[arin-ppml] inevitability of NAT?

[Jack Bates]

I'd be curious if that scales to every user in a game being behind NAT 
category 3, and what effects that would have on gaming performance in 
the long run.

But to be honest, while you may live with substandard gaming (by my 
users' definition), most won't.

Jack


On 2/10/2011 9:57 AM, Scott Helms wrote:
> Jack,
>
> The point was the game does _not_ require UPnP nor any port forwarding.
> However, that is required for voice communication. I don't personally
> use PSN for voice communications hence I haven't run into that problem
> despite being in NAT category 3 by the PSN definition (I have UPnP
> turned off and no forwarding for my PS3).
>
> On 2/10/2011 10:51 AM, Jack Bates wrote:
>> I don't have to look further down.
>>
>> If port forwarding is required for an application to work (often
>> handled by uPNP), then LSN will break the communication. PS3 has
>> required such functionality right along with the xbox and Steam.
>>
>> There are many games out there that also host on a specific end node
>> automatically. They are able to accomplish this due to uPNP and
>> automated port forwarding. They will break in LSN environments.
>>
>>
>> Jack (not gonna be the one to tell his son that he'll just have to
>> deal with it)
>>
>> On 2/10/2011 8:47 AM, Scott Helms wrote:
>>> Jack,
>>>
>>> If you look further down you'll see that the OP's problem was bad
>>> firmware on a $12 router. Having said that there are some ports that are
>>> needed for voice chat which does seem to have a peer to peer component.
>>> I also run gaming servers for my own enjoyment (TF2 currently and many
>>> others in the past) and the days of hosting your own $fps_game server
>>> are generally past and very much outside of the public norm even for PC
>>> gaming. While you can do that the vast majority of the gaming hours
>>> today are spent on servers hosted by companies like Nuclear Fallot,
>>> Branzone, and a host of others. I do miss the days of Quake but home
>>> hosted game servers are a dying (but not completely dead) breed.
>>>
>>> On 2/9/2011 6:02 PM, Jack Bates wrote:
>>>> On 2/9/2011 4:53 PM, Scott Helms wrote:
>>>>> Playstation Network works, by design, flawlessly through NAT and is
>>>>> _not_ a peer to peer application. All traffic goes to the PSN servers
>>>>> and then to clients. Go2MyPC is designed for NAT and in fact one could
>>>>> argue that it wouldn't exist if NAT weren't wide spread.
>>>>
>>>> Errr, are you sure?
>>>>
>>>> http://www.absolute-playstation.com/playstation-network/expert-playstation-3-hardware-accessory-help-playstation3-ps3-console/10976-nat-3-nat-2-a.html
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "Re: nat 3 to nat 2
>>>>
>>>> I tried all the router suggestions and still got nat 3. after much
>>>> frustration I called my ISP. Do this. Ask if your IP address is
>>>> private or public. My ISP sets u up as private. I had them change it
>>>> to public...BINGO Nat 2. Hope this helps."
>>>>
>>>> If you read above, it appears that his ISP ran NAT444 normally, which
>>>> the PS3 categorizes as nat 3, which means he can't reach COD. Dude,
>>>> customers MUST reach COD. :)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Jack
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>