Nice one @JimCollinson
8 Likes
I’m hoping to give more of a direct and personal update to the community than a typical dev update— with room for questions and chat—ahead of a slightly bigger splash.
19 Likes
Nice update. When will you rename “CashNote” to a term that has more of a Safe Network flair/flavor/brand? (eg. SafeNote, DAB, SNOT, etc).
3 Likes
Ach mein Gott!!! not SNOT !!!
Da rümpfe ich die Nase
Safe Network Obfuscated Transaction
SNOT is way better than ACHEW (Asynchronous Cryptographic Homomorphic Encrypted Wad), imho.
3 Likes
By the way, thanks for this one, a property I deliberately asked for a while ago:
How about any news or views about the connectivity?
I’ve been spying on LibP2P, and it seems that the work with AutoNAT.v2 seems to be paused after a quick start. Maybe because it didn’t make it to the last breaking release, and the next one is who knows how many months away?
On the other hand it seems like there would have been some fixes to how the AutoNAT currently works, but I can’t really make any sense about them (just seems so to me).
Then there is the IGD thing, which could maybe help a bit for some cases, if I’m right?
Is paging @bzee the right thing to do here? 
2 Likes
Gotta love the SNITCH too 
Safe Network Intermediated Transaction Cryptographic Header
2 Likes
Good to keep a tab on this every few weeks, thanks for the ping!
The core of the problem is port reuse. For AutoNAT to function properly, a dial-back request has to happen from an ephemeral port (kind of out-of-band from the real listening port we want to have publicly reachable). This is a problem for both QUIC and TCP with port-reuse enabled (which is preferable in NAT situations).
For AutoNAT to use a different port, it requires a refactor in the libp2p core code. This is being worked on by someone with a grant from Filecoin. After that refactor, AutoNAT can be fixed, but there is also a new version specification that will probably be implemented as it’s better in a few ways.
UPnP is a bit of a different story. Personally I’m not a huge fan of implementing it at the moment, as my experience with lots of consumer routers is that UPnP is disabled by default. Also, I’ve experienced that Linux (also in most cases) requires a bit of configuration for it to work. But still, it shouldn’t be that much of a hassle to enable UPnP forwarding through libp2p at the moment, although I think it might lead to some more complexity and time that we’d rather spend elsewhere.
14 Likes
Yeah, but after a few weeks of steady progress, nothing has happened there for two weeks. I wonder if that’s because of this comment about breaking releases.
I suggest we don’t block
v0.53on AutoNATv2. I suggest we aim for AutoNATv2 and related changes inv0.54.
That’ll likely be several months away. I just hope that easy connectivity from homes is not a blocker for MVP, Beta, etc.
Personally, no automatic NAT hole-punching is the blocker for me to approach anyone with “Hey, you can try it yourself like this…”. I managed, after a bit of googling, set a port forwarding for myself. In the end, it was not that difficult. But to do it for anyone else would be too much for me.
3 Likes
By definition MVP and BETA is not for the masses, so not a blocker.
7 Likes
Saw ACHEW and reminded me of Ahchoo in the movie (Robin Hood).
3 Likes
We’re men! We’re men in tights, TIGHT TIGHTS!
1 Like
I have committed many offences on this forum, but starting this could well be the most heinous of the lot.
Please dont lycra this post as I will denier all responsibility.
1 Like
Weeeeeee rob from the… ha, alright I’ve had my fun
Thank you for the heavy work team MaidSafe! I add the translations in the first post 
Privacy. Security. Freedom
6 Likes