2,732
edits
Howto:Multiplayer: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
m
no edit summary
Red Leader (talk | contribs) (More cleanup) |
Red Leader (talk | contribs) mNo edit summary |
||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
== Notes == | == Notes == | ||
* Callsigns can be a maximum of seven characters. | |||
* You might want to check the [[#Known issues|Known issues]] section. | |||
== Connecting to Multiplayer == | == Connecting to Multiplayer == | ||
| Line 10: | Line 11: | ||
[[File:Multiplayer settings dialog.jpg|thumb|Multiplayer settings dialog]] | [[File:Multiplayer settings dialog.jpg|thumb|Multiplayer settings dialog]] | ||
The easiest way to get online is to use the in-sim Multiplayer dialog. All you need to do is enter a callsign and select a server from the menu. Press Connect to go online. | The easiest way to get online is to use the in-sim Multiplayer dialog. All you need to do is enter a callsign and select a server from the menu. Press Connect to go online. | ||
{{-}} | |||
=== Using FGRun === | === Using FGRun === | ||
==== From the main page ==== | ==== From the main page ==== | ||
| Line 314: | Line 314: | ||
If you are interested in hosting your own multiplayer server, you may want to check out [[Howto: Set up a multiplayer server]]. | If you are interested in hosting your own multiplayer server, you may want to check out [[Howto: Set up a multiplayer server]]. | ||
== | == Known issues == | ||
=== Fibertel (Argentina) === | |||
It has been reported (December 2014) that UDP connection through port 5000 is not possible. {{Wikipedia|Fibertel}} (Argentina) users do not have full access to the modem configuration at the moment, they have to pass through a ''very limited'' interface on the Fibertel web site, only aimed at allowing operations like switching on/off the WiFi radio or switching between NAT router mode and bridge mode (and at the moment a bug made users unable to submit any configuration changes). | |||
After various hours of tests by the user with and without Fibertel staff at the phone with the modem in NAT router mode and in bridge mode, after a supervisor decided to remotely flash the modem (Motorola) with a recent firmware and yet noticed strange behaviour and sent tech staff to replace the modem with a simpler one (another Motorola model with no WiFi), after testing with it in bridge mode with tech staff at the phone, the user sought for help [http://forum.flightgear.org/viewtopic.php?f=27&t=24754 in the forum] and finally '''a temporary standalone instance of the multiplayer server software''' (located in Canada) was activated and '''the user was able to connect normally through all the tested ports (5001, 5002, 5003, 5507) but not through port 5000 which is the only available port in any FlightGear multiplayer server at the moment'''. Through another Internet Service Provider (Speedy ADSL) the user could connect with no problems to port 5000 of any multiplayer server. | |||
It has been reported | |||
After various hours of tests by the user with and without Fibertel staff at the phone with the modem in NAT router mode and in bridge mode, after a supervisor decided to remotely flash the modem (Motorola) with a recent firmware and yet noticed strange behaviour and sent tech staff to replace the modem with a simpler one (another Motorola model with no | |||
Facing this evidence, Fibertel Argentina technical staff ''finally'' admitted: "It's not the modem, it's the network, our network uses port 5000 for setup purposes, it should be open for the user but it might not be fully functional". '''This is reported here to avoid other users a similar 60-70 hours time loss.''' The users reports he asked them with energy to stop filtering port 5000, the answer was that because of the implications that was not an option. | Facing this evidence, Fibertel Argentina technical staff ''finally'' admitted: "It's not the modem, it's the network, our network uses port 5000 for setup purposes, it should be open for the user but it might not be fully functional". '''This is reported here to avoid other users a similar 60-70 hours time loss.''' The users reports he asked them with energy to stop filtering port 5000, the answer was that because of the implications that was not an option. | ||
Port 5000 is unofficially associated both with FlightGear and the UPnP protocol. | Port 5000 is unofficially associated both with FlightGear and the {{Wikipedia|UPnP}} protocol. | ||
However, it has been observed (discussion of {{issue|1617}}) that '''the fact that Fibertel Argentina is using port 5000 for network setup purposes shouldn't imply that they are filtering packets: ''"it should really only be when the packet has reached its destination that the port number has any meaning at all"'''''. | However, it has been observed (discussion of {{issue|1617}}) that '''the fact that Fibertel Argentina is using port 5000 for network setup purposes shouldn't imply that they are filtering packets: ''"it should really only be when the packet has reached its destination that the port number has any meaning at all"'''''. | ||
Forum thread full link: http://forum.flightgear.org/viewtopic.php?f=27&t=24754 | Forum thread full link: http://forum.flightgear.org/viewtopic.php?f=27&t=24754. | ||
See {{issue|1617}}. | See {{issue|1617}}. | ||
Besides investigating about '''possible workarounds(?)''' (port forwarding through UDP bidirectional tunnelling) which might or might not add too much network latency or CPU load or constitute a misuse of special purposes networks, the user suggested diversification of port numbers (''"offering two possible port numbers could mean offering twice the chances to connect to the | Besides investigating about '''possible workarounds(?)''' (port forwarding through UDP bidirectional tunnelling) which might or might not add too much network latency or CPU load or constitute a misuse of special purposes networks, the user suggested diversification of port numbers (''"offering two possible port numbers could mean offering twice the chances to connect to the multiplayer network and would constitute a reasonable prevention measure of part of the possible connection problems of FlightGear users over the internet"''). | ||
However, coding work on the server software is not priority at the moment, and any change to servers might turn out to be a "nightmare on the server admins side to implement [...]", not to mention "[...] the fact that most if not all of them are volunteering time and machines for this". | However, coding work on the server software is not priority at the moment, and any change to servers might turn out to be a "nightmare on the server admins side to implement [...]", not to mention "[...] the fact that most if not all of them are volunteering time and machines for this". | ||