Re: Firewalls, Would do you use? or would you recommend?
- From: "Spack" <news@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2006 16:45:18 -0000
benson_james@xxxxxxxxx wrote on 22 Mar 2006 07:00:20 -0800:
VB agree with you there - NAT is not possible with the solution,
besides the fact the admin will be a pain in the arse with all the
services, the server will be hosted in London, we are planning on
running alot of games! BF2, looking at hosting a 64 player server,
Ghost recon - as many as possible, 2 x RVS server - upto 24 players,
maybe not all at once but there will be alot going on...
NAT - Impossible!
Not entirely - it depends on the way the game server packets are handled.
I've run Quake engine based servers (RtCW and ET) behind a NAT system,
BF1942, and BFV. I'm pretty sure I had BF2 running behind NAT while testing
just prior to removing the game servers from here at work (my clan mates and
I had too many things going on in real life to spend playing games any more,
and I decided to re-use the PCs running the game servers for my kids at
home).
Dan
.
- References:
- Firewalls, Would do you use? or would you recommend?
- From: benson_james
- Re: Firewalls, Would do you use? or would you recommend?
- From: Duane Arnold
- Re: Firewalls, Would do you use? or would you recommend?
- From: Volker Birk
- Re: Firewalls, Would do you use? or would you recommend?
- From: Duane Arnold
- Re: Firewalls, Would do you use? or would you recommend?
- From: benson_james
- Firewalls, Would do you use? or would you recommend?
- Prev by Date: Re: I am sick of windows firewall
- Next by Date: Re: Firewalls, what would you use? or would recommend?
- Previous by thread: Re: Firewalls, Would do you use? or would you recommend?
- Next by thread: Re: Firewalls, Would do you use? or would you recommend?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
