News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Why Solana Was Decimated by Bankman-Fried’s Downfall. Parent comment

Re:Why Solana Was Decimated by Bankman-Fried’s Downfall by Galanwe on Wednesday December 28, 2022 @11:20PM (#34169511)
This is a common problem for any peer to peer protocol.

Doesn't really strike me as a problem though, it just means the client has responsibility of opening a port. Considering the complication of adding 1000s of hole punching strategies in the protocol, it's a fine trade-off.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Why Solana Was Decimated by Bankman-Fried’s Downfall by sneak on Thursday December 29, 2022 @07:56PM (#34180279)
Not really. Bitcoind and geth work just fine behind NAT. They have no hole punching strategies in the protocol at all.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Why Solana Was Decimated by Bankman-Fried’s Downfall by Galanwe on Thursday December 29, 2022 @11:25PM (#34181777)
Hu yes they do. Last I checked they both had NAT traversal through UPnP. I remember that years ago bitcoin even had peer discovery through IRC channels in case UPnP was disabled.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Why Solana Was Decimated by Bankman-Fried’s Downfall by sneak on Friday December 30, 2022 @09:22AM (#34185225)
1) UPnP isn't part of the p2p protocol

and

2) even in the case where UPnP fails and there is no inbound connectivity, bitcoind works and syncs fine with only outbound connections

Solana won't even sync behind nat.

[ Parent | on HN ]