TheJam

Amazing, thanks very much! I’ll feedback tonight. Should this be automatic or does it require a cloud resync to force an update to the ping map or anything?

I was looking into the interface as it’s quite slow, on the XR1000, and seen it reported on other routers as well. It seems like the way pages are being loaded are quite inefficient. Looking at the pages in the Settings, all static assets like html pages, JavaScript pages, images, etc., they don’t get cached and keep getting re-downloaded from page-to-page. Nor are they optimised (i.e. minified) - wouldn’t expect noticeable improvement from that alone but doesn’t hurt. Lots of reloading of iframes, from page-to-page, even if the background image stays the same in that iframe, it will display it as a blank white page for a sec, re-downloads all those assets and displays them again to show the same background and form fields. Seems like a lot of expensive queries and DOM manipulation which adds up. Is this something Netgear controls or is it part of DumaOS? Feels like there could be a lot of quick wins for performance gains from the UI with just caching alone for pages which aren’t dynamic. Does feel like it would really benefit from a bit of an overhaul though like being built with a framework like React where it’s only updating the DOM where necessary or deployed as a PWA. Maybe there’s limitations I’m not aware of though for this. I worked as a performance engineer for 4 years and now work as a front-end engineer so just wanted to give some feedback/ suggestions as it seems like a common complaint.

Thanks for that, I’ll give port forwarding another go and then test our port triggering and see what I get. I was on the Netgear page today just looking at the various articles they have on the XR1000 just in case there was something I was missing. I came across this page (https://kb.netgear.com/24290/How-do-I-add-a-custom-port-forwarding-service-on-my-NETGEAR-router?language=en_US) which states the order in the Port Forwarding table is important as it scans the top entry first and works its way down. Even though it’s an article that links from the XR1000 support page, it seems like a generic one that probably goes across multiple Netgear routers. If that is the case with the order of ports, would it be possible to add the ability to reorganise the port table? I believe at the moment it orders the table in order of last modified. Could that be a possible factor with port forwarding not quite working as expected? Seems like the Geo Filter issue is linked to some servers not being whitelisted as discussed in another thread here and Geo Filter blocking them so happy that issue should be resolved after that now. Would explain the intermittent issues with NAT I’ve been having lately and why it works when turning it off. I thought I came across a router bug but persisted after a factory reset. I didn’t realise there was a whitelist for servers as part of it (which 100% makes sense) but good to know in future if I come across this issue again - will just report it on a thread here.

Would you mind sending a quick post to this thread when it’s been updated please?

Thanks for the response, didn’t realise you guys couldn’t control the behaviour with hardware directly. It’s something I’ve only looked at when there’s a network slow down, I haven’t monitored it enough to see if it gradually increases or spike to 100% and gets stuck for some reason. I’ll go and do some investigation on it - if I can get some useful information for you guys to work from - I’ll share it in this thread.

I have an XR1000 which has 3 CPU's, however, one is almost always idle with the other 2 frequently going up towards 100% which ends up bogging down the network and I have to restart the router fairly regularly. It would be great to have the option to use 3 CPU's for all traffic rather than having one dedicated to WiFi which really doesn't get utilised, the design decision doesn't really make sense to me. I'm guessing it's to mitigate complexity with managing 3 CPU threads with each other at a low level but it would really solve a lot of high load issues on the router if wired traffic had an extra 33% overhead (assuming all CPU's are the same). Could that possibly be added as an option to override the default CPU behaviour and use all 3 for all traffic?

Had the same issues today, had to create a Geo fence around Dublin - as I got disconnected with the NAT changing to strict mid game and kicking me from party chat - but still had some issues. Would be great to get this sorted

Could this be an issue with the XR1000’s implementation of UPnP causing issues? Looking online, it seems like some routers work fine with sticking to port 3074 and others don’t. I don’t really understand why port forwarding 3074 to one and 3075 to the other doesn’t keep them on those ports?

No, I’m just on the latest Xbox firmware, same with the XR1000. Bit of a nightmare trying to play 2 Xbox’s on the same network without a good bit of latency being added. Any news on HybridVPN coming to the XR1000? I heard that can help latency issues with multiple consoles using the same network - have one on VPN and another on the network normally. Feel like the only way it’s gonna get resolved at this point is hoping VPN works or getting an additional line into the house which I hope I won’t have to do 🤦🏻‍♂️

I factory reset the router today as well to rule out any issues. Geo Filter hasn’t caused any issues since then either

I disabled UPnP, manually port forwarded all Xbox ports to one console - left the other one off for now just to test. NAT type is Open which is good but the port on the Xbox won’t stay at 3074, it always switched to an alternative port. It’ll stay at 3074 on the Xbox for about 10 - 20s before changing to a random one. Wish you could just manually select 3074 rather than only being able to select it by setting the port to automatic, quite annoying.

I managed to sort the issue out after restarting everything and using IP Address Reservation instead of a static IP - set it on the Xbox as well as I came across an issue where the Xbox assigned an internal IP address automatically rather that getting one assigned by DHCP. Did a lot of trial and error today and it seems if the Xbox stays on port 3074, it’s fine but it seems to change after a random amount of time and I notice considerable issues playing Call of Duty with time to kill and time to death. I have to keep going into my Xbox settings to switch to a random manual port and then back to automatic which chooses 3074 again but doesn’t stick. It’s really noticeable how much the game changes when this happens. If I use port forwarding rules for the IP for 3074, it will show it in automatic for about 10s before changing to a random 5***** number and won’t stay at 3074 no matter what I do. From doing some research, it seems UPnP is responsible. Any way to workaround this?

So now I have Open NAT after resetting everything but still disconnecting from Party chat. I ran a network test on my Xbox and it's saying I have 100% Packet Loss - totally puzzled what's going on with this.

Set my DHCP to the default ranges again and set up IP Address Reservation instead for my xbox. Getting moderate NAT now so seems like that was one issue. I'm sure I've set up static IP's outside the DHCP range before with no issues but maybe I'm being a bit stupid with this one.

First time setting up port forwarding so not sure unfortunately. I did a factory reset and decided to set that up as well as everything else as COD hit detection had been not good over a few days but might need to reset it again. I'll port forward the other port the xbox has assigned itself first and take it from there. Thanks very much for the replies!

One last point, I noticed that the xbox assigns a port number in the network settings for each console. I have one where the xbox assigns the console to the port 3074 automatically and the other xbox assigns it a port number of 56580 or something similar to that, not sure if I need to forward the port the random one it assigns to the other console as well? I assume that UPnP should handle it but might be wrong assuming that.

Yeah, I didn't even try getting into a game after that, I figured if the party chat wasn't working it was probably gubbed. Both devices are added to the Geo-Filter. Only noticed one device showing on the Geo-Filter map but could be 2 of the same icon overlapping. I do notice a client device always pings up in the very south of the UK while its searching for games, which is quite far from where I am in the UK, but assume that was game related. One issue I did notice is that I added the two consoles to the Geo-Filter before setting up the static IP's when it wasn't working. Noticed one of consoles was showing twice on the device list for the Geo-Filter afterwards when only one with that name was actually on the device list. It's a renamed Xbox so the device name should be unique to that Xbox. I had to rename it in the device list on the router to differentiate it and remove the original one from the Geo-Filter which was set up - not sure if I've possibly came across a bug that's now causing issues.

Attached QoS settings: I've tried with it enabled, on auto, and off. Used the auto-setup for the upload/ download values - went through 8 tests and was quite a difference even just changing a % or two until it got to those values.

Could you clarify what you mean by the allow list please? I can see his device on the device map but it's not ticked to be blocked and works fine without a static IP. Not sure if there's another option somewhere else you're referring to?

I haven’t tried that, I’m concerned about the security of the network doing that - especially with people working from home as well.

The NAT is an issue, I can’t start or join Xbox parties without a network error showing up. Both consoles are connected to the XR1000 but there are other devices connected to an Orbi router set to AP mode over ethernet in a different part of the house where WiFi can’t reach. I did a test and it seems if I set up a static IP on Xbox, it doesn’t play well with the GeoFilter. I tested it turning off port forwarding with the same issue until I set the IP to be set automatically on the Xbox’s. I set the DHCP range from 2-200 with the static IP’s at .201 and .202. Could setting it outside of the DHCP range cause an issue? I’ll post screenshots in the next 30 mins or so. I did turn off QoS but it didn’t make a difference to the NAT - tried QoS off with GeoFiltering which didn’t work, tried it on with GeoFiltering which didn’t work. Tried the combo’s on/ off for QoS and both worked with GeoFiltering off.

Hi, I've been trying to solve some latency issues with COD: MW2 with 2 consoles. I had QoS on, GeoFiltering on, UPnP on and NAT set to Open. I saw recommendations in another thread to try port forwarding for 3074 on once console and 3075 on another while keeping the internal port set to 3074 for both. However, I get a Toredo tunnelling error and an unavailable NAT if I do that. If I turn off Geo Filtering, I get an open NAT again. I'm not too sure why this is happening? Any help would be great

@quadrophenic Did this resolve your issue?