Forum Discussion
NAT/forwarding issues while gaming/streaming
Hey guys, I'm new here... I just got my gateway in yesterday... I must say, I'm highly disappointed and I only wish I researched this further before I ordered it...I've already done multiple searches on this topic, so I'm not gonna ask the question I've been wanting to ask which was: "Why isn't my connection open NAT?", or "Why can't I port forward?". I've pretty much answered all of those questions myself by simply searching. I have taken it upon myself to call T-mobile's tech support anyways in the event that somehow a miracle is sent my way....
Fortunately for me, a very kind gentleman by the name of Alex, employee number 786457, assured me that they will be fixing the problem within a 48 hour period. I was told there will be some Beta software sent to my unit "possibly". And yes, that was the word used... Not sure how far I can believe that, seeing as how a lot of you are having issues. But anyway, this is my journey. I will post some updates here n there to let y'all know the outcome. Worst case scenario this causes me to vacate the community & the service entirely. Because this is probably one of the largest handicaps any network can have, it's almost like having parental control without it actually being implemented. Stay tuned folks, I'll let you know what happens.
Hopefully this "beta" program isn't bullcucky.
- Cali_CatBandwidth Buddy
Did you receive the black cube gateway which is the Arcadyan one? It has been a rumor that a major firmware update is on the way so you could very well receive an early beta version. Please keep us up to date on this.
- Anónimo
Cali Cat wrote:
Did you receive the black cube gateway which is the Arcadyan one? It has been a rumor that a major firmware update is on the way so you could very well receive an early beta version. Please keep us up to date on this.
Yes, I have the model KVD21.
- extremetmTransmission Trainee
T-Mobile has been 'fixing' the issue in 48 hours for at the past year. Most likely just to get people off the phone. Not sure what they did to fix your issue but if they can open ports then why isn't an option to do it manually and why isn't it being done on the Nokia.
My guess is they allowed a static route to Xbox servers which would bounce back to your Xbox.
- GreyhawkRoaming Rookie
Hurmph! I have a PS5, provided T-Mobile with the information to open the ports (port forwarding) so I (we) could be NAT 0 ( zero) or NAT1 and was told “we can’t do that”.
Now, I love the speed, and the price.
However if I’m stuck at NAT 3, then I will have to change services so I can play the multiplayer games I paid my hard earned money on just so I could play with my friends.
Are you listening T-Mobile? Do you actually care about us, the people who are paying for unsatisfactory service?
- Ipso_no_factoRoaming Rookie
extremetm wrote:
T-Mobile has been 'fixing' the issue in 48 hours for at the past year. Most likely just to get people off the phone. Not sure what they did to fix your issue but if they can open ports then why isn't an option to do it manually and why isn't it being done on the Nokia.
My guess is they allowed a static route to Xbox servers which would bounce back to your Xbox.
COULD NOT AGREE MORE. My anger grows every time I think of the weasel Tier ZERO tech support rep who sold me the same line of Chit. GOODBYE TMOBILE FOR THAT ALONE.
- Anónimo
A "specific question" was answered. And that's how to (paraphrasing here) work around the problem. If you honestly think that you will find a "fix" for a cellular data connection not giving you a static IPv4 connection... Then I don't know what to tell you. In my honest opinion, workarounds are the only absolute thing you've got right now. Go call the FCC and tell them how butthurt you are.
- GreyhawkRoaming Rookie
Anonymous wrote:
djb14336 wrote:
Probably getting "spammed" because very specific questions were not getting answered.
The true problem has always been tied to unsolicited inbound traffic properly getting through the perimeter network layers... even with the local router set to open/forward inbound packets, those packets were still getting filtered/blocked further up the chain. Basically, it is making the consoles think you have a different NAT type than you actually have. When it comes to truly unsolicited inbound traffic (not coming back in from a previous outbound communication), it was still getting blocked at a higher level. All of this was confirmed back on the Askey modems... the ones that gave us local control over both DMZ and port traversal.
The above video literally just answered every question on this thread.
So your response is basically null and void.
On second thought, I'm glad this video is up now. So, anyone past this point in the discussion that is complaining has nobody to blame but themselves. You're basically a laughing stock.
Alright then, that's a wrap. Good game, and if you can't follow simple directions then you deserve zero port forwarding abilities.
💀
Really? That may all well and good for you. But it doesn't fit for everyone. Not everyone knows enough to do what the service the video points to wants you to do. Are you going to set everything up for everyone you say no longer have a problem because of the posted video link, but doesn't know squat about how to do the work required?
Plus, its NOT FREE.
Sure $5 a month is probably chump change to to you. But not to people who are on a fixed income. Are you willing to pay that for everyone that can't afford it?
T-Mobile is a 'service' company. That is, they provide a service, or a number of services. Their primary 'service' is as a cell phone provider. Now that they want to also provide internet service doesn't change that category.
The fact that T-Mobile’s “internet service” is via cell towers doesn’t change the fact that there are those of us who either can’t do what is required by the video’s “service”, don’t want to, or don’t want to pay extra for something that’s already being paid for.
For example: Xfinity (Comcast) changes rates, speeds, and services every chance they can. So I asked myself why I was paying them for slower speeds for more money than I can afford. I made the 'bill' as low as I could by having my own modem and a separate router. Yet their 'service' still cost me more than I can afford.
So I made the economic choice of changing to T-Mobile internet. I have faster speeds for less money, and my budget likes it as well.
The problem is that I save every year to purchase games for my PlayStation that I can no longer play with friend's that I've made online over years of playing with them. All because their was no "disclosure" about Network Address Translation and the inability to do anything about changing it.
- Anónimo
Just letting everyone who reads this know that my issue is resolved. A firmware update recently released (this last weekend) has fixed this problem. If you're running into this same issue (can't game or stream) just call customer support, I'd request tech support. I spoke directly to a software engineer after speaking to a manager about my issue.
I don't have the ability to port forward manually just yet, however, while gaming most of my problems have been solved. They have opened up certain ports to allow streaming content and open communication on services like Xbox live, etc. My NAT is also changed from strict levels to moderate levels, with no drawbacks on hosting. I can enjoy this as if it was regular cable internet.
I'm glad I didn't have to toss this service.
- djb14336Bandwidth Buddy
But... are those ports truly opening for full peer-to-peer traffic? As in, can unsolicited inbound traffic get through?
That is the true root of the problem... not just whether UPnP or manual port forwarding can be setup locally on the router. There needs to be the ability to have unsolicited inbound traffic from the edge of their network all the way to and through your modem.
As in, if you were to use port probing tools at the likes of speedguide.net or grc.com's shields up! tests and verify supposedly open ports are actually open to your forward facing IPv4 address.
To date, their network topology above the modems has been breaking such peering traffic, regardless of whether our local routers appeared to be opening ports locally. Sure, consoles and the like may report less restrictive NAT and such... but when the truly unsolicited peering traffic needs to come in, things still failed to work properly.
- Anónimo
djb14336 wrote:
But... are those ports truly opening for full peer-to-peer traffic? As in, can unsolicited inbound traffic get through?
That is the true root of the problem... not just whether UPnP or manual port forwarding can be setup locally on the router. There needs to be the ability to have unsolicited inbound traffic from the edge of their network all the way to and through your modem.
As in, if you were to use port probing tools at the likes of speedguide.net or grc.com's shields up! tests and verify supposedly open ports are actually open to your forward facing IPv4 address.
To date, their network topology above the modems has been breaking such peering traffic, regardless of whether our local routers appeared to be opening ports locally. Sure, consoles and the like may report less restrictive NAT and such... but when the truly unsolicited peering traffic needs to come in, things still failed to work properly.
They fixed MY problem, which was inability to game on certain p2p games, or stream. I gave specific information to technical support, and all of my problems disappeared.
I gave my experience. Good luck with yours.
Contenido relacionado
- Hace 3 años
- Hace 8 meses
- Hace 2 años
- Hace 2 años