I know, the developers have now more important problems than Freenet node owners behind a NAT or blocking Firewall. Some developers doesn't want to enable the access to Freenet, if the node is blocked.
I know, the Freenet Node Protocol needs a possibility to contact every node (transient and permanent), if the request needs a long time. One workaround is: permanent node owners share their mainport service or/and FCP-port to the community. ->this way the blocked users must trust the node owner; this access to Freenet can easily get blocked by providers, ... Another workaround: [from the config file] # How long to listen on an inactive connection before closing # (if reply address is known) connectionTimeout=180000 If the permanent nodes increase this value (it's in miliseconds) to half or one hour, then unused TCP connections doesn't die in three minutes. Messages will be passed through the established connections. ->this way Freenet is more static. Very active nodes will be always on the maximum value for maxConnections. Perhaps more loads on permanent nodes. But I think the load is higher, if the permanent node can't connect to the blocked transient node behind NAT! (AFAIK a permanent node is useless behind a NAT, either with the increased connectionTimeout. Or am I wrong?) What do you think? Greetings, Stef _______________________________________________ devl mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hawk.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
