social.ridetrans.it is part of the decentralized social network powered by Mastodon.
We are organizers, transit riders, renters, union members, tech workers, musicians, climate activists; we are passionate about mobility justice, a right to housing, and intersectional communities.

Administered by:

Server stats:

72
active users

Learn more

Er, wait, are you using Syncthing for its intended purpose of syncing files across devices on your local network? And then exposing that infrastructure to the internet? Or are you isolating Syncthing instances?

Syncthing is not limited to local network. It’s hole punching is one of the major features

The fact that Syncthing seems to solve CGNAT on its own has me wondering why there are not more solutions for the server/home side.

Why does Wireguard or any other VPN not work like Tailscale or Zerotier?

Why don’t torrent clients can’t work with IPv6 to seed more?

Why doesn’t Plex adopt a similar mechanic like Syncthing to expose the media over the Internet instead of being a prisoner of CGNAT?

I know I am just throwing different options with my personal frustrations lol, but I hope you get what I am trying to mean, Plex, torrent and home VPN users shouldn’t become masters at networking, especially when the documentation for the tools IS NOT ENOUGH.

Why does Wireguard or any other VPN not work like Tailscale or Zerotier?

tailscale and zerotier are wireguard, but with a public server that helps with NAT. Syncthing uses a public server for that too.

wireguard was specifically made to be as simple and minimalistic as possible.

Why don’t torrent clients can’t work with IPv6 to seed more?

is there such a problem? honest question. But I think that might be a different issue

Why doesn’t Plex adopt a similar mechanic like Syncthing to expose the media over the Internet instead of being a prisoner of CGNAT?

maybe they just don’t see working on it profitable enough

Andres Salomon

@WhyJiffie @kratoz29

> is there such a problem? honest question. But I think that might be a different issue

Yes, that is a problem. We're still in a world where you need to manually enable port forwarding in order to get better seeding for bittorrent clients, and if you have CGNAT you're SOL (short of using a VPN or something to bounce through an external host).

It's likely because torrent software is older (& in crappier languages), and came about before CGNAT was a thing.

> is there such a problem? honest question. But I think that might be a different issue

Yes, that is a problem. We’re still in a world where you need to manually enable port forwarding in order to get better seeding for bittorrent clients, and if you have CGNAT you’re SOL (short of using a VPN or something to bounce through an external host).

I don’t understand, sorry. they were saying that something doesn’t work as expected IPv6. but CGNAT is not used for IPv6, is it? and you don’t really forward ports either, maybe you allow them through in the routercs firewall but notnsure because I don’t have v6

We’re still in a world where you need to manually enable port forwarding

well, you don’t need to, often you can also enable the upnp function in the router so that any software can open all the ports it wants, which is a terrible idea security-wise