Hacker News Reader

Comment by callalex | Hacker News Reader

Do you deny the need for UPnP entirely? This is a confusing statement.

What do you actually need it for? I’ve had it disabled for ages, have no port forwards defined and have never had any issues.

+1. I also have had it disabled for ages. What features am I missing out on? When I look at the UPnP docs it talks about uses for which I have other mechanisms.

VoIP and video calls have lower quality and higher latency without UPnP since this often forces webRTC to tunnel through a TURN server. Networks that have neither IPv6 nor UPnP are just broken

Or you could use STUN and just send packets to a peer. Or use v6. Or anything from RFC6544. The reason UPnP is popular is so many home router people implemented it. If you have a real router, you have more options. As I pointed out, I have a real router and talk to people who have real routers that support things other than a 2008 version of UPnP.

Which is to say, you do not REQUIRE UPnP for webRTC. But yes, if you have a crap router given to you by your ISP (looking at you, SBC and Comcast) then UPnP may be your best bet. My point is you don't NEED UPnP if you have a real router.

I should be saying... thx for bringing me up to speed on this. UPnP is obviously not something I spend a lot of time on.

I have many devices at home and I can't be administering all the port forwards by hand, it would be a lot of work.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com