Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Refactor p2p port handling #318

Conversation

biryukovmaxim
Copy link
Collaborator

Changed the handling of default p2p port. Previously, a fixed port was being used which was not serving the purpose when the operator runs a node and specifies a non-standard local port. The revised code implements variable 'desired_external_port' to set the port number from the normalized peer-to-peer listening address. This allows the use of a non-standard public address. This change makes the system more adaptable to operator wishes and avoids potential conflicts.

Changed the handling of default p2p port. Previously, a fixed port was being used which was not serving the purpose when the operator runs a node and specifies a non-standard local port. The revised code implements variable 'desired_external_port' to set the port number from the normalized peer-to-peer listening address. This allows the use of a non-standard public address. This change makes the system more adaptable to operator wishes and avoids potential conflicts.
@michaelsutton michaelsutton merged commit 99f4040 into kaspanet:master Nov 9, 2023
smartgoo pushed a commit to smartgoo/rusty-kaspa that referenced this pull request Jun 18, 2024
Changed the handling of default p2p port. Previously, a fixed port was being used which was not serving the purpose when the operator runs a node and specifies a non-standard local port. The revised code implements variable 'desired_external_port' to set the port number from the normalized peer-to-peer listening address. This allows the use of a non-standard public address. This change makes the system more adaptable to operator wishes and avoids potential conflicts.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants