4 ms·
You can use non-standard ports for any protocol, but then they're inferior. A first-class address+port has to match the protocol, so only one real user per IP.
by DarylZero 5y ago
You can use non-standard ports for any protocol, but then they're inferior.
A first-class address+port has to match the protocol, so only one real user per IP.
EDIT:
Also, a home internet connection cannot route thousands of streams simultaneously, so allowing thousands of users one port each does not make sense.
It is always going to be cheaper and more performant to do any kind of forwarding on a rented server in a data center.
- marcodiego 5y ago> It is always going to be cheaper and more performant to do any kind of forwarding on a rented server in a data center. I understand this solution, but this is exactly what I'm trying to avoid.
- DarylZero 5y agoWhy avoid it though? Why share an inferior resource that's also more expensive?
- marcodiego 5y agoIndependence from business, better privacy, less bureaucracy and the possibility of quickly enabling it for cases of emergency or experimentation.
- DarylZero 5y agoSeems to me that all of that is an illusion because you're just neglecting the home internet provider that is providing the IP addresses. That's big business, usually regional monopoly, politically powerful, offers no better privacy (neither middleman should be trusted), more bureaucracy, slower to enable.