Hosting Ports

[chusrubi2]

What about changing the hosting-games system? It's a shame that we still have to open ports to be able to host games when nowadays there are protocols avoiding this.

And this would also help noobs who don't even know how to open ports on router.

Anyone with better networking knowledge thinks it would be worthy to work on it?

 

[PurgeandFire]

That is definitely one of the things we emphasized when we talked with them.

It is probably a lot of work, but it is also one of the biggest reasons that people began using those 3rd party host services. If they want to get people back to standard battle.net, it'd definitely go a long way!

 

[Tleno]

Honestly, if they were to implement Battle.net 2.0, that'd be very sweet of them to implement ability to host without all that port hassle, just like Starcraft 2, but then again, might not be worth the effort depending on the hosting differences.

 

[scarletaw]

What about changing the hosting-games system? It's a shame that we still have to open ports to be able to host games when nowadays there are protocols avoiding this.

And this would also help noobs who don't even know how to open ports on router.

Anyone with better networking knowledge thinks it would be worthy to work on it?

absolutely agree!!! there is must be some way out )))

 

[Dr Super Good]

It's a shame that we still have to open ports to be able to host games when nowadays there are protocols avoiding this.

There are not... Unless you are referring to using STUN servers to help some people traverse the NAT.

And this would also help noobs who don't even know how to open ports on router.

So would people bothering to learn about what they use. It is not magic for crying out loud lol.

Anyone with better networking knowledge thinks it would be worthy to work on it?

Short of doing what SC2 does and having Blizzard host all games it will not work.

So people understand why you must forward ports... You are behind a Network Address Translator (NAT) which does not know which local IPv4 address to forward the incoming packets to unless the packets are in response to outgoing packets. Since hosting requires spontaneous incoming packets only the NAT fails to forward them unless you set up a "port forwarding" in the Firewall/NAT table.

SC2 gets around this by hosting the game on properly configured servers so everyone, even the lobby creator, is a client. This is like joining a robot game in WC3.

IPv6 eliminates this problem buy removing the need for a NAT traversal as local IP addresses are incorporated into the public address. Unfortunately most non-commercial ISPs as well as most old computers still do not support IPv6 so it is not viable for a full migration.

 

[chusrubi2]

There are not... Unless you are referring to using STUN servers to help some people traverse the NAT.

Yeah, this was the one I read not so long ago.