Re: Proposal: UP&P

* Matthew Toseland <toad-EI5O+8PHWbJeeLb3ft/[email protected]> [2007-03-06 01:37:52]:

> Universal Plug and Play support
> ===============================
> 
> I suggest that we need UP&P support. The main caveats are that it is not
> usable on an untrusted LAN, so we need to ask the user, and that we may
> not easily be able to distinguish between a local trusted LAN and an
> ISP's LAN. It is also reported that UP&P works only around 50% of the
> time when it is detected.

Ok, let's feed the troll.

> 
> However:
> - It would significantly improve connection reliability. If for example
>   all your peers are german and in germany all domestic IPs change every
>   24 hours, if you are down for 24 hours you are lost for good.

Do we have any stats regarding how many of our users are double-natted?
I know that in france most people had DSL connectivity before the
Wireless craze ; meaning that most users are likely to have two
different natting appliances (the routing modem and the wireless AP).


> - Right now good connectivity relies on getting a few geek nodes - nodes
>   that are directly connected or port forwarded. UP&P would increase the
>   proportion of such nodes dramatically.

I am not sure it's an issue. I am idling on #freenet-refs on a regular
basis to see how the installer performs and to see where users get
stuck : most of them don't have connectivity problems.

> - It would allow for all sorts of bootstrapping protocols. One-time
>   references are the tip of the iceberg: Anything that involves giving
>   your details well in advance of the actual connection attempt will be
>   greatly helped by UP&P support.

Will be greatly helped if UP&P works : indeed.

> - It would (mostly) eliminate the need to rely on centralised STUN servers.

it's assuming there is no double nat : again ;)

I won't debate on it to much as it has proven to be a useless waste of
my time : I'll just give some references :

[1]
http://archives.freenetproject.org/message/20060620.021959.c1c37934.en.html
[2]
http://archives.freenetproject.org/message/20060421.194006.53dfbd93.en.html
[3] http://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/tech/2006-April/001010.html
(from toad ;) )
[4] http://wiki.openwrt.org/OpenWrtDocs/upnp?highlight=%28upnp%29

I won't object to someone implementing up&p support as a plugin for fred
as long as it remains optionnal and isn't done by toad. But still, I do think
it's a useless waste of time/money/effort for the project.

NextGen$