Home
| Calendar
| Mail Lists
| List Archives
| Desktop SIG
| Hardware Hacking SIG
Wiki | Flickr | PicasaWeb | Video | Maps & Directions | Installfests | Keysignings Linux Cafe | Meeting Notes | Linux Links | Bling | About BLU |
> > >-----Original Message----- >From: discuss-bounces at blu.org [mailto:discuss-bounces at blu.org] On Behalf Of John Chambers >Sent: Thursday, September 01, 2005 9:01 PM >To: discuss at blu.org; BLU Discussion List >Subject: Re: Could comcast be blocking port 6667 outbound? > >Bill Horne wrote: >| Sorry to butt in, but I'm confused by the various "outbound" vs. >| "inbound" labels on this topic. >| >| Let's agree on a standard definintion of "inbound" and "outbound", so >| we know what direction(s) we're discussing: >| >| 1. Inbound refers to traffic coming FROM comcast TOWARD my machine 2. >| Outbound refers to traffic going FROM my machine TOWARD comcast. >| >| Does that work for everyone? > >That's exactly how I use them. I guess I'd assume that those are the usual definitions. > It might be more useful or precise to say that outbound is a connection initiated by your computer to that port on remote computer. Inbound is a connection initiated by an external computer to a specific port on your computer. Example: If a POP3 connection is outbound, the "traffic" flows towards your machine. You initiated the connection, so it is outbound. You sent out an initiative connection to a remote computer's port 110. I would say traffic is needlessly ambiguous. The direction is determined by the end at which the port is specified. You open specific ports at your end for inbound connections. MEG
BLU is a member of BostonUserGroups | |
We also thank MIT for the use of their facilities. |