Re:Most 16-year-olds don't have servers in their rooms
by jeroenhd on Friday December 22, 2023 @12:47PM
(#38736631)
Not really? No need to mess with destination ports, no need to visit whatismyipaddress.com, no need to risk exposing your entire home network through SIP ALGs, and your Xbox/PlayStation doesn't tell you that you have a bad "NAT type". Plus, when you forward port 1024-65535 to your Nintendo Switch, as Nintendo says you need to do in its documentation, the rest of your devices don't have their P2P network traffic impeded.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Most 16-year-olds don't have servers in their rooms
by epcoa on Friday December 22, 2023 @02:03PM
(#38737372)
> when you forward port 1024-65535 to your Nintendo Switch, as Nintendo says you need to do in its documentation,
Nintendo is a shit company that treats their customer base like bitches yet gets a tremendous steady amount of good will solely due to nostalgia. I'm the last to want to defend the challenges that NAT brings, but blaming it due to some rando corporation's asshattery is silly. Luckily, or not, their documentation is wrong, you almost never have to blanket port forward all UDP ports for the Switch.
The GP point still stands as well. If you have a firewall set to block inbound by default (typical) you have the same basic port-forwarding bootstrapping/configuration problem. Also, the reasons you would absolutely need whatismyipaddress.com or similar apply to both v4 and v6. If you're configuring your router anyway you can get the v4 address.