Gaming Consoles and IPv4

Owen DeLong owen at
Wed Sep 30 16:45:12 UTC 2020

Your VoIP and Video systems are all getting paid rather well to provide Rendezvous hosts that are capable of forwarding ALL traffic and are not all that sensitive to the additional latency involved in doing so. From some perspectives, this is even considered desirable as it simplifies the process of so-called lawful intercept.

Games want to go peer-to-peer. The real question IMHO is why are game console companies so stupid about IPv6? Why don’t they push harder for IPv6 rollout and take full advantage of the lack of NAT and the ease with which peer-to-peer networking can be accomplished in IPv6 without hopping through a rendezvous host. Build the games to run native v6 speaking to capable consoles and use rendezvous hosts only where an IPv4 console needs to be reached.


> On Sep 27, 2020, at 11:17 AM, Darin Steffl <darin.steffl at> wrote:
> This isn't rocket science.
> Give each customer their own ipv4 IP address and turn on upnp, then they will have open NAT to play their game and host. 
> On Sun, Sep 27, 2020, 12:50 PM Matt Hoppes <mattlists at <mailto:mattlists at>> wrote:
> I know the solution is always “IPv6”, but I’m curious if anyone here knows why gaming consoles are so stupid when it comes to IPv4?  
> We have VoIP and video systems that work fine through multiple layers of PAT and NAT. Why do we still have gaming consoles, in 2020, that can’t find their way through a PAT system with STUN or other methods?
> It seems like this should be a simple solution, why are we still opening ports or having systems that don’t work?

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <>

More information about the NANOG mailing list