decimalator

Not trying to bust your balls, just wondering if you had it working and I was doing something wrong. I've read Activision's documentation, and it "should" work but it doesn't. I've done everything short of forwarding every single other port to the 2nd PS4. Nothing that I've tried works. BLOPS3 mindlessly makes a UPnP request, even though the port is already opened, and the first PS4 to boot up gets an Open NAT and the second PS4 gets moderate.

"would" or "does"? Are you saying that this works, or that it should work?

Can't really do that, since I have other stuff forwarded that that would break. I've tried 3074 on console A and 3075-4000 on console B. Per Activision's documentation that should have worked. Nada. The problem seems to be that BLOPS3 seems to ignore forwarded ports and makes UPnP requests anyways. After a fresh reboot of the Netduma I had no entries on the UPnP page. I booted up BLOPS3 with the ports forwarded, ports showed up on the UPnP page. My post a few posts up has links to screenshots from my Netduma. One iteration of my static port forwarding (3075 for console A, 3076 for console B, which is what their documentation suggests) https://www.dropbox.com/s/ji5xo6c2sxpgn6x/pfstatic.png?dl=0 My UPnP port mappings before a reboot. Multiple apps opening 3074/UDP?? https://www.dropbox.com/s/lqkfrxay56ulye2/upnp1.png?dl=0 My UPnP port mappings after a reboot. Despite the static forwarding, BLOPS3 tried opening the ports https://www.dropbox.com/s/temf8i79kybr04c/upnp2.png?dl=0 What's weird is the Netduma seems to open the ports just fine, at least on a fresh reboot. I'm not sure what it is doing after awhile, if those rules expire after awhile and allow other apps to open the same port but it just doesn't get removed from that list or what.

I can confirm that for BLOPS3 this does not work, despite their documentation saying that it does. See my earlier post, with pretty pictures.

Here is the problem, and I'll use examples. 1. BLOPS3 ignores static port forwardings and uses UPnP anyways. 2. Netduma allows UPnP requests to ports already manually forwarded 3. Netduma also allows multiple apps to request the same port (!?) As you can see, I have 3074/UDP forwarded to 192.168.1.10 (My PS4). I have 3075/UDP forwarded to 192.168.1.12 (My wife's PS4). This is what their documentation says to do to support multiple consoles. The next image with a bunch of different UPnP forwards shows multiple DemonWare port mappings (BO3) including multiple forwardings of 3074/UDP to multiple IPs AND that's with 3074/UDP already manually forwarded. So I disabled UPnP and re-enabled UPnP to flush those mappings, and re-applied the static port forwardings. BO3 STILL used UPnP to forward the ports, but at least this time it forwarded different ports. 3074/UDP still, even though it was already statically mapped and 3078/UDP -> 3074/UDP for the other. In all cases only the one that got 3074/UDP got Open NAT, the other got Moderate. https://www.dropbox.com/s/ji5xo6c2sxpgn6x/pfstatic.png?dl=0 https://www.dropbox.com/s/lqkfrxay56ulye2/upnp1.png?dl=0 https://www.dropbox.com/s/temf8i79kybr04c/upnp2.png?dl=0

I had this same headache with Ghosts and with AW. With Ghosts I had my Linux box as a firewall, added some extra debugging to the UPnP daemon's code and emailed the output to Infinityward to show them that their UPnP handling for multiple consoles was broken, and they ended up fixing it a few patches later. If I remember right, if UPnP didn't give them a port they expected like 3074/UDP they wouldn't request a different port they would just assume that UPnP was broken or something. My money is on something similar happening

Yeah, something is most definitely broken. Treyarch and Activision are doing dick about it. And it's definitely not a false reading, one console gets Open NAT the other gets Moderate. It's not just a false reading like Fraser said before. I can't play BLOPS3 with my wife, one of us does great and whichever is the unlucky one to get Moderate is miserable. The difference is VERY tangible.

I haven't had problems with getting booted recently. The only time I've been booted in the past week was for a legitimate reason, when they were pushing an emergency patch.

Terrible Trials map IMO, at least for my play style. Several of my teammates are top 1% players, and our first run the best we could do was 7 wins. Kept getting beaten by the shotgun zerg rush teams. I often get Beaver errors when I have the geo filter on because of the way Destiny does matchmaking and its weird p2p mesh. Say that I load into a Tower instance with my geofilter set at 1000 miles. Everything is great, Destiny is able to connect to every player and I get matchmade into an instance. Now someone's friend joins them in the tower, and they happen to be outside of my filter. I can't connect to them, Destiny freaks and I get a Beaver error. That's one scenario. It also happens when my clan are doing sweaty pvp matches and we miss someone from our whitelists, whoever is the fireteam leader that doesn't have a complete whitelist gets booted with a Beaver error because they can't connect to everybody

Settings -> Port Forwarding The fields: * Rule Name -- a name to tell you what the rule is for * Start Port -- the port you want to forward, 3074, etc. * End Port -- if you want to forward multiple ports, this is the last port in the sequence. For example: Start Port: 3074, End Port: 3085 * Protocol -- Change this to UDP * IP Address -- the IP of your console. Make sure your console has a static IP assigned so it will not change

Yes and no. Let's quell some misinformation. The port used by Call of Duty is the UDP port 3074. If you have one console in your house sharing your Netduma, you can either use UPnP to dynamically open this port for you, or you can assign a static IP to your console and forward this port to your console. If the game senses that it can't communicate on port 3074, like if you have it statically forwarded and your console's IP changes, or if you have multiple consoles, the game will try to communicate on another port. With UPnP this port is pseudo random, not necessarily 3075. Now there are 2 distinct problems here: #1 -- You have one console sharing your Netduma and you can't get Open NAT. Either you have a bad static port mapping, your console's UPnP is disabled or something else is going wrong. #2 -- You have multiple consoles sharing your Netduma, one can get Open NAT and the other(s) are Moderate. This seems to be a bug with Black Ops 3 either not registering that a port was properly opened and falling back to Moderate NAT or it's really Open but DISPLAYING as Moderate. If you fall into camp #1 we can help get you squared away. If you fall into camp #2, we need to start raising visibility on this with Treyarch and Activision. There's little the Netduma boys can do about it for us. But to answer your question, whichever console connects to Black Ops 3 first is going to get Open NAT. Try shutting down both consoles, rebooting your Netduma and then launching Black Ops 3 on your main console. You should have Open NAT on the main console and Moderate NAT on the second console.

I can only get one console at a time Open NAT, with or without geo-filter enabled. The first console that connects gets port 3074/UDP opened via UPnP, subsequent consoles get ports opened as well but the game marks them as Moderate NAT. Hard to say whether it's really Moderate or just being reported as Moderate. I've sent a message to Activision support to try to get an answer.

In my experience, Destiny is a lot more susceptible to one player in the game having a terrible connection and ruining the experience for a lot of the rest of the players in that game. Case in point -- last night I was running some Iron Banner with some friends. We would go from destroying other teams 20k > 8k to being destroyed 8k < 20k. I got a PSN message from one guy partway through a match after landing some sick sniper headshots telling me he's reported my team for using lag switches. (?!?) I have been playing with all 5 of the other guys almost every day for a good 8 months now, and I know for a fact that A) none of them would even know how to use a lagswitch if they knew how to make or get ahold of one and none of them are big enough douches to do it even if they did. Iron Banner seems to be especially bad for lag, because everybody comes out of the woodwork to play PvP including people barely able to connect to the Internet let alone do so with decently low amounts of latency to the rest of the world. That and the 6v6 gametypes give you 11 chances at another player having a bad connection and making the match miserable.