* Matthew Toseland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007-05-31 00:04:52]:

> On Wednesday 30 May 2007 22:32, Florent Daignière wrote:
> > * Matthew Toseland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007-05-30
> > 20:24:14]:
> > > Is this safe by default? Are you planning to deal with UP&P
> > > based on this code too?
> >
> > Yes binding only to "trusted" interfaces is safe... I don't see any
> > kind of UI we could use not requiering the user to understand the
> > CIDR notation and so on... so I just gave up :) Assuming that geeks
> > will find the way to do it and other users won't need it anyway.
> 
> Well, we could identify the number of LANs the node is on, and the
> number of direct internet connections, that'd be a good start. If
> it's 1/1, the user is probably directly connected, so we're only
> asking about FCP; if it's 1/0, the user is either directly connected,
> on a shared LAN with a NAT, or on a private LAN with a NAT. And
> so on.
> >

We could; I'm not sure it worths it though.

> > I dunno yet, I'll keep it simple at the beginning and make it
> > evolve over time depending on feedback given by newbies.
> >

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

_______________________________________________
Devl mailing list
[email protected]
http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl

Reply via email to