Bert

In addition to that I find that ping assist has simply never worked well if there is a lot of servers in your area that have close latency's. You have to take latency variation into account so set it a touch higher than the one you want, but if you have different locations at 15, 17, 20ms they are too close to differentiate. It also depend on how much jitter there is on your line. The game pings the servers and when you just happen to have a latency spike, DumaOS drops the server. Since we have polygons for geofilter now, the better way is simply looking at the locations for these servers and drawing a small square around them.

LOL this. I signed up on day 1 for the XR500 beta. Nothing. But apperantly everybody who signed up last week and now asks gets bumped.

Are you running it in AP mode? Your XR300 needs to be in router mode and set into the DMZ of your ER-X. In AP mode the Geofilter doesn't work afaik.

It's worthwhile if you want better wifi speed or if you need QoS with speeds over 300 mbit. Also obviously you have acces to DumaOS 3.0 faster.

What sable said. Also you should disable QoS on the XR300 if you want to go that way, it serves no purpose as the ER-X takes care of that.

I tried that already as test. But there is still that random background jitter that is always there. It's even there with no load on your connection at all. Also it's not a acceptable solution to have to throttle your connection to 10% to get a somewhat stable ping. I had one of their Cisco modems before, it gave like 3ms jitter. These Compal Connectboxes are just shite and they should get rid of them.

There is a good chance it's in your modem or neighborhood cable node. Like when I turn off QoS I get huge spikes with saturated line, 400ms+ on upload and 100ms on download. When I run 95/95 on the sliders the bufferbloat is gone but I am left with these spikes up to 30-40ms and I can't iron these out. I had a older Cisco modem the last time I was here and it had way less jitter. In your case if your modem is a Puma 6 chipset you might have the same issue.

You have to be more specific, ie what sort of connection etc. I am in europe now where I have 500/40 cable and I cannot get the jitter ironed out no matter what I do, it's purely down to the modem and ISP. Like I have 10ms ping to Google but with constant jitter up to 30-40ms. Even on idle line. I suspect it's down to the Puma chipset in my modem though.

The one that is active is the only one you need

The SEA server is also mislocated and shows in India usually (physical location Singapore) . So you could try moving your filter radius closer around the SA server. I suspect you're getting connected to the SEA server.

I think the whole range on that provider is probably banned. I can’t tell my IP now as I am in Europe where I use a different SIM card.

Well it’s useful so you don’t get connected to the Asia server. I play a lot of Australians on the Asia server and they are a annoyance as they lag out the lobby.

Probably using Truemove. I have this as well with Truemove.

To be fairly honest, I expect that the no QOS 890mbit simply has to do with the connection efficiency. It's just confusing that it gets mentioned like that. There is no hardware limiting it in that case, it's just limited by LAN performance. Like if you use a 1Gbit network adapter it's rare that you ever get above 940ish mbit. This is also most likely the reason they sell that package as 940mbit, it's what their ISP supplied router can manage and they won't advertise it as 1000 because it would have people complaining that they are not able to see those speeds in a speedtest. Also, generally when you set up any sort of QoS you typically loose out on a bit of available bandwidth. Like in DumaOS you set the ABB sliders but with a automated QoS system like CAKE or fq_codel you generally enter speeds 5-15% lower of what your actual speeds are. So if it can do 821mbit with QoS running that's perfectly fine. Last, unless you are really heavy on bandwidth usage, you won't need QoS that much with gigabit speeds.

I only do this when you want to utilize multiple consoles and uPNP. Ie if you have 2 playstations and you want to achieve open NAT.

Intermediate switch will give you the exact same issue. As all it does is pass through the data as if it were a direct connection. Even if you set both on the same VLAN in the switch.

You would if you switch off the XR500's QoS and run the R1's QoS. I have both as well and for me the XR500 is usually a bit better though. Just on DSL reports it's not really great because it uses DPI, but on pingplotter the actual ping stays flatter. Depending on what you're trying to achieve, you can also configure the XR500 as AP and connect your devices to the R1. If you run modem -> R1 -> XR500 your bandwidth is pretty much limited by the R1 anyway.

It would work. You would have to decide on what you want to achieve, ie turn off QoS on either the R1 or the XR500, whichever you want to use. Then turn off geofiltering on the R1. Then you would enter the WAN IP of the XR500 in the DMZ of your R1. I can't see how this would improve bufferbloat though.

If you're trying to access it from a PC, you can also try adding in a second NIC and plug that into the VR400. You give the NIC and the VR400 static IP's on another range than yoru XR500 is and then it should connect if you type in the VR400's IP in your browser. You don't even need a internal NIC for this, you can buy USB adapters for this. Cheap way to try it out. But if the VR400 is purely bridged and it doesn't perform any sort of NAT I don't see why a single ethernet cable from the XR500 to the VR400 would not work. The routing table in your XR500 should point to the VR400 bridge when you are trying to access that by IP and to WAN for all other connections. A so called ethernet loop should not occur.

it really depends on how your VR400 is configured. Ie have they bridged one of the ports and are you using that? Then you might get away with doing just what you describe, give it a IP in your range (static) and run a Ethernet cable from your XR500 LAN to a port on the VR400. I don't think that there would be an issue. To be sure, turn off things like DHCP server etc so it doesn't conflict with the XR500 DHCP server. I use the same trick for accessing my switch north of my routers. Just run a ethernet cable to it for managment. But I have given that port on the switch it's own VLAN though. If it's not a bridged setup, ie you have the XR500 in DMZ downstream of your VR400 you can acces it by just typing the IP adress of the VR400.

Not sure about 2 PC, but for 2 consoles I had to turn on uPNP, remove all port forwarding rules, and in the WAN menu set NAT filtering to 'open' instead of 'secure'.

Warzone runs on a very low tickrate and that creates these super bullets. I get that in WZ as well, but 6v6 multiplayer is fine.

The issue is you're testing on wifi. Wifi on a R1 is super slow compared to standards nowadays. When I do this on my Iphone X sitting a meter away from the router I get 60-80 mbit and my PC that sits next to the R1 gets 15mbit. But more importantly, your connection is probably faster than the wifi in this case. So you're creating your own bufferbloat by maxing out the wifi connection. When I run pingplotter from my PC over wifi and initiate a speedtest, my ping goes through the roof, like 300-400ms.

To be honest I never felt like that did anything. I use no QoS and full bandwidth, just traffic prioritization. There is a way around this though. Get the cheapest manageable switch you can find that allows you to set port rates and use that between your Xbox and the router. For example Netgear GS305E, about $25 on Amazon, 5 port switch, managable and has port rate limiting.

As far as I know you just make a new line for every port. For me though, forwarding only port 3074 UDP has always given me Open NAT. But you might want to check in game, under options, account, external IP adress. It will say a IP adress with a port number. That port number is the one you need to forward. Usually it will be 3074 though.