4 ms·
Does anyone support those? It still leaves the issue of it using multiple ports.
by LinAGKar 5y ago
Does anyone support those? It still leaves the issue of it using multiple ports.
- teddyh 5y ago> Does anyone support those? Maybe, maybe not, but even then, wouldn’t implementing those be easier (for both you and the rest of the world) than creating a completely new protocol? > It still leaves the issue of it using multiple ports. Aren’t multiple ports only an “issue” if you assume NAT (and CGNAT, shudder) as a natural state of things?
- LinAGKar 5y ago>wouldn’t implementing those be easier (for both you and the rest of the world) than creating a completely new protocol? Maybe. One the other hand, WebDav and SFTP may be more widely supported than those extensions already. >Aren’t multiple ports only an “issue” if you assume NAT (and CGNAT, shudder) as a natural state of things? NAT is unfortunately something ubiquitous. And the multiple ports makes FTP harder to tunnel.