[Tech] Proposal: UP&P

[Matthew Toseland]

On Thu, Mar 08, 2007 at 12:57:01PM +0000, Michael Rogers wrote:
> Matthew Toseland wrote:
> >> It looks like about 70% of deployed NATs are full cone, so 81% of 
> > 
> > If that is true, then things are a lot easier than I had thought. Linux
> > for example doesn't normally do full cone. It is the same with UDP as
> > with TCP?
> 
> It seems to be slightly worse for TCP - see the brynosaurus link in my 
> other email. Linux and BSD software NATs are some of the worst to be 
> behind, but hopefully we can rely on Linux and BSD users to know how to 
> forward a port.

Well some routers use Linux/BSD. But most don't because cheaper hardware
usually trumps cheaper software.
> 
> Cheers,
> Michael
-------------- 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/20070308/770a9f0e/attachment.pgp