Date: Thu, 25 May 2000 15:11:07 +0100 From: Steve Roome <steve@sse0691.bri.hp.com> To: Joe Shevland <shevlandj@kpi.com.au> Cc: freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Transparent proxies and fetch Message-ID: <20000525151107.F28056@moose.bri.hp.com> In-Reply-To: <392C7B22.96CFD7AA@kpi.com.au>; from shevlandj@kpi.com.au on Thu, May 25, 2000 at 11:00:18AM %2B1000 References: <392C7B22.96CFD7AA@kpi.com.au>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, May 25, 2000 at 11:00:18AM +1000, Joe Shevland wrote: > when building ports. Someone wrote in asking whether our ISP has implemented a > transparent proxy. Unfortunately I culled my mail folder so I can't respond > directly, but the poster was on the money (the ISP grabs any port 80 requests > and stuffs them into the proxy instead). > > My question now is how do I work around this issue? I've tried setting the > HTTP_PROXY variable but this just makes the 'make install' of the ports fail > very quickly: In my limited experience calling the ISP and talking to them about it can work. I don't know if it will help, but you might be able to get them to remove the divert for you. The ISP I was with did that for me, on the other hand, you could always change ISP to someone who lets the customer decide when to use a proxy. Then again, someone might have a better solution, but IMHO I think it's quite rude of ISP's to divert your traffic without letting you know about it, imagine how you'd feel if they started diverting all your outgoing port23 connections and archiving everything that went down that line. Others may feel differently about it though! And it's becoming far too standard a practice now, so maybe we're supposed to move with the times and accept it? I dunno! Steve Roome To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20000525151107.F28056>