1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
Dismiss Notice

Welcome To SNBForums

SNBForums is a community for anyone who wants to learn about or discuss the latest in wireless routers, network storage and the ins and outs of building and maintaining a small network.

If you'd like to post a question, simply register and have at it!

While you're at it, please check out SmallNetBuilder for product reviews and our famous Router Charts, Ranker and plenty more!

NETGEAR "Stealthily" Releases the Nighthawk X6S R7960P

Discussion in 'NETGEAR AC Wireless' started by kc6108, Apr 12, 2019.

  1. kc6108

    kc6108 Regular Contributor

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2012
    Messages:
    119
    Location:
    Kansas, USA
    @e38BimmerFN

    Ask and you shall receive...

    Here are the results of the test:

    UPnP Test (?): found: RAX120 (Gateway)
    UPnP Port mapping works



    STUN Test (?): Full Cone NAT



    UDP Binding Test (?): Endpoint independent binding, port prediction is easy
    TCP Binding Test: Endpoint independent binding, port prediction is easy



    UDP Mapping Test (?): your external IP address was different from your local one (NAT).
    Your external source ports were preserved on every connection.
    TCP Mapping Test: your external IP address was different from your local one (NAT)
    Your external source ports were preserved on every connection.



    SIP ALG (?): The initial SIP INVITE packet has been modified.
    Most probably, your NAT implements a SIP-ALG
    FTP ALG:
    The initial FTP PORT command has been modified.
    Most probably, your NAT implements a FTP-ALG



    UDP Hole Punching (?): High TTL Test was not successful
    Low TTL Test was not successful
    Silent Test was not successful
    TCP Hole Punching:
    High TTL Test was not successful
    Silent Test was not successful



    UDP Timeout (?): Your UDP timeout is approx. 40 seconds
    There should be no problem when refreshing bindings.m
     
    Last edited: May 28, 2019
  2. kc6108

    kc6108 Regular Contributor

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2012
    Messages:
    119
    Location:
    Kansas, USA
  3. kc6108

    kc6108 Regular Contributor

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2012
    Messages:
    119
    Location:
    Kansas, USA
  4. e38BimmerFN

    e38BimmerFN Very Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2012
    Messages:
    860
    Location:
    USA
    @kc6108 You the man. Great results. Thank you for verifying. Glad to see FULL CONE NAT. Now hope that NG can fix the R7960P and R8000P routers for this issue. :oops:
     
  5. kc6108

    kc6108 Regular Contributor

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2012
    Messages:
    119
    Location:
    Kansas, USA
    @e38BimmerFN

    I didn't reboot the router after changing 'NAT Filtering' to 'Open'. After rebooting the results of the test changed slightly under the 'UDP Hole Punching' section. Just FYI...

    http://nattest.net.in.tum.de/individualResult.php?hash=c9f7e327afc9d8cd544ee4a288b2b8fc

    Here are the results of the test:

    UPnP Test (?): found: RAX120 (Gateway)
    UPnP Port mapping works



    STUN Test (?): Full Cone NAT



    UDP Binding Test (?): Endpoint independent binding, port prediction is easy
    TCP Binding Test: Endpoint independent binding, port prediction is easy



    UDP Mapping Test (?): your external IP address was different from your local one (NAT).
    Your external source ports were preserved on every connection.
    TCP Mapping Test: your external IP address was different from your local one (NAT)
    Your external source ports were preserved on every connection.



    SIP ALG (?): The initial SIP INVITE packet has been modified.
    Most probably, your NAT implements a SIP-ALG
    FTP ALG:
    The initial FTP PORT command has been modified.
    Most probably, your NAT implements a FTP-ALG



    UDP Hole Punching (?): High TTL Test was not successful
    Low TTL Test was not successful
    Silent Test was successful
    TCP Hole Punching:
    High TTL Test was not successful
    Low TTL Test was not successful
    Silent Test was not successful



    UDP Timeout (?): Your UDP timeout is approx. 40 seconds
    There should be no problem when refreshing bindings.m
     
  6. kc6108

    kc6108 Regular Contributor

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2012
    Messages:
    119
    Location:
    Kansas, USA
    @e38BimmerFN

    I ran another test as a sanity check, and the 'UDP Hole Punching' section changed yet again. Thoughts? Just curious on my part.

    http://nattest.net.in.tum.de/individualResult.php?hash=013d5d377e2624c0b2c0e2a8495515f8

    Here are the results of the test:

    UPnP Test (?): found: RAX120 (Gateway)
    UPnP Port mapping works



    STUN Test (?): Full Cone NAT



    UDP Binding Test (?): Endpoint independent binding, port prediction is easy
    TCP Binding Test: Endpoint independent binding, port prediction is easy



    UDP Mapping Test (?): your external IP address was different from your local one (NAT).
    Your external source ports were preserved on every connection.
    TCP Mapping Test: your external IP address was different from your local one (NAT)
    Your external source ports were preserved on every connection.



    SIP ALG (?): The initial SIP INVITE packet has been modified.
    Most probably, your NAT implements a SIP-ALG
    FTP ALG:
    The initial FTP PORT command has been modified.
    Most probably, your NAT implements a FTP-ALG



    UDP Hole Punching (?): High TTL Test was not successful
    Low TTL Test was successful
    Silent Test was successful
    TCP Hole Punching:
    High TTL Test was not successful



    UDP Timeout (?): Your UDP timeout is approx. 29 seconds
    This is a common value for the UDP timeout.
    However, if an application doesn't send enough keep alive packets, this could be a problem
     
  7. e38BimmerFN

    e38BimmerFN Very Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2012
    Messages:
    860
    Location:
    USA
    AH ok. Yes a reboot is needed to ensure the setting took and all other data caches are cleared out. Thank you for testing this. The "Gaming with Full Cone vs Symmetric NAT Routers" web page has been updated. ;)
     
  8. e38BimmerFN

    e38BimmerFN Very Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2012
    Messages:
    860
    Location:
    USA
    UDP Hole Punching (?): High TTL Test was not successful
    Low TTL Test was not successful
    Silent Test was not successful then Silent Test was successful.

    I usually don't pay any attention to these. Something you might contact the web master of that nat test page to see. I don't see any web page information on what some of these results are all about.

    Patrick Sattler
    [email protected]