12
edits
Howto:Multiplayer: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
no edit summary
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 299: | Line 299: | ||
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&p=226034#p226034 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. | 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&p=226034#p226034 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. | ||
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. | 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. | |||
However, it has been observed (discussion of [https://code.google.com/p/flightgear-bugs/issues/detail?id=1617&q=-Type%3DFeatureRequest%20-status%3ATesting&sort=-id&colspec=ID%20Type%20Status%20Priority%20Summary%20Aircraft%20Milestone 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&p=226034#p226034). | |||
Reported issue 1617 full link: https://code.google.com/p/flightgear-bugs/issues/detail?id=1617&q=-Type%3DFeatureRequest%20-status%3ATesting&sort=-id&colspec=ID%20Type%20Status%20Priority%20Summary%20Aircraft%20Milestone | Reported issue 1617 full link: https://code.google.com/p/flightgear-bugs/issues/detail?id=1617&q=-Type%3DFeatureRequest%20-status%3ATesting&sort=-id&colspec=ID%20Type%20Status%20Priority%20Summary%20Aircraft%20Milestone | ||
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"''). | |||