BlueStar88 writes:It would confuse the freenet routing at the worst case!?No. Routing uses node identities, which are not bound to a single IP.
I know about the node-id, but if there are more than one ip address reporting the same node-id, there could be an effect on the target node...
I don't know exactly, but if i could bound to a specific ip instead to 0.0.0.0 there could be a chance to limit the use of only the same ip as source ip too..Did you try setting ipAddress in the config file?
I've the 'ipAddress' set to a named address from a DynDNS service. But that is not the part..
Probably you missed the meaning of my notice. I'm not talking about the *listen* IP/port, i'm talking about the *outgoing* connection. If you have only one IP at your device you cannot see this effect to trace my problem.
Is there a way to make the node using only one address!? Or is there generally no way to avoid the use of multiple virtual addresses on outgoing connections?Yes.
No. Without using a firewall all incomming packets are going to the freenet node listening at 0.0.0.0:<Port>.
And that hits *all* local interfaces. The 'ipAddress'-statement is only for the source node to know where to send the packets to. By using dynamic DNS services for example. The content of this statement is send/propagated to the others. It does not do any regulation of inbound or outbound connections at the node.
Again:
My problem is, that my node does traffic in both directions using all of my local addresses - and even interfaces (if routed). I can fight this issue using apropriate firewall settings, but that's just not the gentle way...
Cool would be to bound it to a single ip, where all the external traffic is handled to .. and from.
_______________________________________________ Support mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support Unsubscribe at http://dodo.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
