Heyaz. A good alternative to Hamachi is the echoServer approach.
It works in a similar way, making the VNC connection appear to be
"outgoing" from the point of view of both firewalls. Unlike Hamachi,
though: (1) you can own and operate your own "reflection server" (rather
than relying on run by someone you "don't know from childhood"), and
(2) it works using normal TCP connections, rather than relying on a
limitation in most firewalls that do not statefully filter UDP sessions.
Using TCP also allows the echoServer approach to work when there's a
web-proxy in addition to a firewall.
To work with RealVNC, you can use the EchoVNC wrapper, available
here: "http://www.echovnc.com";. We've also integrated the capability
directly into our own VNC flavor, available here:
ftp://ftp.echogent.com/UltraVNC/beta
More info on the whole approach is here:
http://www.echogent.com/tech.htm
hope it helps,
Scott
Mick wrote:
This looks good, as long as you trust *their* servers with *your* login
details . . . As I do not know them personally, from childhood, I wouldn't
really trust them.
All Hamachi traffic, starting at each peer, is encrypted with the
AES-256 cypher. And unless you're running on a relay, your traffic
doesn't touch their servers at all.
I think that the Client adding feature managed from the server side that VNC
offers is a good solution to this problem and by definition more secure than
involving third parties.
If that works, then by all means use it, being the simplest options. The
reason I proffered Hamachi was because most everyone tends to be behind
a router these days, making H the next simplest solution -- sometimes
even fiddling with your router doesn't end up solving the issue.
<snip>
_______________________________________________
VNC-List mailing list
VNC-List@realvnc.com
To remove yourself from the list visit:
http://www.realvnc.com/mailman/listinfo/vnc-list
