Oops, looks like it might work after all. Aplogies for wasting time. > If you're running it on the router you're not really behind it so yes it > would be a matter of just opening a port... I'm behind a grey box with > flashing lights on it and my node believes that its IP address is > 192.168.0.3 :-( > > Port forwarding is only half the solution. I have a hole in my firewall at > 19114 forwarded to 192.168.0.3:19114 but no node trying to reach me will > ever get this far if my node doesn't put the router's (genuine, internet > visible) IP address in outgoing messages instead of 192.168.0.3 > > Degs > > Mike wrote: > > Well, I have freenet node v.0.2 running on my shitty router box > (previously a 486/33, now a 486/66 > > with 32 MB RAM) and it seems to be running just fine. I am not sure how it > will hold up with more > > freenet popularity (it should be fine if freenet scales like it should) or > with all the crypto > > coming in v.0.3. > > I read Oskar's response to your problem and wasn't sure if he was saying > that port forwarding would > > work or not. I don't see why forwarding your incoming freenet port to your > internal box wouldn't > > work (port 19114 in most cases). You can do this by intalling the port > forwarding IPChains module > > ... assuming that your router is running linux. Other connection ports > should be masqueraded > > properly provided they were initiated by the internal node. I may be > forced to try it if v.0.3 > > proves to be too much for my shitty box. > > > > Mike > > > > _______________________________________________ > Freenet-dev mailing list > Freenet-dev at lists.sourceforge.net > http://lists.sourceforge.net/mailman/listinfo/freenet-dev >
_______________________________________________ Freenet-dev mailing list Freenet-dev at lists.sourceforge.net http://lists.sourceforge.net/mailman/listinfo/freenet-dev
