The Port Forwarding thread: Minimizing multiplayer connection issues

Sorry, but if you mean the same "failure numbers" that I have in mind, then I can assure you that it has nothing to do with port forwarding. Since I changed my provider, the ED client usually shows 0 failures on the network page - and I'm not using any sort of port forwarding.
Excellent!
...but I haven't changed anything else and I cannot read your mind, I'm afraid.
And, indeed, it doesn't completely rule out issues due to my ISP. For the foreseeable future though, this is a constant that will not change. No option there.

then I can assure you that it has nothing to do with port forwarding
all due respect and thanks for the attempt to assist however, this statement presumes that other things are equal in our situations. That's likely far from a given. I'm always happy to hear suggestions and remain optimistic that I can make things better and learn as I go.

I have a couple other things to test and I need time to get in-game to see if there's an effect. I will report when I am able!

I hope that was helpful!
 
Maybe, but then every router is using a different wording for this process. Or tell my how I can find an equivalent in a Fritzbox 7590 router.
And what is with all my other wlan devices? Do I have to reconfigure them all to this new fixed IP address?

But please just ignore me if you are short of time. I'm only asking out of curiosity, as port forwarding makes no sense in my case anyway.
...and that's what I wanted to ask: why do you not use port forwarding? That's likely academic and OT for this thread, so you need not answer it, of course.

As far as the specific router you mentioned: the Fritzbox 7590, I can't say that I'm familiar with its config interface (no surprise there since there are a huge number of routers out there with some great- and some terrible- config interfaces). I wish that I could help with that specifically. *

You'll see terms such as "DHCP reservation." Mine is called "Manually Assigned IP Address around the DHCP List" (don't ask me why; that's awful!) On a Trendnet router, I have seen it called (much more predictably) "DHCP Reservations List."
This will almost always (at least in sensible cases) be found in the router's LAN settings.

My advice about making this easiest is: Look at the CLIENT LIST in your router's config interface. That is commonly a table-view showing all of the computers & devices currently connected to the router's LAN (via both ethernet or WIfi). Usually you'll be able to pick out your computer by its name on the network or by its MAC address and in many cases there will be a button right there to reserve that address.
Even if that's not the case, the interfaces will have a pretty simple table-view for DHCP reservation that has a few fields for you to provide info such as:
1) a host name (just a name of your choosing for the computer or device - not functionally imperative)
2) the device's MAC (pretty easy to find using the "ipconfig /all" command in Windows) or obvious based on the few devices shown in your CLIENT LIST.
3) IP address you wish to reserve for the device
4) an "enable" checkbox for the reservation.
You may not see ALL of those fields in your case.
Some routers benefit from a restart even after you've supposedly applied and saved these settings. YMMV.

When you say "wlan" are you referring to wireless (Wifi) access? In short, the answer to your question depends upon whether you want all of those devices to be able to use port-forwarding. If not, there's nothing more convenient than allowing each device and the router to negotiate and get their IP addresses sorted out automatically! This is called DHCP. It's generally a wonderful thing for most of us! Myself included! :cool: Automatic is beautiful!

To be honest, IP reservation is one of the easier tasks to do and it's useful beyond a step in the port-forwarding process. If you have a network-connnected printer, for example, this is a prime example of how handy it is for a device to always have the same IP address on your network. Doesn't it make you crazy when WIndows can't find your printer? Reserve it, I say. Have your router make your life easier!

If you're careful not to make changes, it can be very interesting and educational to look around in your router's config interface.

* You might elect to look at portforwarding.com. they have a pretty big list of routers in their example-pool. If the Fritzbox is there, you may see instructions for doing this specifically for that router.

EDIT:
Surprise: they do!
There's a model 7490 there. I know it's not the same, but if you look and compare with your 7590, you may well find that they're essentially identical or close. These interfaces tend not to change drastically.
 
Last edited:
I still don't get port forwarding. Not in a technical sense but why do it? There is one gigantic problem:
Does it work?

From testing, I would say this indeed makes a difference and many of the multiplayer issues disappear as long as port forwarding is correctly implemented in all wing or crew mates systems, or in all players trying to instance (match maker decisions notwithstanding).
Which means, that ALL players need to enable port forwarding and playing in crowded areas in open play I can guarantee that there is at least one player that doesn't enabled port forwarding (most of the time this is being me).
I tried port forwarding before, multiple times and it simply does not work well enough. The frequency of desynchs, disconnects and straight forward whole instance crashes remained more or less the same.
It may be suitable for organized events in private groups or when playing with the very same players over and over again but for the chaotic randomness of open play? No chance.

I am still waiting for a day where open play is stable and consistent. The matchmaker in particular behaves extremely dumb. When being in an instance with a player and that player low wakes out of the instance, following said player may or may not get you in the same instance despite just having played together.
And then we have wings. Wings should be the very first priority when being matched but it's not. The geographic location is apparently much more important. So when I wing up with someone from across the world and I just want to do some ground exploration on some guardian site or so I can not do this because he isn't located on the same continent.
And most result is that instead of placing two players in a wing in just one instance (max count of players is two), we got two seperate instances for ourselves.
This 1. defeats the purpose of open play (and PG) as we have explicitly not selected solo and 2. has the audacity to dictate who we are allowed to play with or not.
Before you ask, no, port forwarding has not resolved this issue. I have even been attempting to resolve this issue with the wonderful support team but even they are at their wit's end.
 

Viajero

Volunteer Moderator
I still don't get port forwarding. Not in a technical sense but why do it? There is one gigantic problem:

Which means, that ALL players need to enable port forwarding and playing in crowded areas in open play I can guarantee that there is at least one player that doesn't enabled port forwarding (most of the time this is being me).

Most gameplay, at least in my experience, tends to happen in wings of 2 to 4 players. On some occasions we try to gang up with more for larger events. And you can start seeing significant benefits with just a handful of players having port forward (UPnP is not a complete write off), but obviously the more the merrier.

I understand your doubts, but it is not really an issue for speculation. The improvement is real, proven and tested in many peer to peer games before Elite. Not a guarantee that you will have a trouble free experience (there is always some CMDRs without Port Forward or with a stubborn router), but it will probably be reasonably better so to make it worth it.

As for the peer to peer structure, as mentioned, is just a fundamental design choice for the developer, with advantages and disadvantages. The main disadvantage being the unreliability of UPnP connections and routers. The main way to minimize all those is port forwarding. If that still does not help you then there is not much else you can do except completely change and revamp the game network engine (to a server based set up in this case), which is most of the times completely prohibitive cost and resource wise, especially in a game this senior.
 
Last edited:
Most gameplay, at least in my experience, tends to happen in wings of 2 to 4 players. On some occasions we try to gang up with more for larger events. And you can start seeing significant benefits with just a handful of players having port forward (UPnP is not a complete write off), but obviously the more the merrier.

I understand your doubts, but it is not really an issue for speculation. The improvement is real, proven and tested in many peer to peer games before Elite. Not a guarantee that you will have a trouble free experience (there is always some CMDRs without Port Forward or with a stubborn router), but it will probably be reasonably better so to make it worth it.

As for the peer to peer structure, as mentioned, is just a fundamental design choice for the developer, with advantages and disadvantages. The main disadvantage being the unreliability of UPnP connections and routers. The main way to minimize all those is port forwarding. If that still does not help you then there is not much else you can do except completely change and revamp the game network engine (to a server based set up in this case), which is most of the times completely prohibitive cost and resource wise, especially in a game this senior.
My gameplay usually involves instances with 10+ players at hotspots in open as I mainly do PvP. A reliable connection is the foundation of all gameplay in that area. Without a consistent connection, you simply can't do proper player combat.
The design choice of using P2P has mainly advantages for the developers (low cost, low entry level, no advanced know-how required) while having disadvantages mainly for the players (inconsistent connections, no backup system which leads to desynchs and DCs, potential lag and rubberbanding thanks to poor connections) whereas other architectures or even better, a mix of architectures could counteract all the issues we have in Elite to an extend where it is bearable to play in open.
The amount of connectivity issues in Elite is overwhelming (just looking a the recent mauve Adder errors, you see what I'm referring to) and the networking architecture needs a long overdue overhaul or even better: a complete rework as it simply isn't capable of supporting large number of players without major errors like tremendous amount of lag, rubberbanding, frequent disconnects or desynchs (the worst of them all, imo).
Port forwarding doesn't adress any of this. As said earlier, it has a use-case in organized and smaller arrangements of players but P2P in general simply isn't suited for what Elite is advertising itself: an MMO.
 
Last edited:
I have had success with port forwarding.
Before, my friend and I tried physical multi-crew a few times (always me on his ship), and it never worked. Last week, we both went through the steps to get port forwarding working (and tested: netcat is an invaluable tool).
Tonight, we gave it another go (again, me on his ship), and we were able to travel from station, to SC (never worked before), through witch-space (also never worked before), land on a planet, disembark, get on again, then return to the original station (so I could get back to my ship).
All went flawlessly.
In addition, we had no trouble with instancing even without forming a team (prior to the SC/WS tests). We often had to jump through hoops to get instanced before.
 
Oh, I should add... I have a double-router setup, with modest control over the external router (fiber modem, forward all the ports) and complete control over the internal router (the real firewall). Having been using Linux for over twenty years helps no end :).
 

Viajero

Volunteer Moderator
I have had success with port forwarding.
Before, my friend and I tried physical multi-crew a few times (always me on his ship), and it never worked. Last week, we both went through the steps to get port forwarding working (and tested: netcat is an invaluable tool).
Tonight, we gave it another go (again, me on his ship), and we were able to travel from station, to SC (never worked before), through witch-space (also never worked before), land on a planet, disembark, get on again, then return to the original station (so I could get back to my ship).
All went flawlessly.
In addition, we had no trouble with instancing even without forming a team (prior to the SC/WS tests). We often had to jump through hoops to get instanced before.
Happy that it helped you and your friend. And impressed you implemented it over a dual router set up! Remember that is not a full 100% guarantee but it should definitely improve your experience.

(y)
 
Oh, I should add... I have a double-router setup, with modest control over the external router (fiber modem, forward all the ports) and complete control over the internal router (the real firewall). Having been using Linux for over twenty years helps no end :).
By "...forward all the ports..." I presume you mean just the range used by Elite Dangerous.
 
By "...forward all the ports..." I presume you mean just the range used by Elite Dangerous.
No, I have it forward all 65536 ports for both tcp and udp to my internal firewall. I trust my internal firewall far more (and have a few other things going as well). My internal firewall forwards only what is absolutely necessary, dropping everything else in the bit bucket.
Happy that it helped you and your friend. And impressed you implemented it over a dual router set up! Remember that is not a full 100% guarantee but it should definitely improve your experience.
It comes down to setting up DNAT on both routers.

My friend did have trouble instancing with others with PF turned on (nobody could see him, and he couldn't see anybody else), but as it worked for us last night (he turned PF back on), we suspect something else was going on.

The nice thing is should you need to turn PF off or on again after it has been set up, you need to mess with only Elite's config, not the router as well.

I suspect the most important thing is good testing, which is where netcat comes in: set it to listen to the right UDP port on the target machine and get a friend to send some packets (also using netcat) to the target.
 
No, I have it forward all 65536 ports for both tcp and udp to my internal firewall. I trust my internal firewall far more (and have a few other things going as well). My internal firewall forwards only what is absolutely necessary, dropping everything else in the bit bucket.

It comes down to setting up DNAT on both routers.

My friend did have trouble instancing with others with PF turned on (nobody could see him, and he couldn't see anybody else), but as it worked for us last night (he turned PF back on), we suspect something else was going on.

The nice thing is should you need to turn PF off or on again after it has been set up, you need to mess with only Elite's config, not the router as well.

I suspect the most important thing is good testing, which is where netcat comes in: set it to listen to the right UDP port on the target machine and get a friend to send some packets (also using netcat) to the target.
I see. That is interesting and makes some sense in your and my situations. My DSL gateway is quite dated so there have been no updates for it in a long time. This means that I essentially would never trust it as a router to secure my network (and thus would never operate without a router of my own!), so it makes sense to simply forward all 65536 ports on it.

Just to be clear- DNAT?

Edit:
Just saw some definitions for various NAT types, so I believe that I understand the distinction between a Dynamic NAT (and its couple of flavors) and Fullcone and Symmetric NATs - hopefully

Edit2:
Saw an article from a while back that mentions using Firewall-DMZ to help with double-NAT problems related to gaming. My older gateway includes this feature. Wondering...

Edit3:
Just caught another little hitch. It turns out that router interfaces often (term used loosely, restricted to interfaces I have seen) have more than one enable check-box when applying settings for port-forwarding and/or gaming modes. Sometimes they're kinda small and not obvious, so they're easy to miss. More testing is in order for me...
🛠️🖥️
 
Last edited:
Just caught another little hitch. It turns out that router interfaces often (term used loosely, restricted to interfaces I have seen) have more than one enable check-box when applying settings for port-forwarding and/or gaming modes. Sometimes they're kinda small and not obvious, so they're easy to miss. More testing is in order for me...
Yeah, router configs can be downright annoying.
My friend's router would not let him set up a static IP (internal) due to a conflict with the dynamic address range. It turned out the dynamic address range was from 192.168.X.2 to 192.168.Y.254 (I don't remember the exact numbers, but X and Y were fairly separate)... on a 255.255.255.0 subnet. Go figure.
Once I spotted that (yay for screen-sharing on discord), he tweaked the dynamic range to something sensible and was able to assign himself a static IP.
And for those of you panicking about sharing the above IP numbers, 192.168.foo.bar is a standard internal address range that most routers use, so nothing disclosed. (there's also 10.foo.bar.baz and 172.16.foo.bar to 172.31.foo.bar).
 
Hi!

Just may give ppl a hint re: static vs dedicated IP!

Static (internal) IP: 192.168.1.135 (only as an example) definded by the router - can be reserved by windows network settings.

Dedicated (outside) IP: 213.45.168.178 given by the ISP

To easily check your outside IP, simply use f.e ripe.net - if this changes from one day to another its a dynamic IP.

To easily check internal IP use ipconfig/all all in cmd console. If this changes at some point its set dynamic not static.
 
Hi!

Just may give ppl a hint re: static vs dedicated IP!

Static (internal) IP: 192.168.1.135 (only as an example) definded by the router - can be reserved by windows network settings.

Dedicated (outside) IP: 213.45.168.178 given by the ISP

To easily check your outside IP, simply use f.e ripe.net - if this changes from one day to another its a dynamic IP.

To easily check internal IP use ipconfig/all all in cmd console. If this changes at some point its set dynamic not static.
A static IP is an unchanging IP whether coming form the ISP or defining it on your LAN. All it means is UNCHANGING. To prove my point here's a screenshot from my ISP that sells static IPs.
I've bought /29 subnet for many years. All ISPs in my country use the term static IP.


1626208606596.png
 

Viajero

Volunteer Moderator
With regards to Port Forwarding it does not matter if your external IP is dynamic or fixed. As long as you have an external IP (the one that everyone else sees you by) that means you can connect to the internet :) , and that is all that matters. The one that needs to be static is your internal gaming PC or console´s
 
I can confirm after following this rule me and my friend have not disconnected ! so it works but if we enter star port lifts he disappears although i see his lift door open ! so thanks for the post
 

Viajero

Volunteer Moderator
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom