Date: Fri, 4 Apr 1997 18:00:48 +0200 From: "Jochim Kuebart" <joa@delos.lf.net> To: "Nadav Eiron" <nadav@barcode.co.il> Cc: <questions@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Gateway Message-ID: <199704041604.SAA05149@shire.domestic>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Ok, I installed the socks5 package, but now how do I get Windows95 to be Socks5 compliant? Any ideas? Here a debug log: Apr 4 17:53:08 shire Socks5[5119]: Socks5 Logging (re)started at Fri Apr 4 17:53:08 1997 Apr 4 17:53:08 shire Socks5[5119]: libsocks5 Logging (re)started at Fri Apr 4 17:53:08 1997 Apr 4 17:53:08 shire Socks5[5119]: NEC NWSL Socks5 beta-0.17.1 exportable library Apr 4 17:53:08 shire Socks5[5119]: Socks5 starting at Fri Apr 4 17:53:08 1997 Apr 4 17:53:08 shire Socks5[5119]: Config: Reading config file: /usr/local/etc/socks5.conf ** The interfaces are ok, I'm using ppp0 Apr 4 17:53:08 shire Socks5[5119]: Interface lp0: not up Apr 4 17:53:08 shire Socks5[5119]: Interface ipi0: not running Apr 4 17:53:08 shire Socks5[5119]: Interface ipi0: not running Apr 4 17:53:08 shire Socks5[5119]: Interface ipi1: not up Apr 4 17:53:08 shire Socks5[5119]: Interface ipi2: not up Apr 4 17:53:08 shire Socks5[5119]: Interface ipi3: not up Apr 4 17:53:08 shire Socks5[5119]: Interface ppp1: not up Apr 4 17:53:08 shire Socks5[5119]: Interface ppp2: not up Apr 4 17:53:08 shire Socks5[5119]: Interface ppp3: not up Apr 4 17:53:08 shire Socks5[5119]: Interface tun0: not up Apr 4 17:53:08 shire Socks5[5119]: Interface sl0: not up Apr 4 17:53:08 shire Socks5[5119]: Config: Config file read Apr 4 17:53:08 shire Socks5[5119]: Socks5 Logging (re)started at Fri Apr 4 17:53:08 1997 Apr 4 17:53:08 shire Socks5[5119]: Socks5 attempting to run on port: 1080 Apr 4 17:53:08 shire Socks5[5119]: Accept: Waiting on accept or a signal ** Now I try to connect... Apr 4 17:53:15 shire Socks5[5119]: Parent: 1 child Apr 4 17:53:15 shire Socks5[5119]: Accept: Waiting on accept or a signal Apr 4 17:53:15 shire Socks5[5120]: Child: Starting Apr 4 17:53:15 shire Socks5[5120]: Check: Checking host address (00000000 == 00000000) Apr 4 17:53:15 shire Socks5[5120]: Check: Checking port range (0 <= 1095 <= 65535)? Apr 4 17:53:15 shire Socks5[5120]: Route: Line 11: Matched ** Success: the host is on the correct route Apr 4 17:53:15 shire Socks5[5120]: Checking Authentication Apr 4 17:53:15 shire Socks5[5120]: Check: Checking host address (0000000a == 0000000a) Apr 4 17:53:15 shire Socks5[5120]: Check: Checking port range (0 <= 1095 <= 65535)? Apr 4 17:53:15 shire Socks5[5120]: Auth: Line 6: Matched ** Success: the host has access Apr 4 17:53:15 shire Socks5[5120]: Proxy: Received request with incompatible version number: 71 ** Now, I blame this on Windows, but what can I do? I entered the FreeBSD machine as a Socks proxy Apr 4 17:53:15 shire Socks5[5120]: Proxy: closing monitor handle Apr 4 17:53:15 shire Socks5[5120]: Proxy: cleaning input io context Apr 4 17:53:15 shire Socks5[5120]: Proxy: done cleaning up Apr 4 17:53:15 shire Socks5[5119]: Accept: Waiting on accept or a signal ** And that's it Apr 4 17:57:09 shire Socks5[5119]: Accept: Processing exception Apr 4 17:57:09 shire Socks5[5119]: Socks5 Exiting at: Fri Apr 4 17:57:09 1997 > > > On Fri, 4 Apr 1997, Joachim Kuebart wrote: > > > Hi! > > > > When hosts in a local 10.0.0.X net want to access the internet (http, ftp > > etc.), doesn't it require IP Masquerading? And if so, where can I find it > > in FreeBSD? > > There is more than one way to skin a cat (hopefuly Jordan doesn't read > this :-) )... > > You can either go with a "transparent" proxy solution like socks that > requires a socks complient client (most popular clients have socks > support). soccks is available in the ports/packages collection. > > Second way is to set up specific application proxies. This way you need a > specific application for each protocol you need to pass through the > firewall. The added benefit is mainly caching, and better control. For > some of those, look at the fwtk (also in the ports). > > The third is indeed to do IP Masquerading. This is a bit tough, but can > be set up with IPfilter. > > > Does gated help? > > No, gated is for routing which is not the point here. > > > > > c u Jo > > > > > > > Nadav >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199704041604.SAA05149>