Messenger behind firewall discussion

Discussion in 'Windows XP Messenger' started by Dinko Deranja, Jun 21, 2006.

  1. I would like to discuss a situation when Messenger operates behind a
    firewall (primarily audio and video communication). So, lets presume that we
    have two parties one party is directly connected to the Internet (no NAT)
    without a firewall (or an UPnP firewall - WinXP ICF, for example), and the
    other party is behind a NAT and a "hard rock" stateful firewall (doesn't
    allow any incoming connections). My question is - why audio/video (camera)
    communication doesn't work in this scenario? I don't see the reason for
    this, except a flaw in the protocol. I mean, it surely is possible that
    firewalled party can enter some kind of "passive" mode (like FTP) and
    establish a connection with another party that is not behind a NAT/firewall.
     
    Dinko Deranja, Jun 21, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Hi Dinko,

    Assuming both clients are using either MSN Messenger 7 and Windows Live Messenger 8 it should
    actually. Failing that, it should use a relay server (which to be fair, is overloaded a lot
    of the time and doesn't work).

    If you're using Windows Messenger however, both sides need to have a direct connection (via
    UPnP or no NAT) or it won't work.

    --
    Jonathan Kay
    Microsoft MVP - Windows Messenger/MSN Messenger/Windows Live Messenger
    Associate Expert
    http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/expertzone/
    Messenger Resources - http://messenger.jonathankay.com
    All posts unless otherwise specified are (c) 2006 Jonathan Kay.
    You *must* contact me for redistribution rights.
    --

    "Dinko Deranja" <> wrote in message news:...
    >I would like to discuss a situation when Messenger operates behind a firewall (primarily
    >audio and video communication). So, lets presume that we have two parties one party is
    >directly connected to the Internet (no NAT) without a firewall (or an UPnP firewall - WinXP
    >ICF, for example), and the other party is behind a NAT and a "hard rock" stateful firewall
    >(doesn't allow any incoming connections). My question is - why audio/video (camera)
    >communication doesn't work in this scenario? I don't see the reason for this, except a flaw
    >in the protocol. I mean, it surely is possible that firewalled party can enter some kind of
    >"passive" mode (like FTP) and establish a connection with another party that is not behind a
    >NAT/firewall.
    >
    >
     
    Jonathan Kay [MVP], Jun 21, 2006
    #2
  3. "Jonathan Kay [MVP]" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Assuming both clients are using either MSN Messenger 7 and Windows Live
    > Messenger 8 it should actually.


    We are using MSN Messenger 7.5 (party without NAT upgraded to Live 8.0
    yesterday).

    > Failing that, it should use a relay server (which to be fair, is
    > overloaded a lot of the time and doesn't work).


    Which relay server? Is it something that I can install?

    I mean, if a proxy or relay server could be installed somewhere on the
    Internet, than it should work in case both parties are behind a NAT/firewall
    too, because no inbound connections are necessary in this case..
     
    Dinko Deranja, Jun 22, 2006
    #3

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Richmond Baker
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    235
    Robert Edmonds
    Sep 3, 2003
  2. Maarten
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    247
    Jonathan Kay [MVP]
    Sep 9, 2003
  3. Jonathan Kay [MVP]

    Re: Messenger VoPPOE connection behind firewall and connection sharing

    Jonathan Kay [MVP], Sep 9, 2003, in forum: Windows XP Messenger
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    282
    Goddy Fies
    Sep 11, 2003
  4. William Barhorst
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    390
    William Barhorst
    Sep 11, 2003
  5. Jen
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    302
    adrian mason
    Nov 21, 2003
Loading...

Share This Page