From 98b69cf459bd77cc8f160a88d0525bd0e9c51cfb Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: wakgill <76528604+wakgill@users.noreply.github.com>
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 2021 22:58:25 -0600
Subject: [PATCH] Create 99.md

---
 docs/forum/bitcoin-forum/99.md | 24 ++++++++++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 24 insertions(+)
 create mode 100644 docs/forum/bitcoin-forum/99.md

diff --git a/docs/forum/bitcoin-forum/99.md b/docs/forum/bitcoin-forum/99.md
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..9b4a771
--- /dev/null
+++ b/docs/forum/bitcoin-forum/99.md
@@ -0,0 +1,24 @@
+---
+layout: forum
+title: 'Re: Setting up multiple bitcoin machines behind NAT'
+grand_parent: Forum Posts
+parent: Bitcoin Forum
+nav_order: 99
+date: 2010-05-16 23:56:03 UTC
+original: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=54.msg1135#msg1135
+---
+
+# Re: Setting up multiple bitcoin machines behind NAT
+
+---
+
+```
+Re: Setting up multiple bitcoin machines behind NAT
+May 16, 2010, 11:56:03 PM
+
+At the moment, it always assumes the incoming port is 8333, so it would tell other bitcoin nodes to connect to router:8333 even if you're redirecting from another port number.
+
+I'm not in a big hurry to fix this because I can't think of any benefit to having more than one incoming connection port.  If you're providing one incoming port, then you've done your bit to help the network.  Having two incoming ports to the same person doesn't help redundancy.
+
+If you have many computers, then using the -connect switch on most of them to connect locally makes more sense.
+```