router and uPnP is working right and you have no NAT on the ISP modem, OPEN NAT should be seen on the DASH Board of the console. Now in Game NAT status when all consoles are using same game, can report a different status sometimes. This is were it gets interesting. I've been able to get OPEN NAT while using 3 XB1s and BO3. Had to do some QoS configurations and walk thru turning on each xbox one at a time and checking NAT as I went.

Right. What I am saying is that we are using two PS3s to play Destiny together. If UPnP isn't working properly we cannot play together but I have had no issues outside of that multicast problem that I have now resolved. So with two PS3s and the game Destiny UPnP is working properly and consistently for me. With another game such as BO3 maybe we could duplicate the problem you are referencing but with Borderlands 2 and Destiny UPnP works great. The reason I specifically referenced Bonez's problem is that he was experiencing this problem when his kids were playing Destiny and it worked intermittently. That was the exact behavior I was seeing and I thought it worth mentioning that he could have actually been experiencing the multicast issue I had. I did not realize he was using stock firmware though.

 

[e38BimmerFN]

Roger that. Would be interested to know what you see on BO3 with two or more games going at the same time.

We believe Bonez issue is the consoles getting hung up on ports and it seems to be handled by his process. Most of the time, it's really not games or the kind of FW, it's how uPnP and the consoles are getting ports open correctly to get OPEN NAT across the board. Games are different however when it come to networking and port usage, they rely on the same ports and handling to get services. It's how that process and handling effects the NAT status.

What is your NAT status for both Dashboard and InGame on both of your PS consoles when both are in Destiny?

 

[Vexira]

ive been having similar upnp issues, it seems that if my xbox gets port 3074 and i try to play a cod game on pc that needs it i get, moderate nat, this might be slightly off topic but if i try to run 2 pcs with black ops 3 i get open on the first pc moderate on the second, which is frustrating. And from time to timey xbox will randomly get moderate nat on dash. Do i need to set the port ramge to start with port one.

 

[Vexira]

my gta v on pc is stuck on moderate nat, its similar to my copy of cod advanced warefare on xbox, seems that upnp has issues forwarding both game and console ports or the correct port range required in a consistent manner, makes me wonder if destiny on my xbox one is getting its ports forwarded correcty.

 

[e38BimmerFN]

What MFr and model router do you have?
What Mfr and model ISP Modem do you have?

Are you using uPnP on the router or disable and have Port Forwarding or Port Range forwarding configured.

I've only been able to configure a global port usage 1-65535 for both UDP and TCP on a D-Link router and pointed 3 IP addresses for 3 game consoles to this port range using uPnP. No Port Forwarding. It works. OPEN NAT on all including InGame NAT status.
Not sure if or how other routers could be configured.

ive been having similar upnp issues, it seems that if my xbox gets port 3074 and i try to play a cod game on pc that needs it i get, moderate nat, this might be slightly off topic but if i try to run 2 pcs with black ops 3 i get open on the first pc moderate on the second, which is frustrating. And from time to timey xbox will randomly get moderate nat on dash. Do i need to set the port ramge to start with port one.

 

[RMerlin]

ive been having similar upnp issues, it seems that if my xbox gets port 3074 and i try to play a cod game on pc that needs it i get, moderate nat

This is normal. A port cannot be forwarded to two different devices at the same time. If the game isn't able to chose a different port when the first one is already redirected somewhere else, then there's nothing you or the router can do about it.

 

[Vexira]

d

What MFr and model router do you have?
What Mfr and model ISP Modem do you have?

Are you using uPnP on the router or disable and have Port Forwarding or Port Range forwarding configured.

I've only been able to configure a global port usage 1-65535 for both UDP and TCP on a D-Link router and pointed 3 IP addresses for 3 game consoles to this port range using uPnP. No Port Forwarding. It works. OPEN NAT on all including InGame NAT status.
Not sure if or how other routers could be configured.

Dreytech vigor 130 modem in bridge mode with the RT-AC 88U, upnp on the router only, running 380.66 Beta 2, routers bug is that it wont forward the correct port range for black ops 3, if there are 2 copies in use, even when the game used to use port 3074, but it was changed in a patch to 27017

 

[Vexira]

This is normal. A port cannot be forwarded to two different devices at the same time. If the game isn't able to chose a different port when the first one is already redirected somewhere else, then there's nothing you or the router can do about it.

The router is not redirecting it to a port form the required range of ports that activsion specifies for example if the game uses port 3074, instead of trying 3075 it will try 3405 or some thing else which makes no sense, same with black ops 3 it now uses port 27017, but the router will give it a port in the 3000 range not in the 27014-27050 range which is the required range if you do a manual port forward, since the game client wants a port from that range. tried port triggering cant work out how to do it properly.

One thing that bugs me is that, my previous netgear router gave me and open nat status in gta v on my pc via upnp meaning open port but my 88u gives moderate meaning half open or not fully forwarded via upnp.

Another bug is that changing values for bandwidth or priories to custom in adaptive qos causes upnp to stop forwarding the ports, until i change the starting port to 1 then i change it back to 1024, then it works, I've also noticed if upnp plays up ticking erase jfs partition at next boot and hitting apply has gotten it to work.

 

[e38BimmerFN]

uPnP should open a virtual port for the 2nd or more consoles. This is what should happen if multiple game consoles are online at the same time and using same game. The 1st console to connect with BO3 should get the main port, 3074, uPnP should either assign 3075-3076 maybe for the 2nd console to connect or pick a virtual random port for the 2nd console and any other consoles to connect after that.

With NG and Asus routers, I noticed that you can't seem to specific using a range of IP addresses with a range of ports like I can with a D-Link router. There I can tell QoS to assign a range of IP address for the xboxes, set protocol to use both UDP and TCP, set the port range to 1 thru 65535 and with uPnP enabled, I was able to get all 3 xbox 1 connected with OPEN NAT on the dashboard and in BO3. Not sure if this kind of configuration can be done on NG or Asus router UIs.

 

[ColinTaylor]

uPnP should either assign 3075-3076 maybe for the 2nd console to connect or pick a virtual random port for the 2nd console and any other consoles to connect after that.

Just to be clear here; the decision to use another port, and which port to use, is entirely down to the game/console in question. The UPnP service on the router has nothing to do with that process. Or to put it another way; if a game requests opening port 3074 but that port is already in use, the router will not open and alternative port instead, it is the responsibility of the game/console to do that.

 

[e38BimmerFN]

However the configuration of the router can impact how the game ask and responds to getting additional ports right? After setting up 3 xbox ones with a DLink router, if the router isn't configured correctly, ports and NAT status will not be achieved thus the method and configuration I found seems to work. At least for a D-Link router. I stand corrected about uPnP and gaming.

 

[ColinTaylor]

However the configuration of the router can impact how the game ask and responds to getting additional ports right?

There's very little the router can do to influence the behaviour of a game. It's more or less limited to accepting or rejecting port mapping requests, and providing status updates. The only things UPnP can be configured for is allowed port ranges, secure mode and timeout values. Of course, all this assumes that there aren't any bugs in the software.