I've tried to join a public server from a little lanparty but it seemed as only one person could join a server, as soon as th second person tries both got kicked.
Someone suggest me to use a different net_port for every client, but this seems a bit to complicated for a lager group of people to change this settings manually. So my suggestion is to add a option in the settings-menu to use a random port instead or check if the port is not allready in use (what shouldnt be that hard).
How would you check its not in use?
Get a working router or manually change the port if your router is too dumb to do it for you.
The solutions is already here and it is called NAT - network adress translation. ANY router should be able to do it. (Seriously, is there any ISP not using routers to connect "dial-up" customers to their net these days?)
Quote from: Bissig on July 04, 2008, 12:14:00 AM
The solutions is already here and it is called NAT - network adress translation. ANY router should be able to do it. (Seriously, is there any ISP not using routers to connect "dial-up" customers to their net these days?)
not all NAT implementations are perfect, many common routers don't do the right thing when multiple clients start udp "connections" to the same ip:port with the same source port.
Quote from: kevlarman on July 04, 2008, 03:49:39 AM
Quote from: Bissig on July 04, 2008, 12:14:00 AM
The solutions is already here and it is called NAT - network adress translation. ANY router should be able to do it. (Seriously, is there any ISP not using routers to connect "dial-up" customers to their net these days?)
not all NAT implementations are perfect, many common routers don't do the right thing when multiple clients start udp "connections" to the same ip:port with the same source port.
Same for TCP?
TCP has connections so is a lot easier to track, but its entirely possible for shitty router's to fuck that up too. But I would assume that most are better at tcp.