From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tony Wan Subject: does NAT based on iptables support TCP hole punch? Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2009 11:42:44 +0800 Message-ID: <69b8237b0906102042q647797bdl88e16be088af6f45@mail.gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org Return-path: Received: from qw-out-2122.google.com ([74.125.92.27]:39666 "EHLO qw-out-2122.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754005AbZFKDmm (ORCPT ); Wed, 10 Jun 2009 23:42:42 -0400 Received: by qw-out-2122.google.com with SMTP id 5so850534qwd.37 for ; Wed, 10 Jun 2009 20:42:44 -0700 (PDT) Sender: netfilter-devel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Hi all, It's said that TCP hole punch does not work if both endpoints come from 2 sub-networks, whose NAT are both implemented by iptables. I just want to make sure whether this is true. If so, what type of nat can iptables work as? full-cone, restricted, port restricted, or symmetric? Sorry if it's not appropriate to ask such a question here. Thanks in advance. -- Best regards, Tony Wan