Date: Fri, 17 May 1996 22:48:22 -0700 (MST) From: Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org> To: alk@Think.COM (Tony Kimball) Cc: terry@lambert.org, questions@freebsd.org, archie@whistle.com Subject: Re: ip masquerading Message-ID: <199605180548.WAA22030@phaeton.artisoft.com> In-Reply-To: <199605180246.VAA00761@compound.Think.COM> from "Tony Kimball" at May 17, 96 09:46:48 pm
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> Writing a socks client that hooks to a tunnel driver on the machine > that needs the masquerading is a better solution, and it doesn't > require kernel hacks to get there (or source hacks for statically > linked binaries, like normal socks does). And it does it without > violating the world. > > Ah, but it requires running FreeBSD on my toaster, my Amiga, my > lawnmower, in short everything I have that does IP traffic. So? And your problem is? 8-). Actually, it requires a "socks" layer in the TCP/IP code you put in your toaster. It's not like you can ROM GPL'ed Linux code anyway, which is the only place masquerading is implemented. > Sorry, but my toaster is not going to fulfill host requirements. > In order to conform to rfcs, I need something to provide masquerade > for my toaster, otherwise I will never be able to turn of the stupid > thing when I'm in Bangkok, and the flaming pop-tarts will burn down > my house. Well, feel free to write "masquerading" instead of a socks tunnel; it should take you about twice as long. No skin off my nose. You might be real pissed when you try to get it integrated into the kernel sources, though... I don't think Garrett has gone insane yet. Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199605180548.WAA22030>