| Can a MoCA adapter help with Actiontec small NAT table? If I use an Actiontec Ethernet over Coax MoCA Adapter with the Actiontec router that came with the FiOS, will I still get issues with the small NAT tables? I wanted to connect my gaming computer to the MoCA adapter to "bypass" the Actiontec router because the router keeps freezing when I play online. I only want a particular system to have it's dedicated connection with the FiOS, with no slowdowns caused by devices in between (in this case, the Actiontec router keeps freezing).
Does this work? Or is using a bridge from the Actiontec to a stronger router the only solution?
Thanks for the help  . |
|
 birdfeedrPremium,MVM
join:2001-08-11
Warwick, RI
kudos:5
1 edit | The only thing an adapter will do is change how the same thing is delivered. In this case coax vs. ethernet. The packets are the same.
The Actiontec router is the bottleneck. Or how your app is configured.
[edit to add] If you're appledog in that other thread, consider keeping all the discussion in one place. »Actiontec Router Overload?
If you're running a Rev.F, you can minimize the impact by how you use the connection.
»Verizon Online FiOS FAQ »What is the NAT Table problem in the Actiontec? |
|
 More FiberPremium,MVM
join:2005-09-26
West Chester, PA
kudos:18 | reply to napcat
Review the different options in the following FAQ:
»Verizon Online FiOS FAQ »What are the tradeoffs between the various router configurations
Some options are constrained by the Actiontec's NAT table, some by the user's router. MOCA bridges are also covered.
If you have the rev. F, the rev. F supports a minimum of 30,000 connections in the NAT table. It may support more, the 30K was a limitation of the testing methodology.
--
There are 10 kinds of people in the world; those who understand binary and those who don't.
|
|
| reply to napcat
MoreFiber(or anyone else) would you happen to know the rev G's limits? |
|
| I have an Actiontec Rev G Router. Where should I Look to Find the NAT table Limit's. |
|
More FiberPremium,MVM
join:2005-09-26
West Chester, PA
kudos:18 | Unlike the Westell, the Actiontec does not display the size of the NAT table.
You can run the following program:
»www.smallnetbuilder.com/mydownlo···tool.zip
You should run it from multiple computers since Windows has a limit of about 30K connections from a single PC.
If you post back with your results, I'll update the FAQ.
--
There are 10 kinds of people in the world; those who understand binary and those who don't.
|
|
Reviews:
 ·Verizon FiOS
| said by More Fiber:Unlike the Westell, the Actiontec does not display the size of the NAT table.
You can run the following program:
»www.smallnetbuilder.com/mydownlo···tool.zip
You should run it from multiple computers since Windows has a limit of about 30K connections from a single PC.
If you post back with your results, I'll update the FAQ.
Thank you I'll give it a try.
I do run another program that creates hundreds of thousands of NAT connections and the rev. G easily handled at least 100K when I tested it, possibly 150K. I confirmed this after running the test under the same environment with my pfSense router, which gives you a readout of how many concurrent connections are open. I'll try to find its limit
|
|
| Any result's yet sarge87 ?
I tried using the small net builder tool but it will not install on my system's. I can't wait to See your finding's on NAT table Size. |
|
|
|
| reply to napcat
Just curious what ddo you need a NAT table with 50K connections for?
--
35/35 Fios, Triple Play Extreme. |
|
More FiberPremium,MVM
join:2005-09-26
West Chester, PA
kudos:18 | Refreshing a large server list in Steam can easily eat up 30K connections. |
|
Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS
| reply to napcat
said by bigdaddy:Any result's yet sarge87 ?
I tried using the small net builder tool but it will not install on my system's. I can't wait to See your finding's on NAT table Size.
Sorry I forgot about this thread!  I have my linux router in place now and I'll swap it out for the Rev. G tonight and see how it does. However my method is not very precise because the amount of connections can vary by 10-30k very rapidly so I'm looking for another way to get precise results. |
|
| Thanks serge87 |
|
 sashwaPixie Cat Crunchin' n Foldin'Premium,Mod
join:2001-01-29
Alcatraz
kudos:14 | reply to serge87
(topic move) Can a MoCA adapter help with Actiontec small NAT taModerator Action
The post that was here (and all 4 followups to it), has been moved to a new topic .. »Can a MoCA adapter help with Actiontec small NAT table? |
|
Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS
2 edits | reply to bigdaddy
Re: Can a MoCA adapter help with Actiontec small NAT table? said by More Fiber:Unlike the Westell, the Actiontec does not display the size of the NAT table.
You can run the following program:
»www.smallnetbuilder.com/mydownlo···tool.zip
You should run it from multiple computers since Windows has a limit of about 30K connections from a single PC.
If you post back with your results, I'll update the FAQ.
said by bigdaddy:Any result's yet sarge87 ?
I tried using the small net builder tool but it will not install on my system's. I can't wait to See your finding's on NAT table Size.
Sorry for the slow reply. After a week of testing I can safely say the Rev. G can do 200K connections. I'm optimistic that it can do 250-300K or more, but with my testing method I can only say(for now) that 200K at a minimum is doable. This is more than enough for even the most die-hard torrenters or steam-list-refreshers 
If anyone has any alternative NAT testing method I'm open to hear them!
For documentation's sake
To give you an idea, this was the type of NAT table condition during testing before I switched from my pfsense router to the Rev. G:
Roughly 237K states on the linux router. The same condition was applied to the Rev.G for a couple of hours which also handled it fine. |
|
More FiberPremium,MVM
join:2005-09-26
West Chester, PA
kudos:18 | Thanks Serge. FAQ has been updated. |
|
 MrKal_El
join:2003-01-19
Franklin Square, NY | reply to napcat
Since you guys know what you are doing... could you test (if you have one) the new Rev. I router?
--
Twitter: MrKal_El |
|
1 edit | As dagwag77 reported over in the Rev I thread, he got over 100k connections with the smallnetbuilder test running from three clients.
In general, these tests are difficult to pull off on Actiontecs because it's difficult to see exactly how many connections are active on the router itself. Active connections are not reported in the GUI, so you have to go into the CLI and run something like "firewall dump -ps" to see how many connections are active; but the load on the router from the test programs makes the output sluggish or non-existent.
In terms of the tests themselves, serge87's is a real-world test to multiple IP's simultaneously, so I would tend to view it as the most accurate, even with the limitations he mentions. It would be great if someone could loan him an I, or duplicate his methodology on an I.
The SNB test is useful but has the following limitations:
1) The default parameters of the test are to contact ONE IP address on the WAN side, from ONE client on the LAN. This becomes an issue if you're testing a NAT table because theoretically you can only have up to 65k ports available to a single IP address.
2) By default, the client starts at port 20,000 and works up from there. This gives you roughly 45,000 ports to test because there are only 65,000 ports to work with. If the NAT table is smaller than that, no problem; if it's larger, the test doesn't show anything.
3) You can start the client at a lower port. I've done this with a Westell and the results match what you'd expect, i.e., starting at 20,000 you get 45,000; starting at 10,000 you get 55,000, etc. On an Actiontec Rev F, the total connections reported are 30k regardless of the starting port, so it's safe to assume that 30k is the Rev F limit.
4) To get beyond the port limit, you'd need to run the SNB test from mulitple clients, preferably to multiple "servers" with different IP's on the WAN side; then add the total number of connections achieved on each client to draw a reasonable conclusion.
5) These issues are often attributed to "client" limitations (I've used that rather sloppy terminology myself), but that's true only in the sense that there are certain things tcp cannot do, i.e., it is impossible to open multiple connections to a single IP on more than 65k ports. Using the default SNB parameters, but with a lower starting port on the client, I've gotten 55,000 connections from an XP SP3 laptop. |
|
Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS
| reply to napcat
said by claibourne:In general, these tests are difficult to pull off on Actiontecs because it's difficult to see exactly how many connections are active on the router itself. Active connections are not reported in the GUI, so you have to go into the CLI and run something like "firewall dump -ps" to see how many connections are active; but the load on the router from the test programs makes the output sluggish or non-existent.
In terms of the tests themselves, serge87's is a real-world test to multiple IP's simultaneously, so I would tend to view it as the most accurate, even with the limitations he mentions. It would be great if someone could loan him an I, or duplicate his methodology on an I.
I wish the Actiontecs had an open connection counter window like the Westell 9100EM had. It was very easy to track the NAT table that way  My rev G hit 200K(and probably a little bit more) but at that point it was very sluggish that opening a webpage took 2-5 seconds. It didn't crash but I suspect 200K is very close to its limit, perhaps 250K? I saw in another thread the rev. I is reported to have 128mb symmetrical ram? Makes me wonder how it would do against the rev G. |
|
