Date: Sun, 21 Oct 2001 20:31:19 -0500 From: David Kelly <dkelly@hiwaay.net> To: "Brandon S. Allbery KF8NH" <allbery@ECE.CMU.EDU> Cc: Allen Landsidel <all@biosys.net>, Kal Torak <kaltorak@quake.com.au>, FreeBSD Stable <freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: Re: ICQ with NAT problems Message-ID: <200110220131.f9M1VJw44179@grumpy.dyndns.org> In-Reply-To: Message from "Brandon S. Allbery KF8NH" <allbery@ECE.CMU.EDU> of "Sun, 21 Oct 2001 20:52:51 EDT." <109960000.1003711970@vpn46.ece.cmu.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
"Brandon S. Allbery KF8NH" writes: > On Sunday, October 21, 2001 19:47:57 -0500, David Kelly <dkelly@hiwaay.net> > wrote: > +----- > | What am I missing about the problem that the punch_fw option in natd is > | not supposed to deal with? Is my understanding ICQ is only a particular > | implementation of IRC? > +--->8 > > Er, no; while it has a similar purpose, the protocol is completely > different and I would be surprised if punch_fw worked with it. OK, my ignorance was showing. If its all that common/popular then it might be a candidate for enhancing libalias and therefore natd. -- David Kelly N4HHE, dkelly@hiwaay.net ===================================================================== The human mind ordinarily operates at only ten percent of its capacity -- the rest is overhead for the operating system. 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?200110220131.f9M1VJw44179>