river-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dan Creswell <dan.cresw...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: NAT traversal, Meekong Jeri, DGC
Date Mon, 27 Jun 2011 07:39:47 GMT
I just don't like incidental side-effects like these.

DGC has a very specific job to do, keeping a firewall port open is a
separate thing and ought to be tackled elsewhere IMHO.

Simplistically, DGC is running atop a connection created via some
transport protocol (e.g. http) just as the core invocation protocols
do. If one were to put "keep-alive" in there, it should be at the
transport level (e.g. http or tcp) not in the higher level protocols.



On 26 June 2011 21:51, Peter Firmstone <jini@zeus.net.au> wrote:
> Just wondering, could DGC be useful for keeping a port open on a firewall?
> EG: Ping an endpoint occasionally to keep it alive while a lease exists?
> The client doesn't know which port is open on a firewall, this connection is
> set up by the firewall to allow replies from an external host to be received
> by a client behind a firewall.
> If a client provides a handback object to a service, the service can
> continue to contact the client via that handback object, while the
> connection remains alive and the firewall port open.
> Thoughts?
> Cheers,
> Peter.

View raw message