On 8/28/06, Ravi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Point duly noted. I suggested 80 as many firewalls are flexible with port 80. This will result in more P2P connections than using any other port.
This only works when you have simple ACL-based stateless firewalls. An application-layer firewall will look at your packets, see that they are not HTTP, and silently drop them. A stateful firewall will of course not let you poke a hole inward until a connection has first been made outward. Since this could easily be the problem on the other side as well... Not even a $30 home router would let in port 80 "unsolicited" unless the user was running a web server or something, and if every user were savvy enough to poke the holes in their own firewalls we wouldn't be having this discussion!
Yes I agree that there is lot of complexity with P2P chat. Since audio/video applications have to solve these problems anyway, I was hoping to get a free ride. I think those days have yet not arrived.
All I can say is good luck. :) -- Psi webmaster (http://psi-im.org) im:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://halr9000.com
