Glenn Phillips <glennp@null.net.nz> wrote

>I believe the official word on this from Microsoft is that to get
>NetMeeting through NAT/firewalls, you should basically translate all high
>UDP ports. This is simply poor design, because they chose T.120 and H.323
>as the application protocols. Now, as we all know, this is:

Well, actually, I think many of us have never heard of these protocols. From
what I understand, and as mentioned in my previous messagem H.323 negotiates
ports[1] on the fly. Can you tell us more about them?

>a) Stupid
>b) Impossible through the M10's crappy pinhole system

We concur.

>I believe they (MS) have made life a lot easier with MetMeeting 3, but I
>haven't read about that yet.

Has anyone heard anything about NM 3?

[1] - For the non-geeks among us: each protocol uses a different port. That
is how a single computer can use many different protocols. mail uses port 25,
DNS uses port 53, telnet uses port 23, etc. So if I try to telnet to your computer,
the address might be 11.22.33.44:23 (the :23 is the port number and is how the
receiving machine knows what protocol to talk with).
-
Dan Langille

To unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@freebsddiary.cx
with "unsubscribe adsl" in the body of the message
Received on Wed Jul 7 11:46:02 1999