NAT/firewall penetration; headless

What's the status on port ranges required for Croquet
installations? If I want to run a node on the network,
does this mean that I best open up the firewall completely
for that particular IP address? I hope this will change
in the future.

If I want to run a headless node like http://croquet.blagblagblag.org/
how much resources do I need on that machine to host several 10
participants?

--
Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a> http://leitl.org
______________________________________________________________
ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820            http://www.ativel.com
8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A  7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE

Please email me, directly.

---

Finding fabulous fares is fun.
Let Yahoo! FareChase search your favorite travel sites to find flight and hotel bargains.

On Feb 23, 2007, at 5:42 AM, Eugen Leitl wrote:

>
> What's the status on port ranges required for Croquet
> installations? If I want to run a node on the network,
> does this mean that I best open up the firewall completely
> for that particular IP address? I hope this will change
> in the future.

See <a href="http://croquetconsortium.org/index.php/WAN/LAN%">http://croquetconsortium.org/index.php/WAN/LAN% 
2C_Connecting_and_Discovery

>
> If I want to run a headless node like http://croquet.blagblagblag.org/
> how much resources do I need on that machine to host several 10
> participants?


I've always been pipe-limited. See the performance section of the  
above.  In the lab on a high-speed LAN, I've had ten machines  
connected to a Mac G5 desktop without fuss.

Every now and then I've had occasion to try a router on a Windows box  
and have seen performance problems with just two participants. But  
I've never had the time or motivation to investigate. Unix & Mac have  
been fine for routing, and Windows is fine for all other purposes  
(e.g., supplying snapshots of the world for each new user as they join).