On Mon, Jul 29, 2002 at 12:19:37PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > I have seen a claim (on FMB) that one person can see more with build 489 > than he could before. I've also seen claims that the noderefs that are > available to a transient node behind a NAT "firewall" are different from > the noderefs that are available to a non-transient node tunneling > through a NAPT "firewall". So, I *think* freenet is sort-of split by > default. Hard to prove, though.
Freenet DOES NOT WORK behind a NAT "firewall" if you do not tunnel (by port forwarding.) It does not work, period, transient or not. > I still think that some warning/discussion on the freenet-dev list was > warranted, since I don't normally keep track of the #freenet irc > channel. For instance, what network is #freenet on? Why isn't that on > the freenetproject web site in an obvious place, such as the "Developer" > area "About This Site" section, or the FAQ? Because if we published it, we would have to move the discussions somewhere else... <> -- Oskar Sandberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ devl mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hawk.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
