Jump to content

NAT Traversal, Proxy/Tor, DHT Network


Guest

Recommended Posts

  • 3 weeks later...
  • Replies 77
  • Created
  • Last Reply

I have an idea. Firon earlier wrote this:

"beg the BitComet devs for it (haha), or pay them money for the source like BitLord did.. lol"

Since there are quite a few people who want NAT traversal implemented, how about finding out how much we would have to pay BitComet devs for the source. As long as its a reasonable amount, maybe we could collect donations from people who want it to pay for the source?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Eh µTorrent is owned by BitTorrent Inc now, so I don't think donations are even needed anymore, since (1) they might have more time/staff to work on NAT traversal, or (2) if they can't get it done themselves, they already have the money to buy a solution :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

NAT Traversal is made to "transparently" bypass the firewalling effects specifically caused by routers NAT, it is far less likely to work with software firewalls.

BitComet's version of NAT Traversal works because many people use it that don't really need it. They're too lazy to forward ports on their Linksys or D-Link routers...which it probably works fine on, given nothing else in their network setup is particularly complicated.

And this causes a problem because although they're not firewalled to other NAT Traversal-enabled users they STILL are to EVERYONE else!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just curious, but if I understand you right, even with NAT Traversal, the main problem would be with software firewalls. But isn't it relatively easy to allow utorrent to pass through software firewalls? I'm in a situation where my network administrator wont let me forward a port into my computer, my software firewall is allowing it fine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just to comment since this was brought back up. BitComet's NAT Traversal now supports the PE/MSE function, and yes it is backwards compatible. BitComet's NAT Traversal works well at my college which has some big fancy expensive cooperate firewall software. The only client I can use their is BitComet.

Since BitComet uses the same DHT as µTorrent I would suggest just borrowing some code for reference.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another vote for NAT traversal. I can only connect to trackers through my home proxy with BitComet or Bitspirit. I seemed to have more success with the later actually (which is based on Bitcomet btw), but both programs are banned in many trackers. Plus they seem to fuck-up the connection a bit, as in getting a bit slower, less responsive.

Latest utorrent build at this date does not fill the lack.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

NAT transveral requires an immense understanding of UDP packet behavior across software firewalls, consumer routers, and internet network switches. µTorrent's handling of UDP packets current only exists in DHT traffic, and it's not exactly doing well if people's problems concerning DHT is anything to go by.

The first beta versions of NAT transveral may likely cause more problems than they fix. It'd be like Azureus' protocol encryption bugs (when it first implimented PE) or D-Link Router DMZ data destruction...except many magnitudes worse if this feature were enabled by default!

So even if this works perfectly for most people, this definitely should not be implemented by default...if done at all!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the chinese are now more happy than ever to use bitcomet, because it supports PE over Nat traversal. the main reason why they need nat traversal is because chinese ISPs are heavily proxied by law. ("Great firewall of china")

without nat traversal, p2p is almost impossible within china.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...