[OpenAFS] Re: rxtcp, rxutcp [for networks without UDP]

[Adam Megacz]

Jeffrey Altman <jaltman@secure-endpoints.com> writes:
> Unfortunately, switching to tcp will not solve your NAT problems.
> NATs drop their mappings from internal addr/port to external port
> equally for both both udp and tcp.

Actually, I've recently encountered a number of NATs that simply block
all inbound UDP (and the NAT serves DNS itself).  A disturbing number
of hotel/conference-center/etc networks have this lovely property.

I can already predict the response ("the network is broken, fix the
network"), but these days if somebody's web browser (ie HTTP) "works",
they're never going to believe me when I tell them that their network
is the reason they can't get to their files.  No matter how wrong they
are.  No matter how loud I scream.

Thus, I search for a solution. ;)

As a side note, it's pretty sad how anything other than TCP is pretty
much a second-class citizen these days.  If you're at a for-profit
organization with more than 200 employees it's even worse -- you're
incredibly lucky to have anything other than proxied HTTP.

Oh well.

  - a