SC with Nat2Nat

CheahaDR · Post by **CheahaDR** » 2005-03-09 19:15

Would it be possible to create a single click package that would auto initiate a connection using Nat2Nat? This would be the closest thing to GoToAssist out there, as we could traverse firewalls on both sides.

I really see this product SC being the future of UltraVNC. There really are not many opensource alternatives for this type of operation.

I would like to put my vote in the hat for some concentrated develpent on this product as a diffent product than the main UltraVNC product. As I understand SC is a stripped version of the full code.

If SC could become a self registering service with remote uninstall capibilities, then I believe we'd really have something here. Add Nat2Nat and we're GOLD!!!

Thanks for all the hard work, and from all of us Admins out here, let me just say that without this product we'd all be having drive/walk/run alot more....thanks!

redge · Post by **redge** » 2005-03-09 20:23

I agree with this function too

Post by **Rudi De Vos** » 2005-03-09 21:07

There are problem with this approach

*Nat2Nat use des3 encryption ( can it be exported ?)

*Looking at the current numbers of SC downloads , volume could become a problem. Don't know how many requests the
server can handle. Bandwidth/Quota's

*Server down...no connection.
NH run on a value server in the US, i'm in Europe. No way to garantie any uptime.

A implemented Nat2nat would demand different quality for the NH service. You need to be able to count on it.

redge · Post by **redge** » 2005-03-09 22:08

ok, thank you for the good answer about the reality of remote computing difficulty !

Sandgrub · Post by **Sandgrub** » 2005-03-10 01:04

What about adding an encrypted version of NetCat (CryptCat or SoCAT) to pipe the connections across the Inet??

CheahaDR · Post by **CheahaDR** » 2005-03-10 15:35

Thanks for the replys. One answer to this would be "release the Nat2Nat server" or make it part of the repeater product. I like many admins have access to at least ONE pc that is using a real IP address, and this could be an argument to the SC w/nat2nat as to which server to use.

As for the encryption, this is a red tape issue that I'm sure we can find a way around.

I like many others am VERY excited about SC and find it to be the most useful use of VNC to date.

Thanks for all the hard work.

redge · Post by **redge** » 2005-03-12 17:28

nh.exe and/or source NH server futur available + creating personal nsc.exe + nvc.exe like creating SingleClick (SC) online ?

for a friend want to host is personal NH without your NH server dependencies.

nir_kornfeld · Post by **nir_kornfeld** » 2005-04-25 07:58

CheahaDR wrote:One answer to this would be "release the Nat2Nat server" or make it part of the repeater product. I like many admins have access to at least ONE pc that is using a real IP address, and this could be an argument to the SC w/nat2nat as to which server to use.

Why don't you start the Repeater (mode II) service on your machine with real IP, then you can create a SC version that uses this repeater to connect to your VNCservers.

That way you don't need to use the two Nat2Nat clients on each side, just the regular UltraVNC server and Viewer (or SC).

I did it - and it works great.

Note that there are still some problems with the repeater service that crashes from time to time, so make sure you start it as a service with the "restart service upon failure" option..,

cheaha · Post by **cheaha** » 2005-04-25 15:15

cheaha · Post by **cheaha** » 2005-04-25 15:16

nir_kornfeld wrote:
CheahaDR wrote:One answer to this would be "release the Nat2Nat server" or make it part of the repeater product. I like many admins have access to at least ONE pc that is using a real IP address, and this could be an argument to the SC w/nat2nat as to which server to use.
Why don't you start the Repeater (mode II) service on your machine with real IP, then you can create a SC version that uses this repeater to connect to your VNCservers.

That way you don't need to use the two Nat2Nat clients on each side, just the regular UltraVNC server and Viewer (or SC).

I did it - and it works great.

Note that there are still some problems with the repeater service that crashes from time to time, so make sure you start it as a service with the "restart service upon failure" option..,

It's less effecient than using Nat2Nat. Yes I too have done the repeater SC.exe setup. I have profile that uses it; however, what you deal with is the limitation of having to pass ALL traffic through the repeater.

I'm running my repeater on a publically accessable DSL line; it's what is availible to most small businesses. The problem is the outbound bandwidth limitation cap. The repeater slows things down, where with Nat2Nat nogotiations only require a little bandwith to establish the connection between the client and server.

So Nat2Nat integration with SC.exe and our own Nat2Nat server would be ideal.

UltraVNC

SC with Nat2Nat

SC with Nat2Nat

Nat2Nat with an added product...

Great Answer's

Re: Great Answer's

Re: Great Answer's