Any thoughts? The original poster thinks this is an attack, and NAT problems 
seem unlikely given that the packets on the different port are all at the same 
time. Also for the same reason it is unlikely that it is a harvesting attempt - 
they would be spread out over a long period.
-------------- next part --------------
An embedded message was scrubbed...
From: Toni Bergman <>
Subject: [freenet-support] Part 2: Probably a bug: please report: 1 peers       
forcibly disconnected due to not acknowledging packets.
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2009 15:12:05 +0300
Size: 136589
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 835 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.

Reply via email to