Date: 17 Oct 1999 10:35:04 -0000 From: michaels@inet.no To: ludwigp@bigfoot.com Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Problems with ICQ via NAT Message-ID: <19991017103504.19549.qmail@bastesen.inet.no>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> Your redirect_port solution doesn't work if you're trying to communicate > with someone else behind a firewall. I've tried. ICQ seems to refuse to > even try. So I installed a SOCK5 Proxy. I had great success with Dante > v1.1.0-pre2 (http://www.inet.no/dante). Unfortunately, the 1.1.0 final > release version is worse with ICQ than NEC's socks5 proxy was. If anyone > wants 1.1.0-pre2, I can stick it on an FTP server. That's strange. Are you sure you did not just forget to change your rulefile (sockd.conf) when going to 1.1? The announcement for 1.1 included this: *** Incompatible changes compared to the previous release: - The addition of the "udpreply" command means you have to modify your existing server configfile to allow udppackets "back in" if you are allowing udppackets. It was also mentioned in the NEWS file, but unfortunately not emphasized at all there: o new command for socks-rules added: "udpreply". This is analogous to the "bindreply" command and replaces the old way of saying what addresses udppacket "replies" shall be allowed from. If something else is the problem, we'll try to fix it if someone lets us know. (I don't read this list so cc is in order for any reply.) -- _ // \X/ -- Michael Shuldman <michaels@inet.no> 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?19991017103504.19549.qmail>