From owner-freebsd-current Mon Apr 22 15:47:17 1996 Return-Path: owner-current Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) id PAA21942 for current-outgoing; Mon, 22 Apr 1996 15:47:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from precipice.shockwave.com (precipice.shockwave.com [171.69.108.33]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) with ESMTP id PAA21936 for ; Mon, 22 Apr 1996 15:47:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost.shockwave.com (localhost.shockwave.com [127.0.0.1]) by precipice.shockwave.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id PAA06258 for ; Mon, 22 Apr 1996 15:46:40 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199604222246.PAA06258@precipice.shockwave.com> To: current@freebsd.org Subject: socks support native in freebsd? Date: Mon, 22 Apr 1996 15:46:40 -0700 From: Paul Traina Sender: owner-current@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk I know I'm the "let's not bloat things out" guy, but I want to get some feedback on this idea. It seems like a big gain. I'd like to bring socks4 (and later socks5) into the FreeBSD source tree directly. The reason for doing so is that minor modifications to our utilities, such as telnet, ftp, et al need to be performed. I figure it would be more useful to the user community if we just make these changes /and/ ship our default binaries with socks support included. Everything will behave as normal, unless the user creates /etc/socks.conf which will then enable socks functionality. Comments? Paul p.s. for those who don't know, SOCKS is an application relay system for handling clients behind a firewall. Because SOCKS operates on TCP connections directly, it also means that you can do things that would otherwise require globally routable network addresses (e.g. SOCKS lets you do away with network address translators and use RFC 1597 addresses).