Fanatical_Meat
Survivor
Is it possible?
you might need to use Direct IP connect though DEPENDING on how good/bad your router is.
However, you're going to run into problems with things like Steam authentication, the anti-cheat system, and finding the "server".
How could you forget the Doritos?Sure. I run a dedicated server and connect to it via LAN on my laptop. No reason I couldn't have a LAN party and have everybody do the same. Just gotta stock up on Mountain Dew and pizza rolls...
I actually was considering traditional LAN parties - i.e. no internet. I'm old... My first LAN party was done over IPX/SPX... on 10Base2... Guess I didn't think through all the different ways that question could have been interpreted.Why would that be? I was presuming a typical internet-connected home LAN. Are you envisioning something self-contained, not connected to the internet?
To be honest, I am a bit confused about your reply. Perhaps there is a terminology difference between myself who is power user(built PC's, develop backend application systems for a living(ie, programmer) vs a network engineer. In my world what is typically called a router is a device that "routes" network traffic from an external WAN to in internal LAN. Sometimes with built in wi-fi, sometimes with ethernet ports, and many times both. This device typically is the "gateway" and in many(but not all) cases also has some rudimentary firewall capabilities such as blocking incoming traffic except over specific ports. Is that a different definition of router to you because that's generally what the US industry calls these devices, though there are some other possible words for such a device.If you need a router within a home LAN, you need a better network design, not a better router!
To be honest, I am a bit confused about your reply. Perhaps there is a terminology difference between myself who is power user(built PC's, develop backend application systems for a living(ie, programmer) vs a network engineer.
no worries I was just confused as I did not know it was a joke. I know OF the terms switch, bridge, and router and i know there are some differences, but not enough detail to know exctly what they are. My brother, well he could be called a network engineer(maybe???) as he works on F5 network appliances and various other filtering rules and networky stuff I just don't care to learn would might have gotten that joke.No, you're right, there is a difference in terminology. In my world, a router is a device that makes a decision on a layer 3 value of a packet. I.e. it decides which interface to send it down depending on the IP address alone. Technically, what most people have in their homes is not a router, because it doesn't make any routing decisions, it just takes a packet on one side, rewrites it, and drops it down on the other.
A device that changes medium at layer 1 e.g. WAN Fibre, to LAN Ethernet, or LAN ethernet to WLAN should be called a bridge.
A device that decides which port to drop a packet on depending on the layer 2 information should be switch.
A device that decides which port to drop a packet on depending on the layer 3 information should be called a router. Even then, you can have a layer 3 switch, which most network engineers would not call a router. (E.g. crossing VLANs)
My joke which I guess nobody but a network engineer would understand is that if for a home network, you need to make a layer 3 decision to reach another device on the same network, you've got an inefficient or overly complex network. To keep a network performing efficiently, you want to route packets as little as possible, and make the switching decision at wire speed without a routing decision (which is much slower.) I realised after I posted it, it probably came across as harsh for anyone who didn't get it. Apologies if you did take offence.