On Wed, Dec 01, 2004 at 01:39:54AM +0100, Newsbyte wrote: > Well, it's a funny thing, with the firewall. I'm still not very clear about > myself. It is supposed to work without a glitch these days; it should handle > NAT and firewalls without a glitch...only it sort of doesn't. It works, but > it doesn't. I'll let a High God explain that one, but rest assured it's full > of 'ifs' and 'thens'. Using UDP might have helped to avoid all that, but ah, > details.
No, it's not. If you have a NAT you can't hole punch, then it won't work well. If you have a NAT you haven't punched a hole in, then it won't work well. If you have a NAT and you HAVE punched a hole i.e. forwarded the port, then it should work reasonably well, and you don't need to set the ip address. -- Matthew J Toseland - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Freenet Project Official Codemonkey - http://freenetproject.org/ ICTHUS - Nothing is impossible. Our Boss says so.
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ 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]
