[BitTorrent] UPnP, NATs, and P2P

Bill Cox bill at viasic.com
Mon Feb 14 09:45:48 EST 2005


On Mon, 2005-02-14 at 13:10 +0000, Justin Cormack wrote:
> IPv6 is part of the solution, at least machines are addressable. You can still
> filter just as much as you like on the firewall.
> 
> Clearly there is no solution that works with NAT, if the firewall is setup
> in any way sensibly.
> 
> The same problem is there with voip, its a real pain configuring phones when
> there is nat. The one I got tried to use STUN but it simply doesn't work, 
> yo have to forward ports manually.
> 
> I think P2P, VOIP and mobile phones will be what forces adoption of ipv6.

I think the lack of IP addresses will drive IPv6 adoption, and that
problem will be exacerbated  by the popularity of things like VOIP
enabled phones and other P2P devices, so I agree with you there.

However, I'm no longer convinced that IPv6 will help solve the NAT
problem.  I suspect that Cisco will continue shipping NAT enabled
residential gateway/routers long after IPv6 is established, possibly for
many decades.  What you and I think wont change what Cisco does, so
there's no use arguing about what's right.  Note that they ship their
LinkSys routers with UPnP disabled today.  UPnP otherwise would have
solved the NAT problem.

I suspect that this situation will continue unless there's some new
solution for NAT enabled gateways that can block unauthorized incoming
connections yet allow legitimate ones through.  But how can a router
know the difference?

Bill




 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/BitTorrent/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    BitTorrent-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 





More information about the BitTorrent mailing list