3 ms·
I kind of agree, but the way the internet is going, with everyone being behind carrier-grade nat, it's not much of a decentralized network of computers anymore,
by dusted 2y ago
I kind of agree, but the way the internet is going, with everyone being behind carrier-grade nat, it's not much of a decentralized network of computers anymore, not to mention all the kids with their laptops and tablets not even hosting anything :(
- Kuinox 2y agoUPnP exists and allow devices to ask the router to open a port to them.
- cosarara 2y agoThat doesnt help with CGNAT.
- Dalewyn 2y agoUPnP is just automating the process of forwarding ports, CGNAT will still screw you sideways because you're behind a router you can't access or order around.
- Fidelix 2y agoUPnP is useless with CGNAT (Carrier Grade NAT), which is what the op is talking about. There are other ways to get seeding working, though, including IPV6, which is gaining adoption, so I don't agree with the OP.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- nikisweeting 2y agoThere are ways around this, I've experimented with setting up a cluster of ArchiveBox instances that share snapshots over Tailscale. Tailscale lets users sign up for free accounts, and you can share machines between separate accounts. A (CGNAT-compatible) decentralized invite-only network could concievably spread that way.