On 6/29/2024 7:00 PM, Mark Filipak wrote:
Everything is down to what your router does.
Which in the vast majority of small installations (e.g. homes) is _also_
working as a NAT device and performs some filtering and basic firewall
functions. Or, at least I hope the device you have does, it's hard to
get one that doesn't.
The world knows you by the IP that your ISP has assigned.
Sure, call it 198.3.160.206/24 (outside interface).
Let's then assume that the inside interface of the firewall is
192.168.12.1/24 and the systems A & B are on .11 and .12.
The only way that A or B are not publicly
addressable is if you're not connected to the Internet.
Not correct if they are using RFC1918 addresses when pretty much by
definition they are not "publicly addressable". If you have a single
system directly connected to the ISP (without NAT/etc), then yes, that
system will get the 198 address and be publicly accessible, but that's
only ONE system. The only way for A and B to both be publicly
addressable is if the ISP gives each on a separate IP and if routes
exist to them.
BTW, "publicly accessible" means that datagrams from anywhere outside
can be routed to a specific system, not that the system can send
datagrams outbound.
192.168.0.xxx does not route to the Internet.
More correctly, the router does not have a _route_ for that network and
even if it did, the next hop would black-hole the datagrams.
Do those 4 statements fit together in your mind? If not, ask.
Looked like 3, but never mind that.
...this is networking 101...
Yes, please study it, you seem to be mistaken in how things work and
general network engineering practice.
z!
_______________________________________________
ffmpeg-user mailing list
ffmpeg-user@ffmpeg.org
https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-user
To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email
ffmpeg-user-requ...@ffmpeg.org with subject "unsubscribe".
