Date: Sat, 08 May 1999 18:26:19 -0700 From: Ludwig Pummer <ludwigp@toy.chip-web.com> To: Christopher Michaels <ChrisMic@clientlogic.com> Cc: questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: ICQ Behind NAT (Was: question about 2 subnets on the same switch.) Message-ID: <4.1.19990508182009.0091ed90@mail-r> In-Reply-To: <6C37EE640B78D2118D2F00A0C90FCB440110586C@site2s1>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
At 01:06 PM 5/8/1999 , Christopher Michaels wrote: >Pardon my intrusion, but why is this so problematic? I've been running ICQ >behind my firewall w/o any apparent problems. Maybe I just haven't noticed >them. > >Also, on that note, what SOCKS proxy would you recommend? > >-Chris It's the way the ICQ protocol is. I don't know anything more technical than that. As for why you haven't noticed... have you ever had problems with 1) sending messages to someone else (something like `can't connected directly to user`), 2) not seeing someone else in a chat or being unable to start a chat, 3) file transfers not getting through. Oftentimes, it takes a person on the other end to also have a firewall in order to notice these problems. I've always used the SOCKS5 proxy from www.socks.nec.com. There's also a port for NEC's socks5, but the last time I checked (few weeks ago), the port was one version behind (v1.09 is current versus v1.08 for the port). The distfile for 1.08 is also no longer available. Installing NEC's socks from their tarball isn't very difficult. It's not much more than the standard "configure && make && make install" process. --Ludwig Pummer ( ludwigp@bigfoot.com ) ICQ UIN: 692441 To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4.1.19990508182009.0091ed90>