Re: Proposal: UP&P
Matthew Toseland <toad-EI5O+8PHWbJeeLb3ft/[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.network.freenet.technical |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Wed, Mar 07, 2007 at 09:22:02AM +0000, Michael Rogers wrote: > > There are some useful stats in this paper: > http://nutss.gforge.cis.cornell.edu/pub/imc05-tcpnat.pdf > > Here's the raw data: > http://www.guha.cc/saikat/stunt-results.php > > It looks like about 70% of deployed NATs are full cone, so 81% of > NAT-to-NAT connections should work without UPnP, NAT-PMP or manual port > forwarding. If that is the case then we can even use TCP - provided that we identify the rewritten port number if any, and that we open a connection to another node... _______________________________________________ Tech mailing list [email protected] http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tech
signature.asc
(application/pgp-signature, 189 B)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFF72d3A9rUluQ9pFARAm1PAJ9wyNU/0q5RNxa4qVAb16+qoXcXJQCeJRhK ZynR5lyxwCPtoBXhoYTY+yQ= =tiyu -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----