Received: from sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.192] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-1.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from <jayf@outlook.com>) id 1UJZFO-0007qO-Os for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Sun, 24 Mar 2013 00:57:18 +0000 Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of outlook.com designates 65.55.111.163 as permitted sender) client-ip=65.55.111.163; envelope-from=jayf@outlook.com; helo=blu0-omc4-s24.blu0.hotmail.com; Received: from blu0-omc4-s24.blu0.hotmail.com ([65.55.111.163]) by sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) id 1UJZFN-00081A-Qm for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Sun, 24 Mar 2013 00:57:18 +0000 Received: from BLU0-SMTP30 ([65.55.111.137]) by blu0-omc4-s24.blu0.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Sat, 23 Mar 2013 17:57:12 -0700 X-EIP: [Io14VoHS11DZnT24wrlvNyeF+XTIpehg] X-Originating-Email: [jayf@outlook.com] Message-ID: <BLU0-SMTP30A4EFEB3349A94802E930C8D60@phx.gbl> Received: from [192.168.1.15] ([67.189.14.219]) by BLU0-SMTP30.phx.gbl over TLS secured channel with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Sat, 23 Mar 2013 17:57:10 -0700 Date: Sat, 23 Mar 2013 17:57:09 -0700 From: Jay F <jayf@outlook.com> User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130307 Thunderbird/17.0.4 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Bitcoin Development <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net> References: <CA+8xBpe9D=poPyJ=soGdN3sovqdmvyGGij6FM8PHYGUB5aUkzQ@mail.gmail.com> <CACh7GpFqZtWVQFjM-w1uoB+74sVvE=_mXwBQ4P-qGMp2=HJ_yQ@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <CACh7GpFqZtWVQFjM-w1uoB+74sVvE=_mXwBQ4P-qGMp2=HJ_yQ@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-OriginalArrivalTime: 24 Mar 2013 00:57:11.0024 (UTC) FILETIME=[84183700:01CE282A] X-Spam-Score: -1.5 (-) X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net. See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details. -1.5 SPF_CHECK_PASS SPF reports sender host as permitted sender for sender-domain 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider (jayf[at]outlook.com) -0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, no trust [65.55.111.163 listed in list.dnswl.org] -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record 0.0 MSGID_FROM_MTA_HEADER Message-Id was added by a relay X-Headers-End: 1UJZFN-00081A-Qm Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] A bitcoin UDP P2P protocol extension X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: <bitcoin-development.lists.sourceforge.net> List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>, <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_name=bitcoin-development> List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net> List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>, <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=subscribe> X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 24 Mar 2013 00:57:18 -0000 My first concern was that I and about everyone else only has TCP/UDP port forwarding, but at least for the first: UDT uses UDP to transfer bulk data with its own reliability control and congestion control mechanisms. Multiple UDT flows can share a single UDP port, thus a firewall can open only one UDP port for all UDT connections. The latter appears not so friendly to NAT. On 3/23/2013 3:30 PM, Mark Friedenbach wrote: > If you're considering a datagram protocol, you might be interested in > some more modern alternatives to UDP: > > UDT: Breaking the Data Transfer Bottleneck > http://udt.sourceforge.net/ > > Stream Control Transmission Protocol > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stream_Control_Transmission_Protocol > > >