On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 10:03 PM, Matthew Toseland <toad at amphibian.dyndns.org> wrote: > On Friday 11 July 2008 04:23, Florent Daigni?re wrote: >> * Matthew Toseland <toad at amphibian.dyndns.org> [2008-07-10 16:55:23]: >> >> > On Thursday 10 July 2008 10:44, Florent Daigni?re wrote: >> > > * Matthew Toseland <toad at amphibian.dyndns.org> [2008-07-07 12:17:33]: >> > > > 7. Automatic bandwidth limit calibration. (Toad) >> > > > >> > > > Several other p2p apps implement this, we should too. Bandwidth is > *the* >> > > > scarce resource most of the time, we want to use as much of it as we > can >> > > > without significantly slowing down the user's internet connection (see >> > > > above). >> > > >> > > I don't think that such a thing can reliably work. It might work in 80% >> > > of the cases but will badly screw up in others. >> > >> > It works for other p2p's. What specifically is the problem for Freenet? > Small >> > number of connections? >> >> Small number of connections *and* usage of UDP! Do you know any p2p >> protocol which uses mainly UDP and does what you call "automatic >> bandwidth limit calibration"? >> >> E2k uses TCP, bittorrent uses TCP... As far as I know, only their links >> to DHTs use UDP (Kademilia); they don't use it for data transfert. > > Then how do they get through NATs? Are you sure your information is up to > date?
Ed2k use kademilia and/or server to ask the peer to callback. They can't communicate if both side are behind NAT. (This is called "LowID" in ed2k world) Original BT just doesn't work behind NAT. Newer variant use UDP to ask for callback.
