The dreaded IPC-6023 using Google Wifi

[licquorice]

But the SH2 still needs to translate the public IP address to the private address of the Google wifi to know where to route packets surely.

[DarrenDev]

Yes, but it can do it on a 1:1 mapping - no manual management of port forwarding on the outer network, allowing UPnP on the inner network to work as it should.
Is there an issue with double-NAT other that port forwarding that also needs to be addressed?

[licquorice]

1:1 mapping or not, it is still translating a public IP address to a private IP address to reach the Google WAN where it will be translated again from one private address to another.

I have no idea of the problems or not regarding double port forwarding as opposed to double NAT, but they are not the same thing surely. As said previously, putting the Google WAN IP address in the SH2 DMZ just avoids port forwarding not natting.

[DarrenDev]

So you're just arguing semantics?
If so, then I'll point out that I said "should resolve the double NAT issue" ... not that it'd remove double-NAT.

[licquorice]

No, its not semantics, its accuracy of terminology which the gaming fraternity seem to have subverted with their various shades of 'NAT'. To me NAT is NAT, Network Address Translation, there can't be more than one type. Port forwarding is port forwarding and is not the same as NAT.

[DarrenDev]

"No, its not semantics, its accuracy of terminology"

Surely an oxymoron?

[licquorice]

I think you need a better dictionary.

Calling a car a motorbike is not semantics.

[DarrenDev]

OK, well the problem raised has been (hopefully) solved. My involvement ends here.
Feel free to pursue your issues with the gaming fraternity and their inability to correctly articulate their technical issues.

[RichieCat]

@DarrenDev @licquorice 

Hey guys, I've just noticed the ensuing debate, I hope it's healthy.

For info this morning I've been busy patching cables and running tests.

I set the SH2 up with no WiFi and only 3 IP addresses in its DHCP range. The first address I put into the DMZ and then I told my Google router to use that IP for a Static connection. The second address services the Main BT Box via a direct CAT5 link and the third address is straight to the BT Mini box .. This cures my IPC-6023 error on the BTTV boxes and allows my previously connected Google clients to continue on that SSID/CAT5 network...

The only downside is the DMZ suggestion hasn't had the originally proposed benefit of avoiding Double NAT so my PS5 now shows "moderate" instead of "Open"... I'll see if there's a tangible difference over the next few days and either live with it or maybe add a 4th IP to the SH2 DHCP range and make a direct connection from the PS5 to SH2...

Anyway thanks for the help, I've got a working and useable solution for now

[jbalmford]

Hi,

I have recently moved over to BT from Virgin. I have Google WiFi with a main 'box' and then one further Google WiFi 'box' elsewhere.

Everything is working fine, until I try and get the BT TV to work (sounds like the same issue to me as experienced on this forum post, hence the post!). What options do I have to resolve this? I am a true novice, so will need step-by-step instructions please...

I am happy to get rid of Google WiFi, but only if I can rename the BT SH2 to be the 'same' as the Google WiFi to save resetting 25+ connections on devices.

Any advice welcome, please...

Thank you!