Skip to content

Julien

← The Voice of the Proton Community

My feedback

3 results found

  1. Linux Client

    5,597 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    Close
    Close
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    492 comments  ·  Proton Drive » New feature  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    Close
    Close
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Julien commented  · 

    This is critical!

    Julien supported this idea  · 

  2. Check password breach, duplicates, weak, missing 2FA

    1,780 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    Close
    Close
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    Planned  ·  57 comments  ·  Proton Pass » New feature  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    Close
    Close
    Julien supported this idea  · 

  3. Static Port forwarding

    201 votes
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    Close
    Close
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    7 comments  ·  Proton VPN » Changes to existing features  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    Close
    Close
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Julien commented  · 

    Yes please!

    The only other alternative is the NAT-PMP feature. It works but it's really tricky... One needs to make the application send port forwarding requests to the VPN gateway and not the normal one (eg. home router).

    The NAT-PMP RFC clearly states that it is not designed for that:

    Clients always send their NAT-PMP requests to their default gateway,
    as learned via DHCP [RFC2131], or similar means. This protocol is
    designed for small home networks, with a single logical link (subnet)
    where the client's default gateway is also the NAT for that network.
    For more complicated networks where the NAT is some device other than
    the client's default gateway, this protocol is not appropriate.

    Julien supported this idea  · 

Feedback and Knowledge Base

(thinking…)