2008/5/8, Daniel Janzon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > On Wed, 2008-05-07 at 20:42 +0200, Marc Herbert wrote: > > > > You have to keep in mind that NATs are a kludge and that there is > > nothing mandating network applications to take them into > > consideration.
> If you want iperf to be popular (and hence well maintained) I guess the > only option is to accept reality as it is with all the NATs. I am not sure who is "you" above... the Big Evil and Powerful Iperf Corporation with very deep pockets, trying to sneak the iperf spyware on as many PCs as possible? :-) Concerning maintenance, a very small and volunteer team might actually find it useful to filter out a number of users, possibly demanding and possibly not contributing much source code :-) > Quite often ISPs or your local BOFH uses NAT and you don't have the > right to forward a port. My experience differs. This feature was available on every router given by every ISP I have seen so far. That means tens of them. The only exception(s) was when... there was no router at all, so no problem at all. If your BOFH prevents you to run iperf, maybe that is just because... he does not want you to? He might not want you to do anything else than surfing the web on port 80, and especially not saturating its pipes? In any case iperf is open-source: thus tweaking connection establishment is open to anyone. Cheers, Marc. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by the 2008 JavaOne(SM) Conference Don't miss this year's exciting event. There's still time to save $100. Use priority code J8TL2D2. http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;198757673;13503038;p?http://java.sun.com/javaone _______________________________________________ Iperf-users mailing list Iperf-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/iperf-users
