![]() |
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