Date   : Wed, 12 Aug 2009 15:30:47 +0100
From   : robert@... (Rob)
Subject: Econet <> Ethernet

On 12/08/2009, michael.firth@... <michael.firth@...> wrote:
> You might also want some other form of persistent ID in these messages, so
> that more than one gateway can sit behind the same NAT device (and hence IP
> address) - I'm not completely sure why you'd need this, but it seems
> sensible to make the protocol capable of supporting it.

It might be easier to make it a configureable port number,
particularly for incoming connections that have to be forwarded by a
cheap home router which can generally only cope with one onward
destination per port ..

>
> Something like that would also help with an accept / reject decision - if
> people agreed on an ID range then you could build Econet "VPNs" that would
> talk to each other, but reject messages outside the ID range.

What about some sort of identification code or password that needs to
be quoted on a registration in order for it to connect?  That would
stop just anybody connecting into the virtual econet.  md5(password) ?

Also, what happens if gateway A and gateway B both connect to gateway
C, and the hosts behind A want to talk to hosts behind B - does
traffic have to go via C, or should there be a way for C to inform A
and B about each other?

Rob