4 ms·

This uses STUN servers to help it poke through NATs. (That's what I mean by "WebRTC's NAT traversal tricks") There's no TURN server set for this, but it should

by saljam 6y ago

This uses STUN servers to help it poke through NATs. (That's what I mean by "WebRTC's NAT traversal tricks") There's no TURN server set for this, but it shouldn't be hard to add one. There are NATs where you'd need one to relay all the traffic, but these seem to be relatively rare nowadays. If anyone has any actual statistics on these I'd appreciate it!

majke 6y ago
Which one? Which STUN server are you using?
- adrianpike 6y ago
  Looks like Google's: https://github.com/saljam/webwormhole/blob/f542b26fb2fa3282023d7836d679bb4b758c7e97/web/main.js#L150 https://github.com/saljam/webwormhole/blob/f542b26fb2fa32820...
- lioeters 6y ago
  stun:stun.l.google.com:19302 Source: https://github.com/saljam/webwormhole/blob/8f707583d68173de3d380525244145099a3a9721/cmd/ww/main.go#L27-L28 https://github.com/saljam/webwormhole/blob/8f707583d68173de3...
- saljam 6y ago
  The website uses Google's. On command line it's an option and Google's is default. I'd like to make the signalling server also a STUN server at some point.
  - crazygringo 6y ago
    Oh that's interesting... I had no idea there were publicly available STUN servers like that. But way back in 2014 a Google employee does seem to have confirmed it's free to use, but comes without guarantees. [1] https://groups.google.com/d/msg/discuss-webrtc/shcPIaPxwo8/F8Vc8QlIyn0J https://groups.google.com/d/msg/discuss-webrtc/shcPIaPxwo8/F...
scruffups 6y ago
" but these seem to be relatively rare nowadays " AT&T 5G uses Symmetric NAT. It's not rare if you have an iPhone or iPad with cellular. No way to do P2P without relaying traffic unless you want to "guess" the randomized port number, and, on that front, there are NAT-device-aware algorithms that can make that process faster. We were promised IPv6 will make NAT's not necessary but I believe service providers use NATs not simply to conserve the IPv4 space but to actively discourage using the service to host your own servers.
- anderspitman 6y ago
  It's amazing what would be possible if NAT wasn't a thing. We will get there. Someday.
  - api 6y ago
    We are going backward. Newer 5G and fiber deployments where I live offer only IPv4 with carrier grade NAT. No IPv6, and no real IP unless you ask for one. (Not sure how long they will offer that to non-business subscribers.)
- 7leafer 6y ago
  This man told the truth! They are zealously pushing the "ever increasing speeds" of questionable benefit for the user - what for? So that commuters could watch 8k 120fps video while on a bus? Or rather to gather all kind of sensor data in real-time, audio and video included, from their human oil wells? To strip off people's clothes with millimetre wave imaging? But making it easy for people to run their own home/mobile servers, share and cooperate without govporate oversight is clearly not on their agenda.

by saljam 6y ago

majke 6y ago

Which one? Which STUN server are you using?

adrianpike 6y ago
Looks like Google's: https://github.com/saljam/webwormhole/blob/f542b26fb2fa3282023d7836d679bb4b758c7e97/web/main.js#L150 https://github.com/saljam/webwormhole/blob/f542b26fb2fa32820...
lioeters 6y ago
stun:stun.l.google.com:19302 Source: https://github.com/saljam/webwormhole/blob/8f707583d68173de3d380525244145099a3a9721/cmd/ww/main.go#L27-L28 https://github.com/saljam/webwormhole/blob/8f707583d68173de3...
saljam 6y ago
The website uses Google's. On command line it's an option and Google's is default. I'd like to make the signalling server also a STUN server at some point.
- crazygringo 6y ago
  Oh that's interesting... I had no idea there were publicly available STUN servers like that. But way back in 2014 a Google employee does seem to have confirmed it's free to use, but comes without guarantees. [1] https://groups.google.com/d/msg/discuss-webrtc/shcPIaPxwo8/F8Vc8QlIyn0J https://groups.google.com/d/msg/discuss-webrtc/shcPIaPxwo8/F...

scruffups 6y ago

" but these seem to be relatively rare nowadays " AT&T 5G uses Symmetric NAT. It's not rare if you have an iPhone or iPad with cellular. No way to do P2P without relaying traffic unless you want to "guess" the randomized port number, and, on that front, there are NAT-device-aware algorithms that can make that process faster. We were promised IPv6 will make NAT's not necessary but I believe service providers use NATs not simply to conserve the IPv4 space but to actively discourage using the service to host your own servers.

anderspitman 6y ago
It's amazing what would be possible if NAT wasn't a thing. We will get there. Someday.
- api 6y ago
  We are going backward. Newer 5G and fiber deployments where I live offer only IPv4 with carrier grade NAT. No IPv6, and no real IP unless you ask for one. (Not sure how long they will offer that to non-business subscribers.)
7leafer 6y ago
This man told the truth! They are zealously pushing the "ever increasing speeds" of questionable benefit for the user - what for? So that commuters could watch 8k 120fps video while on a bus? Or rather to gather all kind of sensor data in real-time, audio and video included, from their human oil wells? To strip off people's clothes with millimetre wave imaging? But making it easy for people to run their own home/mobile servers, share and cooperate without govporate oversight is clearly not on their agenda.