realbasic-nug
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Important socket question

To: REALbasic Network Users Group <realbasic-nug at lists dot realsoftware dot com>
Subject: Re: Important socket question
From: Richard Altenburg <realbasic at brainchild dot nl>
Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2003 19:01:59 +0200
On 30-03-2003 18:47, "Richard Altenburg" <realbasic at brainchild dot nl> wrote:

>> Technically it is not possible to bind multiple sockets to the same port
>> on the same machine (who gets the packets?)
>> 

> 
> That was my thought too, but I write this great ;-) news-downloader that
> does something I don't even understand myself: it communicates through port
> 119 on the same server in various sockets, and they do not mind at all.
> 

To answer my own question: I think this can work because I am behind a
router that does Network Address Translation (NAT). If it gives every new
socket that connects to the Internet an own internal address, this router
would distinguish each and every request and answer that goes in and out,
and send this to the appropriate socket (but that would still give my Mac
only one address and port).


---
A searchable archive of this list is available at:
<http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/search.php>

Unsubscribe:
<mailto:realbasic-nug-off at lists dot realsoftware dot com>

Subscribe to the digest: 
<mailto:realbasic-nug-digest at lists dot realsoftware dot com>
.


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>