[LAU] Even more netjack trouble (although setup seems as described )
arnold at arnoldarts.de
Tue Sep 28 11:15:31 UTC 2010
On Tuesday 28 September 2010 12:52:14 Julien Claassen wrote:
> In Sep 28 A.D. 2010 Jörn Nettingsmeier scripsit:
> > On 09/28/2010 12:30 PM, Julien Claassen wrote:
> >> So no matter if he initiates the connection, he will also need the
> >> correct ports forwarded from his router?
> > UDP is stateless, and there is no concept of "initiating a connection" on
> > the network layer. you basically send a UDP packet and hope it makes it.
> > the opposite end does the same.
> > so say we have this setup:
> > machine A: 192.168.0.2/24
> > router A: internal address 192.168.0.1/24, external address x.x.x.x
> > internet
> > router B: internal address 192.168.0.1/24, external address y.y.y.y
> > machine B: 192.168.0.2/24
> > router A must listen to the UDP port you want to use and forward each
> > packet to machine A.
> > router B must listen to the same port and forward to machine B.
> > say you're A. your partner host will then be y.y.y.y, i.e. the router.
> > since it's forwarding, you will be in effect talking to machine B.
> > same rules apply for the other direction.
> > it's advisable to run a testing tool for udp connections before you try
> > netjack. i recommend iperf, it's text-mode and available at sourceforge
> > iirc.
> Thank you very much. We'll do that and test netjack again. I think we
> will have more luck this time. :-)
To make it easier, you (or your partner) could setup a public accessible
openvpn (probably with port forwarding as jörn described on the servers
side). Then you can just use the network of this vpn tunnel to use udp.
That way you only have to set up openvpn once and not fiddle with changing
port-numbers and changing apps every time again...
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
More information about the Linux-audio-user