On 2010-04-21 at 19:37 -0600, Yves Dorfsman wrote:
> Phil Pennock wrote:
> > On 2010-04-18 at 11:42 -0600, Yves Dorfsman wrote:
> >> addresses on the public internet. I only used one, so I turned that off,
> >> and
> >> pointed to a public stun server (who fund those? all of them seems to be
> >
Phil Pennock wrote:
> On 2010-04-18 at 11:42 -0600, Yves Dorfsman wrote:
>> addresses on the public internet. I only used one, so I turned that off, and
>> pointed to a public stun server (who fund those? all of them seems to be
>> aliases to an amazon EC2 node!),
>
> stun.l.google.com
>
> I'm
On 2010-04-18 at 11:42 -0600, Yves Dorfsman wrote:
> addresses on the public internet. I only used one, so I turned that off, and
> pointed to a public stun server (who fund those? all of them seems to be
> aliases to an amazon EC2 node!),
stun.l.google.com
I'm fairly sure that's not an Amazon
> From: discuss-boun...@lopsa.org [mailto:discuss-boun...@lopsa.org] On
> Behalf Of Yves Dorfsman
>
> Anyway, NAT is a problem for any p2p that is not tcp based, and voice
> and
> video tend to be udp... But, there are work-arounds, such as STUN which
> work
> quite well.
Nat is a problem for any
Robert Hajime Lanning wrote:
>
>
> SIP doesn't really work over NAT. The recommendation in the Asterisk
> community is you have the Asterisk server on a public IP, then the
> clients (soft or hard) can be behind NATs. And all media (RTP) is run
> through the Asterisk server (canreinvite=no), not
Robert Brockway wrote:
> On Tue, 6 Apr 2010, Edward Ned Harvey wrote:
>
>> If we only cared about the client/server model, IPv4 and NAT would be just
>> fine, now and for decades to come. The real value-add of IPv6 is peer to
>> peer. But in order for that to be logistically possible, a client n
On Tue, 6 Apr 2010, Edward Ned Harvey wrote:
> If we only cared about the client/server model, IPv4 and NAT would be just
> fine, now and for decades to come. The real value-add of IPv6 is peer to
> peer. But in order for that to be logistically possible, a client needs to
> know the IP address
Edward Ned Harvey wrote:
>
>
>> -as mentioned yesterday, there are protocols out there that use proper
>> authentication over encypted channels to let peers establish a peer to
>> peer
>> connection through a dialogue through servers that work well.
>>
>> What problem are you trying to solve?
>
> From: discuss-boun...@lopsa.org [mailto:discuss-boun...@lopsa.org] On
> Behalf Of Yves Dorfsman
>
> -for your idea to work, you have to have a short TTL on your DNS
> record. The
> DNS infrastructure was meant to use caching as much as possible, with a
> lot of
> short TTL, the DNS servers are g
On 2010-04-07 at 14:44 -0400, Edward Ned Harvey wrote:
> So, the only issue with typical DDNS, such as MS and Bind, is the complexity
> of setup. They can easily do it for DHCP clients on a LAN, assuming you're
> running your own DHCP server, and you're on your own LAN, but not so easy if
> requir
On 2010-04-07 at 07:42 -0700, Atom Powers wrote:
> If the big regional and global carriers aren't supporting IPv6 yet, it
> doesn't really matter if your ISP does, it's still going to have to be
> tunneled somewhere.
Enough of the global carriers, and outside the USA the regional
carriers, carry I
Edward Ned Harvey wrote:
>
> But, I just got the idea from startssl.net ... All you need to do is connect
> to a webpage, or any web service for that matter, and they know your client
> IP address. As long as you have *any* way to uniquely identify yourself to
> a web site, the automatic DDNS cou
> From: Phil Pennock [mailto:lopsa-discuss+p...@spodhuis.org]
>
> Dynamic DNS updates. I haven't messed on this Mac, but ISTR that it's
So, the only issue with typical DDNS, such as MS and Bind, is the complexity
of setup. They can easily do it for DHCP clients on a LAN, assuming you're
running
On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 6:22 AM, Christopher A Manly wrote:
> For that matter … anybody know how to get an IPv6 address, if your ISP
> doesn’t simply give them out?
>
> My first suggestion would be to get in touch with your ISP. All the big
> carriers are looking at v6, some are actually talking a
For that matter … anybody know how to get an IPv6 address, if your ISP doesn’t
simply give them out?
My first suggestion would be to get in touch with your ISP. All the big
carriers are looking at v6, some are actually talking about it, and some are
even beginning to support it. Which means
Phil Pennock wrote:
> On 2010-04-06 at 22:11 -0600, Yves Dorfsman wrote:
>> Phil Pennock wrote:
For that matter . anybody know how to get an IPv6 address, if your ISP
doesn't simply give them out?
>>> Hurricane Electric give out free tunnels: http://www.tunnelbroker.net/
>> Tunnelling is
On 2010-04-06 at 22:11 -0600, Yves Dorfsman wrote:
> Phil Pennock wrote:
> >
> >> For that matter . anybody know how to get an IPv6 address, if your ISP
> >> doesn't simply give them out?
> >
> > Hurricane Electric give out free tunnels: http://www.tunnelbroker.net/
>
> Tunnelling is great to pl
Phil Pennock wrote:
>
>> For that matter . anybody know how to get an IPv6 address, if your ISP
>> doesn't simply give them out?
>
> Hurricane Electric give out free tunnels: http://www.tunnelbroker.net/
Tunnelling is great to play and learn about ipv6, but not so much for peer to
peer stuff, b
Edward Ned Harvey wrote:
>
>
> But if you imagine that you get a different IPv6 address for every
> network that you plug into, which is what you have to imagine to be
> commonplace some years out from now… then there are basically two
> options. (a) whatever service you’re using (for examp
On 2010-04-06 at 22:19 -0400, Edward Ned Harvey wrote:
> I can't assume option (a) because Intel's video conference system isn't
> probably going to match Adobe's and Microsoft's and Apple's and Google's and
> RedHat's and so on. So there's got to be some really awesome DDNS solution.
> I am famil
If we only cared about the client/server model, IPv4 and NAT would be just
fine, now and for decades to come. The real value-add of IPv6 is peer to
peer. But in order for that to be logistically possible, a client needs to
know the IP address of another client, and one thing I know for *dang* sur
21 matches
Mail list logo
