Re: [R] parallel: socket connection behind a NAT router
Thanks! This solution also looks promising. It should be more stable than
using ssh tunneling. I will also explore this method.
Best,
Jiefei
On Tue, Jan 19, 2021 at 3:11 PM Martin Morgan
wrote:
> A different approach uses doRedis
> https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=doRedis (currently archived, but
> actively developed) for use with the foreach package, or RedisParam
> https://github.com/mtmorgan/RedisParam (not released) for use with
> Bioconductor's BiocParallel package.
>
> These use a redis server https://redis.io/ to communicate -- the manager
> submits jobs / obtains results from the redis server, the workers retrieve
> jobs / submit results to the redis server. Manager and worker need to know
> the (http) address of the server, etc, but there are no other ports
> involved.
>
> Redis servers are easy to establish in a cloud environment, using e.g.,
> existing AWS or docker images. The README for doRedis
> https://github.com/bwlewis/doRedis probably provides the easiest
> introduction.
>
> The (not mature) k8sredis Kubernetes / helm chart
> https://github.com/Bioconductor/k8sredis illustrates a complete system
> using RedisParam, deploying manager and workers locally or in the google
> cloud; the app could be modified to only start the workers in the cloud,
> exposing the redis server for access by a local 'manager'; this would be
> cool.
>
> Martin
>
> On 1/19/21, 1:50 AM, "R-help on behalf of Henrik Bengtsson" <
> r-help-boun...@r-project.org on behalf of henrik.bengts...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jan 18, 2021 at 9:42 PM Jiefei Wang wrote:
> >
> > Thanks for introducing this interesting package to me! it is great
> to know a new powerful tool, but it seems like this method does not work in
> my environment. ` parallelly::makeClusterPSOCK` will hang until timeout.
> >
> > I checked the verbose output and it looks like the parallelly
> package also depends on `parallel:::.slaveRSOCK` on the remote instance to
> build the connection. This explains why it failed for the local machine
> does not have a public IP and the remote does not know how to build the
> connection.
>
> It's correct that the worker does attempt to connect back to the
> parent R process that runs on your local machine. However, it does
> *not* do so by your local machines public IP address but it does it by
> connecting to a port on its own machine - a port that was set up by
> SSH. More specifically, when parallelly::makeClusterPSOCK() connects
> to the remote machine over SSH it also sets up a so-called reverse SSH
> tunnel with a certain port on your local machine and certain port of
> your remote machine. This is what happens:
>
> > cl <- parallelly::makeClusterPSOCK("machine1.example.org",
> verbose=TRUE)
> [local output] Workers: [n = 1] 'machine1.example.org'
> [local output] Base port: 11019
> ...
> [local output] Starting worker #1 on 'machine1.example.org':
> '/usr/bin/ssh' -R 11068:localhost:11068 machine1.example.org
> "'Rscript'
> --default-packages=datasets,utils,grDevices,graphics,stats,methods
> -e 'workRSOCK <- tryCatch(parallel:::.slaveRSOCK, error=function(e)
> parallel:::.workRSOCK); workRSOCK()' MASTER=localhost PORT=11068
> OUT=/dev/null TIMEOUT=2592000 XDR=FALSE"
> [local output] - Exit code of system() call: 0
> [local output] Waiting for worker #1 on 'machine1.example.org' to
> connect back '/usr/bin/ssh' -R 11019:localhost:11019
> machine1.example.org "'Rscript'
> --default-packages=datasets,utils,grDevices,graphics,stats,methods -e
> 'workRSOCK <- tryCatch(parallel:::.slaveRSOCK, error=function(e)
> parallel:::.workRSOCK); workRSOCK()' MASTER=localhost PORT=11019
> OUT=/dev/null TIMEOUT=2592000 XDR=FALSE"
>
> All the magic is in that SSH option '-R 11068:localhost:11068' SSH
> options, which allow the parent R process on your local machine to
> communicate with the remote worker R process on its own port 11068,
> and vice versa, the worker R process will communicate with the parent
> R process as if it was running on MASTER=localhost PORT=11068.
> Basically, for all that the worker R process' knows, the parent R
> process runs on the same machine as itself.
>
> You haven't said what operating system you're running on your local
> machine, but if it's MS Windows, know that the 'ssh' client that comes
> with Windows 10 has some bugs in its reverse tunneling. See
> ?parallelly::makeClusterPSOCK for lots of details. You also haven't
> said what OS the cloud workers run, but I assume it's Linux.
>
> So, my guesses on your setup is, the above "should work" for you. For
> your troubleshooting, you can also set argument outfile=NULL. Then
> you'll also see output from the worker R process. There are
> additional troubleshooting suggestions in Section 'Failing to set up
> remote workers' of
Re: [R] parallel: socket connection behind a NAT router
Thank you! It works now!!
Your guess is correct, I'm using windows so the default ssh does not work.
Sadly the bug hasn't been fixed yet. The PuTTY solution works like a charm.
Glad to know the ssh tunneling trick. This is much simpler than using port
hole punching. This package is awesome! Many thanks for your help!!!
Best,
Jiefei
On Tue, Jan 19, 2021 at 2:50 PM Henrik Bengtsson
wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 18, 2021 at 9:42 PM Jiefei Wang wrote:
> >
> > Thanks for introducing this interesting package to me! it is great to
> know a new powerful tool, but it seems like this method does not work in my
> environment. ` parallelly::makeClusterPSOCK` will hang until timeout.
> >
> > I checked the verbose output and it looks like the parallelly package
> also depends on `parallel:::.slaveRSOCK` on the remote instance to build
> the connection. This explains why it failed for the local machine does not
> have a public IP and the remote does not know how to build the connection.
>
> It's correct that the worker does attempt to connect back to the
> parent R process that runs on your local machine. However, it does
> *not* do so by your local machines public IP address but it does it by
> connecting to a port on its own machine - a port that was set up by
> SSH. More specifically, when parallelly::makeClusterPSOCK() connects
> to the remote machine over SSH it also sets up a so-called reverse SSH
> tunnel with a certain port on your local machine and certain port of
> your remote machine. This is what happens:
>
> > cl <- parallelly::makeClusterPSOCK("machine1.example.org", verbose=TRUE)
> [local output] Workers: [n = 1] 'machine1.example.org'
> [local output] Base port: 11019
> ...
> [local output] Starting worker #1 on 'machine1.example.org':
> '/usr/bin/ssh' -R 11068:localhost:11068 machine1.example.org
> "'Rscript'
> --default-packages=datasets,utils,grDevices,graphics,stats,methods
> -e 'workRSOCK <- tryCatch(parallel:::.slaveRSOCK, error=function(e)
> parallel:::.workRSOCK); workRSOCK()' MASTER=localhost PORT=11068
> OUT=/dev/null TIMEOUT=2592000 XDR=FALSE"
> [local output] - Exit code of system() call: 0
> [local output] Waiting for worker #1 on 'machine1.example.org' to
> connect back '/usr/bin/ssh' -R 11019:localhost:11019
> machine1.example.org "'Rscript'
> --default-packages=datasets,utils,grDevices,graphics,stats,methods -e
> 'workRSOCK <- tryCatch(parallel:::.slaveRSOCK, error=function(e)
> parallel:::.workRSOCK); workRSOCK()' MASTER=localhost PORT=11019
> OUT=/dev/null TIMEOUT=2592000 XDR=FALSE"
>
> All the magic is in that SSH option '-R 11068:localhost:11068' SSH
> options, which allow the parent R process on your local machine to
> communicate with the remote worker R process on its own port 11068,
> and vice versa, the worker R process will communicate with the parent
> R process as if it was running on MASTER=localhost PORT=11068.
> Basically, for all that the worker R process' knows, the parent R
> process runs on the same machine as itself.
>
> You haven't said what operating system you're running on your local
> machine, but if it's MS Windows, know that the 'ssh' client that comes
> with Windows 10 has some bugs in its reverse tunneling. See
> ?parallelly::makeClusterPSOCK for lots of details. You also haven't
> said what OS the cloud workers run, but I assume it's Linux.
>
> So, my guesses on your setup is, the above "should work" for you. For
> your troubleshooting, you can also set argument outfile=NULL. Then
> you'll also see output from the worker R process. There are
> additional troubleshooting suggestions in Section 'Failing to set up
> remote workers' of ?parallelly::makeClusterPSOCK that will help you
> figure out what the problem is.
>
> >
> > I see in README the package states it works with "remote clusters
> without knowing public IP". I think this might be where the confusion is,
> it may mean the remote machine does not have a public IP, but the server
> machine does. I'm in the opposite situation, the server does not have a
> public IP, but the remote does. I'm not sure if this package can handle my
> case, but it looks very powerful and I appreciate your help!
>
> Thanks. I've updated the text to "remote clusters without knowing
> [local] public IP".
>
> /Henrik
>
> >
> > Best,
> > Jiefei
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Jan 19, 2021 at 1:22 AM Henrik Bengtsson <
> henrik.bengts...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> If you have SSH access to the workers, then
> >>
> >> workers <- c("machine1.example.org", "machine2.example.org")
> >> cl <- parallelly::makeClusterPSOCK(workers)
> >>
> >> should do it. It does this without admin rights and port forwarding.
> >> See also the README in https://cran.r-project.org/package=parallelly.
> >>
> >> /Henrik
> >>
> >> On Mon, Jan 18, 2021 at 6:45 AM Jiefei Wang wrote:
> >> >
> >> > Hi all,
> >> >
> >> > I have a few cloud instances and I want to use them to do parallel
> >> > computing. I would like to create a socket cluster on my
Re: [R] parallel: socket connection behind a NAT router
A different approach uses doRedis https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=doRedis
(currently archived, but actively developed) for use with the foreach package,
or RedisParam https://github.com/mtmorgan/RedisParam (not released) for use
with Bioconductor's BiocParallel package.
These use a redis server https://redis.io/ to communicate -- the manager
submits jobs / obtains results from the redis server, the workers retrieve jobs
/ submit results to the redis server. Manager and worker need to know the
(http) address of the server, etc, but there are no other ports involved.
Redis servers are easy to establish in a cloud environment, using e.g.,
existing AWS or docker images. The README for doRedis
https://github.com/bwlewis/doRedis probably provides the easiest introduction.
The (not mature) k8sredis Kubernetes / helm chart
https://github.com/Bioconductor/k8sredis illustrates a complete system using
RedisParam, deploying manager and workers locally or in the google cloud; the
app could be modified to only start the workers in the cloud, exposing the
redis server for access by a local 'manager'; this would be cool.
Martin
On 1/19/21, 1:50 AM, "R-help on behalf of Henrik Bengtsson"
wrote:
On Mon, Jan 18, 2021 at 9:42 PM Jiefei Wang wrote:
>
> Thanks for introducing this interesting package to me! it is great to
know a new powerful tool, but it seems like this method does not work in my
environment. ` parallelly::makeClusterPSOCK` will hang until timeout.
>
> I checked the verbose output and it looks like the parallelly package
also depends on `parallel:::.slaveRSOCK` on the remote instance to build the
connection. This explains why it failed for the local machine does not have a
public IP and the remote does not know how to build the connection.
It's correct that the worker does attempt to connect back to the
parent R process that runs on your local machine. However, it does
*not* do so by your local machines public IP address but it does it by
connecting to a port on its own machine - a port that was set up by
SSH. More specifically, when parallelly::makeClusterPSOCK() connects
to the remote machine over SSH it also sets up a so-called reverse SSH
tunnel with a certain port on your local machine and certain port of
your remote machine. This is what happens:
> cl <- parallelly::makeClusterPSOCK("machine1.example.org", verbose=TRUE)
[local output] Workers: [n = 1] 'machine1.example.org'
[local output] Base port: 11019
...
[local output] Starting worker #1 on 'machine1.example.org':
'/usr/bin/ssh' -R 11068:localhost:11068 machine1.example.org
"'Rscript'
--default-packages=datasets,utils,grDevices,graphics,stats,methods
-e 'workRSOCK <- tryCatch(parallel:::.slaveRSOCK, error=function(e)
parallel:::.workRSOCK); workRSOCK()' MASTER=localhost PORT=11068
OUT=/dev/null TIMEOUT=2592000 XDR=FALSE"
[local output] - Exit code of system() call: 0
[local output] Waiting for worker #1 on 'machine1.example.org' to
connect back '/usr/bin/ssh' -R 11019:localhost:11019
machine1.example.org "'Rscript'
--default-packages=datasets,utils,grDevices,graphics,stats,methods -e
'workRSOCK <- tryCatch(parallel:::.slaveRSOCK, error=function(e)
parallel:::.workRSOCK); workRSOCK()' MASTER=localhost PORT=11019
OUT=/dev/null TIMEOUT=2592000 XDR=FALSE"
All the magic is in that SSH option '-R 11068:localhost:11068' SSH
options, which allow the parent R process on your local machine to
communicate with the remote worker R process on its own port 11068,
and vice versa, the worker R process will communicate with the parent
R process as if it was running on MASTER=localhost PORT=11068.
Basically, for all that the worker R process' knows, the parent R
process runs on the same machine as itself.
You haven't said what operating system you're running on your local
machine, but if it's MS Windows, know that the 'ssh' client that comes
with Windows 10 has some bugs in its reverse tunneling. See
?parallelly::makeClusterPSOCK for lots of details. You also haven't
said what OS the cloud workers run, but I assume it's Linux.
So, my guesses on your setup is, the above "should work" for you. For
your troubleshooting, you can also set argument outfile=NULL. Then
you'll also see output from the worker R process. There are
additional troubleshooting suggestions in Section 'Failing to set up
remote workers' of ?parallelly::makeClusterPSOCK that will help you
figure out what the problem is.
>
> I see in README the package states it works with "remote clusters without
knowing public IP". I think this might be where the confusion is, it may mean
the remote machine does not have a public IP, but the server machine does. I'm
in the opposite situation, the server does not have a public IP, but the remote
does. I'm not sure if
Re: [R] parallel: socket connection behind a NAT router
On Mon, Jan 18, 2021 at 9:42 PM Jiefei Wang wrote:
>
> Thanks for introducing this interesting package to me! it is great to know a
> new powerful tool, but it seems like this method does not work in my
> environment. ` parallelly::makeClusterPSOCK` will hang until timeout.
>
> I checked the verbose output and it looks like the parallelly package also
> depends on `parallel:::.slaveRSOCK` on the remote instance to build the
> connection. This explains why it failed for the local machine does not have a
> public IP and the remote does not know how to build the connection.
It's correct that the worker does attempt to connect back to the
parent R process that runs on your local machine. However, it does
*not* do so by your local machines public IP address but it does it by
connecting to a port on its own machine - a port that was set up by
SSH. More specifically, when parallelly::makeClusterPSOCK() connects
to the remote machine over SSH it also sets up a so-called reverse SSH
tunnel with a certain port on your local machine and certain port of
your remote machine. This is what happens:
> cl <- parallelly::makeClusterPSOCK("machine1.example.org", verbose=TRUE)
[local output] Workers: [n = 1] 'machine1.example.org'
[local output] Base port: 11019
...
[local output] Starting worker #1 on 'machine1.example.org':
'/usr/bin/ssh' -R 11068:localhost:11068 machine1.example.org
"'Rscript' --default-packages=datasets,utils,grDevices,graphics,stats,methods
-e 'workRSOCK <- tryCatch(parallel:::.slaveRSOCK, error=function(e)
parallel:::.workRSOCK); workRSOCK()' MASTER=localhost PORT=11068
OUT=/dev/null TIMEOUT=2592000 XDR=FALSE"
[local output] - Exit code of system() call: 0
[local output] Waiting for worker #1 on 'machine1.example.org' to
connect back '/usr/bin/ssh' -R 11019:localhost:11019
machine1.example.org "'Rscript'
--default-packages=datasets,utils,grDevices,graphics,stats,methods -e
'workRSOCK <- tryCatch(parallel:::.slaveRSOCK, error=function(e)
parallel:::.workRSOCK); workRSOCK()' MASTER=localhost PORT=11019
OUT=/dev/null TIMEOUT=2592000 XDR=FALSE"
All the magic is in that SSH option '-R 11068:localhost:11068' SSH
options, which allow the parent R process on your local machine to
communicate with the remote worker R process on its own port 11068,
and vice versa, the worker R process will communicate with the parent
R process as if it was running on MASTER=localhost PORT=11068.
Basically, for all that the worker R process' knows, the parent R
process runs on the same machine as itself.
You haven't said what operating system you're running on your local
machine, but if it's MS Windows, know that the 'ssh' client that comes
with Windows 10 has some bugs in its reverse tunneling. See
?parallelly::makeClusterPSOCK for lots of details. You also haven't
said what OS the cloud workers run, but I assume it's Linux.
So, my guesses on your setup is, the above "should work" for you. For
your troubleshooting, you can also set argument outfile=NULL. Then
you'll also see output from the worker R process. There are
additional troubleshooting suggestions in Section 'Failing to set up
remote workers' of ?parallelly::makeClusterPSOCK that will help you
figure out what the problem is.
>
> I see in README the package states it works with "remote clusters without
> knowing public IP". I think this might be where the confusion is, it may mean
> the remote machine does not have a public IP, but the server machine does.
> I'm in the opposite situation, the server does not have a public IP, but the
> remote does. I'm not sure if this package can handle my case, but it looks
> very powerful and I appreciate your help!
Thanks. I've updated the text to "remote clusters without knowing
[local] public IP".
/Henrik
>
> Best,
> Jiefei
>
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 19, 2021 at 1:22 AM Henrik Bengtsson
> wrote:
>>
>> If you have SSH access to the workers, then
>>
>> workers <- c("machine1.example.org", "machine2.example.org")
>> cl <- parallelly::makeClusterPSOCK(workers)
>>
>> should do it. It does this without admin rights and port forwarding.
>> See also the README in https://cran.r-project.org/package=parallelly.
>>
>> /Henrik
>>
>> On Mon, Jan 18, 2021 at 6:45 AM Jiefei Wang wrote:
>> >
>> > Hi all,
>> >
>> > I have a few cloud instances and I want to use them to do parallel
>> > computing. I would like to create a socket cluster on my local machine to
>> > control the remote instances. Here is my network setup:
>> >
>> > local machine -- NAT -- Internet -- cloud instances
>> >
>> > In the parallel package, the server needs to call `makeCluster()` and
>> > listens to the connection from the workers. In my case, the server is the
>> > local machine and the workers are the cloud instances. However, since the
>> > local machine is hidden behind the NAT, it does not have a public address
>> > and the worker cannot connect to it. Therefore, `makeCluster()` will never
>> > be able to see the connection from the workers
Re: [R] parallel: socket connection behind a NAT router
Thanks for introducing this interesting package to me! it is great to know
a new powerful tool, but it seems like this method does not work in my
environment. ` parallelly::makeClusterPSOCK` will hang until timeout.
I checked the verbose output and it looks like the parallelly package also
depends on `parallel:::.slaveRSOCK` on the remote instance to build the
connection. This explains why it failed for the local machine does not have
a public IP and the remote does not know how to build the connection.
I see in README the package states it works with "remote clusters without
knowing public IP". I think this might be where the confusion is, it may
mean the remote machine does not have a public IP, but the server machine
does. I'm in the opposite situation, the server does not have a public IP,
but the remote does. I'm not sure if this package can handle my case, but
it looks very powerful and I appreciate your help!
Best,
Jiefei
On Tue, Jan 19, 2021 at 1:22 AM Henrik Bengtsson
wrote:
> If you have SSH access to the workers, then
>
> workers <- c("machine1.example.org", "machine2.example.org")
> cl <- parallelly::makeClusterPSOCK(workers)
>
> should do it. It does this without admin rights and port forwarding.
> See also the README in https://cran.r-project.org/package=parallelly.
>
> /Henrik
>
> On Mon, Jan 18, 2021 at 6:45 AM Jiefei Wang wrote:
> >
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I have a few cloud instances and I want to use them to do parallel
> > computing. I would like to create a socket cluster on my local machine to
> > control the remote instances. Here is my network setup:
> >
> > local machine -- NAT -- Internet -- cloud instances
> >
> > In the parallel package, the server needs to call `makeCluster()` and
> > listens to the connection from the workers. In my case, the server is the
> > local machine and the workers are the cloud instances. However, since the
> > local machine is hidden behind the NAT, it does not have a public address
> > and the worker cannot connect to it. Therefore, `makeCluster()` will
> never
> > be able to see the connection from the workers and hang forever.
> >
> > One solution for letting the external machine to access the device inside
> > the NAT is to use port forwarding. However, this would not work for my
> case
> > as the NAT is set by the network provider(not my home router) so I do not
> > have access to the router. As the cloud instances have public addresses,
> > I'll wonder if there is any way to build the cluster by letting the
> server
> > connect to the cloud? I have checked `?parallel::makeCluster` and
> > `?snow::makeSOCKcluster` but I found no result. The only promising
> solution
> > I can see now is to use TCP hole punching, but it is quite complicated
> and
> > may not work for every case. Since building a connection from local to
> the
> > remote is super easy, I would like to know if there exists any simple
> > solution. I have searched it on Google for a week but find no answer.
> I'll
> > appreciate it if you can provide me any suggestions!
> >
> > Best,
> > Jiefei
> >
> > [[alternative HTML version deleted]]
> >
> > __
> > R-help@r-project.org mailing list -- To UNSUBSCRIBE and more, see
> > https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help
> > PLEASE do read the posting guide
> http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html
> > and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.
>
[[alternative HTML version deleted]]
__
R-help@r-project.org mailing list -- To UNSUBSCRIBE and more, see
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help
PLEASE do read the posting guide http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html
and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.
Re: [R] parallel: socket connection behind a NAT router
If you have SSH access to the workers, then
workers <- c("machine1.example.org", "machine2.example.org")
cl <- parallelly::makeClusterPSOCK(workers)
should do it. It does this without admin rights and port forwarding.
See also the README in https://cran.r-project.org/package=parallelly.
/Henrik
On Mon, Jan 18, 2021 at 6:45 AM Jiefei Wang wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> I have a few cloud instances and I want to use them to do parallel
> computing. I would like to create a socket cluster on my local machine to
> control the remote instances. Here is my network setup:
>
> local machine -- NAT -- Internet -- cloud instances
>
> In the parallel package, the server needs to call `makeCluster()` and
> listens to the connection from the workers. In my case, the server is the
> local machine and the workers are the cloud instances. However, since the
> local machine is hidden behind the NAT, it does not have a public address
> and the worker cannot connect to it. Therefore, `makeCluster()` will never
> be able to see the connection from the workers and hang forever.
>
> One solution for letting the external machine to access the device inside
> the NAT is to use port forwarding. However, this would not work for my case
> as the NAT is set by the network provider(not my home router) so I do not
> have access to the router. As the cloud instances have public addresses,
> I'll wonder if there is any way to build the cluster by letting the server
> connect to the cloud? I have checked `?parallel::makeCluster` and
> `?snow::makeSOCKcluster` but I found no result. The only promising solution
> I can see now is to use TCP hole punching, but it is quite complicated and
> may not work for every case. Since building a connection from local to the
> remote is super easy, I would like to know if there exists any simple
> solution. I have searched it on Google for a week but find no answer. I'll
> appreciate it if you can provide me any suggestions!
>
> Best,
> Jiefei
>
> [[alternative HTML version deleted]]
>
> __
> R-help@r-project.org mailing list -- To UNSUBSCRIBE and more, see
> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help
> PLEASE do read the posting guide http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html
> and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.
__
R-help@r-project.org mailing list -- To UNSUBSCRIBE and more, see
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help
PLEASE do read the posting guide http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html
and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.
[R] parallel: socket connection behind a NAT router
Hi all, I have a few cloud instances and I want to use them to do parallel computing. I would like to create a socket cluster on my local machine to control the remote instances. Here is my network setup: local machine -- NAT -- Internet -- cloud instances In the parallel package, the server needs to call `makeCluster()` and listens to the connection from the workers. In my case, the server is the local machine and the workers are the cloud instances. However, since the local machine is hidden behind the NAT, it does not have a public address and the worker cannot connect to it. Therefore, `makeCluster()` will never be able to see the connection from the workers and hang forever. One solution for letting the external machine to access the device inside the NAT is to use port forwarding. However, this would not work for my case as the NAT is set by the network provider(not my home router) so I do not have access to the router. As the cloud instances have public addresses, I'll wonder if there is any way to build the cluster by letting the server connect to the cloud? I have checked `?parallel::makeCluster` and `?snow::makeSOCKcluster` but I found no result. The only promising solution I can see now is to use TCP hole punching, but it is quite complicated and may not work for every case. Since building a connection from local to the remote is super easy, I would like to know if there exists any simple solution. I have searched it on Google for a week but find no answer. I'll appreciate it if you can provide me any suggestions! Best, Jiefei [[alternative HTML version deleted]] __ R-help@r-project.org mailing list -- To UNSUBSCRIBE and more, see https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help PLEASE do read the posting guide http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.
