From: Haig D. <ha...@di...> - 2007-04-05 15:15:40
|
Hey there, Is anybody working on integrating STUNT (Simple Traversal of UDP Through NATs and TCP) into Gaim? I'm tired of not being able to connect to another client directly when we're both behind NATing firewalls, and it looks like the STUNT process would circumvent this problem. If nobody's working on it, and if it makes sense, a friend & I were thinking about starting the implementation... Haig More info on STUNT here: http://nutss.gforge.cis.cornell.edu/stunt.php |
From: Ethan B. <ebl...@cs...> - 2007-04-05 15:36:07
|
Haig Didizian spake unto us the following wisdom: > Is anybody working on integrating STUNT (Simple Traversal of UDP Through > NATs and TCP) into Gaim? I'm tired of not being able to connect to > another client directly when we're both behind NATing firewalls, and it > looks like the STUNT process would circumvent this problem. >=20 > If nobody's working on it, and if it makes sense, a friend & I were > thinking about starting the implementation... The only trouble with that is that none of the major services use UDP for their communication. It's all well and good to be able to *pass* UDP, but if you can't do anything with it once it's there... Ethan --=20 The laws that forbid the carrying of arms are laws [that have no remedy for evils]. They disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes. -- Cesare Beccaria, "On Crimes and Punishments", 1764 |
From: Haig D. <ha...@di...> - 2007-04-05 15:44:24
|
Ethan, I think it's all about the "T" at the end of STUNT. While STUN was designed for UDP, STUNT is for TCP communication, too. h On Thu, 2007-04-05 at 11:35 -0400, Ethan Blanton wrote: > Haig Didizian spake unto us the following wisdom: > > Is anybody working on integrating STUNT (Simple Traversal of UDP Through > > NATs and TCP) into Gaim? I'm tired of not being able to connect to > > another client directly when we're both behind NATing firewalls, and it > > looks like the STUNT process would circumvent this problem. > > > > If nobody's working on it, and if it makes sense, a friend & I were > > thinking about starting the implementation... > > The only trouble with that is that none of the major services use UDP > for their communication. It's all well and good to be able to *pass* > UDP, but if you can't do anything with it once it's there... > > Ethan > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT > Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your > opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys-and earn cash > http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV > _______________________________________________ Gaim-devel mailing list Gai...@li... https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gaim-devel |
From: Ethan B. <ebl...@cs...> - 2007-04-05 15:53:20
|
Haig Didizian spake unto us the following wisdom: > I think it's all about the "T" at the end of STUNT.=20 >=20 > While STUN was designed for UDP, STUNT is for TCP communication, too. Ahh, I missed that on the first read -- if it works, go to it. We are slowly growing a number of mechanisms for making NAT traversal more plausible, and as long as they don't interfere with normal operation and are not overly invasive, I see no reason not to include others. Ethan --=20 The laws that forbid the carrying of arms are laws [that have no remedy for evils]. They disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes. -- Cesare Beccaria, "On Crimes and Punishments", 1764 |
From: Haig D. <ha...@di...> - 2007-04-05 16:28:42
|
Ethan, Sounds good. It's been years since I've played with the gaim source... should we create a plugin or patch Gaim's core? What approach would you recommend? Thanks - Haig On Thu, 2007-04-05 at 11:52 -0400, Ethan Blanton wrote: > Haig Didizian spake unto us the following wisdom: > > I think it's all about the "T" at the end of STUNT. > > > > While STUN was designed for UDP, STUNT is for TCP communication, too. > > Ahh, I missed that on the first read -- if it works, go to it. We are > slowly growing a number of mechanisms for making NAT traversal more > plausible, and as long as they don't interfere with normal operation > and are not overly invasive, I see no reason not to include others. > > Ethan > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT > Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your > opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys-and earn cash > http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV > _______________________________________________ Gaim-devel mailing list Gai...@li... https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gaim-devel |
From: Nathan P. <gai...@gl...> - 2007-04-06 09:22:22
|
Ethan Blanton wrote: > Haig Didizian spake unto us the following wisdom: >> I think it's all about the "T" at the end of STUNT. >> >> While STUN was designed for UDP, STUNT is for TCP communication, too. > > Ahh, I missed that on the first read -- if it works, go to it. We are > slowly growing a number of mechanisms for making NAT traversal more > plausible, and as long as they don't interfere with normal operation > and are not overly invasive, I see no reason not to include others. Please take heed of this warning in the FAQ: "...the STUNT library has not been optimized for connection-establishment-latency. Therefore, it make take little longer to connect to end-point using STUNT that you could already connect to with plain sockets. As a result, the recommended way of using the STUNT library is to try the plain-socket connection first and if that fails, then fall back to the STUNT library." Also, perhaps I am wrong, but it is my understanding that STUNT requires special cooperation from the other client for TCP hole punching. If that is the case, then maybe STUNT is not so useful for gaim since it would only work with other gaim clients. -Nathan |