Talk:TCP hole punching

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the TCP hole punching article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

This article was nominated for deletion on 12 November 2009 (UTC). The result of the discussion was keep.

Computing: Networking Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Networking task force (assessed as Mid-importance).

Unnamed section[edit]

"TCP hole punching is a commonly-used NAT traversal technique" Commonly? Where? The article does not list one example use. And is, pardon the expression, crap. The deletion discussion suggested cleanup, but after years passed, it is still a mess. Delete, if no improvement in, let's say, one month. --Xerces8 (talk) 23:44, 6 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe this can be a reference for this page: A New Method for Symmetric NAT Traversal in UDP and TCP 129.104.247.2 (talk) 03:12, 24 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Carrier-grade NAT[edit]

It would be good to have a link to, or at least an explanation of the meaning of, "Carrier-grade NAT".

BTW, yes, the article is technical, but the subject matter is technical. I'm glad the article is here, even if I wish it had more information. The way to improve it would be to add more information, more links, more references, not to delete it as was apparently suggested.Ifdef (talk) 22:05, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Real world numbers for A is non-predictable and B is non-predictable, resulting in "NO"[edit]

Please provide a real world numbers. How high is the percentage if you take two random consumer internet endpoints that the tcp hole puching is not possible (since both are non-predictable). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.246.166.50 (talk) 05:35, 6 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]