I am trying to setup peer to peer networking and am trying to understand how this works.
Normally in Client to Server connection, I will connect to the server IP and port. Behind the scenes, it will create a client socket bound to a local port at the local ip, and the packet is sent to the router. The router will then NAT the local port and the local socket, to the client public ip and a different public client socket with a destination for the server IP and port.
When the server responds, the router then DENATs the public client ip and public client port back to the local ip and local port, and the packet arrives at the computer.
In a Peer to Peer networking, I may have the peer's public IP, but it is shared by many machines and the router hasn't allowed a connection yet, so there isn't a open port I can send the data to.
There was then an option that both peers contact a server. That opens a port on the router. Then the peers send packets to each other's client port.
However, usually the router will only accept packets from the same IP the request was made to, so the two peers cannot reuse the server's connection.
How do the two peers talk to each other in this scenario ?
CodePudding user response：
You said it yourself: "peers send packets to each other's client port". Therefore, the router will "accept packets from the same IP the request was made to".
Say, Alice is behind router A and Bob is behind router B.
Having learned their public endpoints from a server, Alice will send UDP packets to Bob's public IP, and Bob will send UDP packets to Alice's.
Having seen Alice talk to Bob's IP, router A will accept UDP packets from Bob.
Having seen Bob talk to Alice, router B will accept UDP packets from her as well.
That is, some initial packets might be rejected as coming from the blue, but after both parties have initiated communication on their side, routers will have no reason to block what follows.
The trick in UDP hole punching seems to be for the routers to reuse the same NAT tunnel for different IPs - so that the port discovered by a server is the same as the port reused for direct communication.
We can talk with different IPs from a normal UDP socket (by skipping connect and using sendto), so it's kind of logical that a tunneled socket would be able to do the same.
CodePudding user response：
Peer-to-peer networking works exactly the same way as client/server networking. Only one of the peers will become a server and the other a client.
Normally in a peer-to-peer app like bittorrent all peers are also servers but of course for any individual connection one machine must take the role of the client. However a single peer may have multiple connections. So for any single peer some of the connections to it will be server sockets and some will be client sockets.
How this works with NAT is exactly the same as a client/server architecture. You must configure your router to NAT back to your peer application in order for others to connect to it. If not then your peer can only connect to other peers but other peers cannot connect to you. For example, if your bittorrent client is generally acting slow, not managing to get a lot of connections and not managing to finish downloading some torrents this often signifies that you have not configured your router's port forwarding back to your PC for your bittorrent client.
For the use-case of non-expert users (consumers) there are several ways to get around NAT automatically without requiring your users to configure their routers. The most widely used method is UPnP (Universal Plug and Play). However a lot of more expert users who can configure their own routers often disable UPnP because it is a fairly well known DDoS target. So if you do decide to use UPnP you should make it optional for more advanced users to disable it if they don't want to use it.
For cases where you need a guaranteed connection regardless of router configuration then your app cannot be 100% peer-to-peer. You'd need a relay server that acts as a server to both peers that will forward the packet form the sending client peer to the receiving client peer. Of course, the disadvantage of this is that you now have a fixed cost of maintaining a server to support your app just like traditional client/server systems but in this case you're using peer-to-peer to reduce server costs, not eliminate the server.
One example of this "hybrid" approach is cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin and Ethereum. They need a core group of servers to exist in order to work. However, for these protocols the servers run the same software as the clients - they're all just nodes. The only difference is that you don't shut down the servers whereas most people quit their bitcoin wallet once they've done using it (unless they're mining). Another example that is similar is the TOR network. There is a set of core TOR nodes that act as the "server" part of the network ensuring that the network always exist.