* Matthew Toseland <toad at amphibian.dyndns.org> [2007-03-06 01:37:52]:
> Universal Plug and Play support > =============================== > > I suggest that we need UP&P support. The main caveats are that it is not > usable on an untrusted LAN, so we need to ask the user, and that we may > not easily be able to distinguish between a local trusted LAN and an > ISP's LAN. It is also reported that UP&P works only around 50% of the > time when it is detected. Ok, let's feed the troll. > > However: > - It would significantly improve connection reliability. If for example > all your peers are german and in germany all domestic IPs change every > 24 hours, if you are down for 24 hours you are lost for good. Do we have any stats regarding how many of our users are double-natted? I know that in france most people had DSL connectivity before the Wireless craze ; meaning that most users are likely to have two different natting appliances (the routing modem and the wireless AP). > - Right now good connectivity relies on getting a few geek nodes - nodes > that are directly connected or port forwarded. UP&P would increase the > proportion of such nodes dramatically. I am not sure it's an issue. I am idling on #freenet-refs on a regular basis to see how the installer performs and to see where users get stuck : most of them don't have connectivity problems. > - It would allow for all sorts of bootstrapping protocols. One-time > references are the tip of the iceberg: Anything that involves giving > your details well in advance of the actual connection attempt will be > greatly helped by UP&P support. Will be greatly helped if UP&P works : indeed. > - It would (mostly) eliminate the need to rely on centralised STUN servers. it's assuming there is no double nat : again ;) I won't debate on it to much as it has proven to be a useless waste of my time : I'll just give some references : [1] http://archives.freenetproject.org/message/20060620.021959.c1c37934.en.html [2] http://archives.freenetproject.org/message/20060421.194006.53dfbd93.en.html [3] http://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/tech/2006-April/001010.html (from toad ;) ) [4] http://wiki.openwrt.org/OpenWrtDocs/upnp?highlight=%28upnp%29 I won't object to someone implementing up&p support as a plugin for fred as long as it remains optionnal and isn't done by toad. But still, I do think it's a useless waste of time/money/effort for the project. NextGen$
