Call Of Duty Black Ops 2 Playstation 3 Test
My pf config is similar, but I didn’t need as many opened ports to get NAT Type 2 to work. The issue I found with the documentation ( http://manuals.playstation.net/document/en/ps4/settings/nw_test.html#ID39017 ) is that it doesn’t specify what direction the ports should be opened for. … ext_if=”xl0″ ps4=”172.17.0.10″ #PSN likes it when source ports of traffic aren’t changed from the PS4 to their servers match out on $ext_if from !$ps4 to any nat-to ($ext_if:0) match out on $ext_if from $ps4 to any nat-to ($ext_if:0) static-port
In Black Ops and MW2 my NAT type is set to open, but my friend can’t join and I can’t join him. He gets this message: *** is not in a joinable lobby. My other friends can join me or invite me. The friend in question also has his NAT type set to open, so I have no idea what’s the problem. Any replies?
Static Port Forwarding : This is probably the most secure method but provides the least flexibility as you are required to configure your RG to statically setup port forwarding. The process is dependent on the actual game you are playing as they use different ports as well as your make/model of RG as they have different processes.
Avant d'avoir l'occasion de tester ce Black Ops 2, j'ai beaucoup entendu autour de moi, même de la part de personnes détestant la saga, que Treyarch avait fait de véritables efforts dans le but de faire évoluer la formule et que le solo de ce nouvel opus valait réellement le coup. C'est donc avec beaucoup d'espoir et d'optimisme que j'ai lancé le jeu, que je n'ai évidemment pas acheté, faut pas déconner non plus.
I have a NAT Type 3 which leads to a Strict NAT on all CoD and which prevents me to join my friends online. On my RG I have put the PS3 on the DMZ, all ports are opened and redirected to the PS3 (which also has a fixed private IP). So I suspected that there was an issue with my ISP, which I contacted to understand if they could help me. They told me that my public IP was IPV6 and that probably was the reason was the PS3 was behaving strangely. What troubles me here is that all the website like whatismyip.
Moderate : A lot of people with a “Moderate” NAT type strive to achieve an “Open” NAT type. The difference between “Moderate” and “Open” is if you are forwarding ports towards your PS3. You can follow specific online instructions for your RG to setup inbound port forwarding for the required ports to achieve an “Open” NAT type (assuming your ISP isn’t blocking inbound ports).
i cant connect to my friend in mw3 and i can’t even start a voice chat with him. we have the same ISP (we live in the same building), both consoles have in game moderate Nat (NAT type 2 in the INTERNET connection test; necessary ports have been forwarded) as we don’t have private IP’s. According to this given matrix we should connect just fine so what can be the problem ? also recently my friend can’t complete console’s internet connection test, during PSN availability check the test fails but after quiting the test he has no problem in loging in and playing online.
Mêmes les gadgets futuristes ou les passages en Stratégie en Temps Réel (gâchés par l'IA) n'ont pas suffit à m'amuser et à m'apporter la dose de fraîcheur que l'on m'avait promise. Au final, si je me souviens toujours du niveau d'infiltration à Tchernobyl du premier MW ou de la scène de l'aéroport de MW2, peu de missions ne m'ont véritablement marqué dans cette campagne. A mon sens, la campagne de Black Ops 2 manque cruellement d'équilibre au niveau du rythme. Auparavant, on enchaînait les missions à la mise en scène démesurée dans une avalanche d'action et d'explosions tandis qu'ici, les quelques missions vraiment "épiques" sont concentrées à la fin.
The second type of NAT is within games like “Call of Duty: Black Ops” or “Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2” which has 3 different classifications (“Open”, “Moderate” and “Strict”) which defines how your RG deals with inbound port forwarding and NAT. This can affect your ability to join or host games, the following matrix shows who can match with who:
Normally, a RG won’t allow inbound connections and if someone attempts to connect to your device from the Internet then the request will be dropped or ignored by the firewalling function. Inbound port forwarding allows you to tell the RG to accept inbound connections and forward them to an internal device. There are a number of different techniques to allow inbound port forwarding: DMZ, UPnP and static port forwarding. Depending on the model of your RG depends on what is available to you. However, each of them doesn’t come without security risks as you are allowing external untrusted connections into your “trusted” home network.
Mais encore, si les problèmes récurrents de la saga, à savoir une facilité ahurissante, une IA mal branlée ou encore un moteur vraiment vieillissant avaient été réglés, j'aurais pu passer au delà de cet ennui lors des phases narratives mais malheureusement, il n'y a aucune amélioration de ce côté là. Je me suis donc retrouvé à tirer sur des ennemis débiles incapables de viser ou de réagir rapidement entre deux séquences d'espionnage ou d' "infiltration" chiantes à mourir (même Assassin's Creed fait mieux dans ce domaine, c'est dire à quel point ces passages sont une torture.
In case y’all are interested: [ root@********* +4F314C18 etc ]$pfctl -sr . . . pass in inet proto tcp from any to (fxp1) port = www flags S/SA keep state rdr-to 192.168.2.146 pass out inet proto tcp from 192.168.2.146 to any port = www flags S/SA keep state nat-to (fxp1) round-robin static-port pass in inet proto tcp from any to (fxp1) port = https flags S/SA keep state rdr-to 192.168.2.146 pass out inet proto tcp from 192.168.2.146 to any port = https flags S/SA keep state nat-to (fxp1) round-robin static-port pass in inet proto tcp from any to (fxp1) port = smtps flags S/SA keep state rdr-to 192.
First off thanks a lot Chris for explaining some interesting questions I would have asked about NAT Types… But, one thing that has not been asked is this. I have a NAT 2… Open… Everything is great… One thing is I host a lot of lobby’s and I have found that NAT 1 people have a serious issue connecting to my lobby’s. I am using a SMC wireless modem (all-in-one unit). Is there anyway in your opinion minus going and getting a modem without the wireless feature being built in to achieve a NAT 1 status?