* Matthew Toseland <toad at amphibian.dyndns.org> [2006-04-26 19:01:30]:
> On Wed, Apr 26, 2006 at 02:31:00PM +0000, NextGen$ wrote: > > * Matthew Toseland <toad at amphibian.dyndns.org> [2006-04-26 13:26:33]: > > > > > On Wed, Apr 26, 2006 at 11:19:23AM +0000, NextGen$ wrote: > > > > > > > > imho Up&p and stun are useless without multi-homming support. > > > > > > Huh? What exactly do you think is necessary prior to STUN/UP&P? > > > > Having references with multiple contact points (an "official" signed > > reference with possibly several addresses and an unofficial one with ip > > gathered from up&p, other peers, last known, ...)... And maybe the > > possibility within the node to have different listeners bound to different > > sockets. > > We already have the possibility of multiple IPs in the ref, and a > separate last-detected IP. The IP detected from other peers is just used > in the overall detection algorithm though; we will only publish one IP > address at present, and we will only use one at a time to talk to a > given node. I'm not sure exactly what you are suggesting we need. Imho we need to publish every known and valid ip addresses, even local ones ; otherwise nodes on the same lan won't be able to connect (to both outside and internal peers). NextGen$
