Comments on: A little bugfix release: 1.2.1 http://codelaide.com/blog/2007/07/25/a-little-bugfix-release-121/ we <3 macs, too Thu, 10 Dec 2009 12:11:13 -0800 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: Justin Miller http://codelaide.com/blog/2007/07/25/a-little-bugfix-release-121/comment-page-1/#comment-1254 Justin Miller Mon, 30 Jul 2007 11:25:52 +0000 http://codelaide.com/blog/2007/07/25/a-little-bugfix-release-121/#comment-1254 Ah, that makes sense. Although I wouldn't personally have a need for the external IP on an internal router like that, I'm sure someone does! Ah, that makes sense. Although I wouldn’t personally have a need for the external IP on an internal router like that, I’m sure someone does!

]]> By: georg http://codelaide.com/blog/2007/07/25/a-little-bugfix-release-121/comment-page-1/#comment-1247 georg Sun, 29 Jul 2007 23:15:51 +0000 http://codelaide.com/blog/2007/07/25/a-little-bugfix-release-121/#comment-1247 It's a possibility I've also been thinking about, but there's one huge problem: The IP address with which you reach the internet isn't necessarily the external IP address of the router: This only holds true if there's only one NAT router between you and the internet, but I know that Lighthouse is also used in setups where there are multiple layers of networks chained together through NAT routers, where only the top-most level is connected to the internet. In this case, the whatismyip.com approach would display the top-most router's external IP address rather than that of the router with which Lighthouse is associated, which is not what should happen. Therefore, I've decided to rather display "Unknown" when the clean (i.e. UPnP-based) approach is not supported. It’s a possibility I’ve also been thinking about, but there’s one huge problem: The IP address with which you reach the internet isn’t necessarily the external IP address of the router: This only holds true if there’s only one NAT router between you and the internet, but I know that Lighthouse is also used in setups where there are multiple layers of networks chained together through NAT routers, where only the top-most level is connected to the internet.

In this case, the whatismyip.com approach would display the top-most router’s external IP address rather than that of the router with which Lighthouse is associated, which is not what should happen. Therefore, I’ve decided to rather display “Unknown” when the clean (i.e. UPnP-based) approach is not supported.

]]> By: Justin Miller http://codelaide.com/blog/2007/07/25/a-little-bugfix-release-121/comment-page-1/#comment-1244 Justin Miller Sun, 29 Jul 2007 17:44:44 +0000 http://codelaide.com/blog/2007/07/25/a-little-bugfix-release-121/#comment-1244 <em> On the UPnP front, we no longer require routers to support the retrieval of the external IP address in order for Lighthouse to associate. If the router doesn’t support this, but port forwardings work fine, Lighthouse will happily associate with such routers now and simply report the external IP address as “Unknown”. </em> Might it be possible to use a page or service such as whatismyip.com to figure out the external IP in another manner? Not really affecting me, but just an idea... On the UPnP front, we no longer require routers to support the retrieval of the external IP address in order for Lighthouse to associate. If the router doesn’t support this, but port forwardings work fine, Lighthouse will happily associate with such routers now and simply report the external IP address as “Unknown”.

Might it be possible to use a page or service such as whatismyip.com to figure out the external IP in another manner? Not really affecting me, but just an idea…

]]>