[Tech] Proposal: UP&P

[Matthew Toseland]

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...
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
Url : http://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/tech/attachments/20070308/c3795f54/attachment.pgp