Well 50% of clients below thinking they have succeeded and not doing so suggests there are SERIOUS problems with UP&P implementations...
On Wed, Apr 26, 2006 at 01:03:46PM +0200, Thomas King wrote: > Thanks for this hint. From the thread > (http://zgp.org/pipermail/p2p-hackers/2006-April/003804.html) it looks like > that different people made different experiences. Probably it would be a good > idea to write a small UPnP-Capability-Test-Programm so that we can collect > data for a survey. I think it is an unanswered question if and how well UPnP > works. My perception is that it works pretty well because it is supported by > many routers and a lot of software in UPnP-enabled. However, may be I am > wrong. What do you think about this? > > Of course, this evaluation program should not be part of freenet, instead it > should be a separate program probably announced on the freenet website? > > > On Wednesday 26 April 2006 01:27, Matthew Toseland wrote: > > Hmm, not good.. could you keep us informed of the results of the thread? > > > > On Wed, Apr 26, 2006 at 12:13:02AM +0100, Michael Rogers wrote: > > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > > > Hash: SHA1 > > > > > > This thread on p2p-hackers might be of interest... > > > > > > Alex Pankratov wrote: > > > > We've recently added UPnP support to our client software and > > > > now I got some server-side stats and they are most interesting. > > > > > > > > Check this out - > > > > > > > > Roughly a half of all clients that reported success talking to > > > > their 'routers' and establishing TCP/UDP port mappings were > > > > still inaccessible from an outside via their mapped ports. > > > > > > > > Our UPnP code is written from scratch, so if the client says that > > > > ports are mapped, there was in fact a 200 response for respective > > > > SOAP request from the router. > > > > > > > > I was expecting some degree of failures due to double NAT'ing, > > > > additional firewalling, etc .. but 50% ? > > > > > > > > Anyone care to comment or compare this to their own numbers ? > > > > > > > > Alex > _______________________________________________ > Tech mailing list > Tech at freenetproject.org > http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tech -- Matthew J Toseland - toad at amphibian.dyndns.org Freenet Project Official Codemonkey - http://freenetproject.org/ ICTHUS - Nothing is impossible. Our Boss says so. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/tech/attachments/20060426/f4581411/attachment.pgp>
