Dr David Hingston wrote:
>
> Dan et al
> The H323 compliance seems to be the key to netmeeting
> working, under ADSL anyway, and I assume if we are talking about using
> 3COM's/UNIX boxes the UNIX box is going to need to have some
> NAT functionality, if we have some windows boxes networked behind the
> firewall????
>

Indeed, but you have more choice in the means to which you achieve the ends.

Outbound is relatively straightforward in many cases as you can easily IP
MASQ and port forward where necessary, and there are free application
proxies for many common applications and many other applications that
support generic proxies like SOCKS 5 (eg ICQ). (There are also SOCKS
wrappers you could experiment with that SOCKSify the IP stack for non-SOCKS
client software).

I guess the point is that a these are the kinds of things that are better
dealt with at a smart configurable gateway, rather than dealt with in a
limited way by one vendors take on the problem, burned into firmware on a
router. This is obviously a generalisation, (Cisco IOS is a damn site more
configurable, extensible and upgradeable than some desktop OS's I've seen)
but you get the idea.

> Calling in is likely to require NAT, calling out may get away
> without it, given H323 compliance.
>
> I have not yet found any comment in the documentation about
> H323 compliance. Anyone found it or tried it???
> (Unless you are going to run netmeeting on the UNIX box........)
>
Given this is relatively 'dumb' modem and the connection is mostly software
driven, I doubt there is any high level stuff like H.323 proxies on board.
Shouldn't matter, see above.

Rob

This message is part of the NZ ADSL mailing list.
see http://unixathome.org/adsl/ for archives, FAQ,
and various documents.
To unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@unixathome.org
with "unsubscribe adsl" in the body of the message
Received on Sun Feb 4 23:05:53 2001