[p2p-hackers] Number of pinholes supported by low-end NATs?

Michael Slavitch slavitch at gmail.com
Fri Mar 3 00:42:14 UTC 2006


In theory 65K-2. In practise, "less" but lots.  Our testing seems to support
values that are like this:


1
4
16
64
256
1K
4K
16K
64K

With more recent boxes supporting the higher end in test cases if not in
real life.  CPU and bandwidth cack out before ports do.

Gaming forced this.

"Do the numbers differ if the messages are carried over UDP vs TCP?"

.  If you can guess how much RAM is available you can guess the size of the
pinhole range.

Look at ( http://openwrt.org/)

On 02/03/06, Philip Matthews < philip_matthews at magma.ca> wrote:
>
> Does anyone have any idea how many pinholes a P2P application
> can have open at one time through a typical low-end NAT box?
>
> Could a P2P application maintain connections to 30 peers simultaneously?
> What about 50 peers? Or 100 peers?
>
> Do the numbers differ if the messages are carried over UDP vs TCP?
>
> (Note: My interest is in limitations in the NAT box, and NOT in any
> limitations in
> the Windows, Mac, Linux, ... box on which the P2P application is
> running.)
>
> Just wondering if anyone has any solid data in this area.
>
> - Philip
> _______________________________________________
> p2p-hackers mailing list
> p2p-hackers at zgp.org
> http://zgp.org/mailman/listinfo/p2p-hackers
> _______________________________________________
> Here is a web page listing P2P Conferences:
> http://www.neurogrid.net/twiki/bin/view/Main/PeerToPeerConferences
>



--
Michael Slavitch
Ottawa, Ontario Canada
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://zgp.org/pipermail/p2p-hackers/attachments/20060302/034bd318/attachment.html


More information about the P2p-hackers mailing list