Date: Mon, 11 Aug 1997 21:11:23 -0700 From: Paul Traina <pst@shockwave.com> To: obrien@NUXI.COM Cc: Satoshi Asami <asami@cs.berkeley.edu>, cvs-committers@FreeBSD.ORG, cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG, cvs-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/security Makefile Message-ID: <199708120411.VAA02736@precipice.shockwave.com> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sun, 10 Aug 1997 22:44:42 PDT." <19970810224442.48530@dragon.nuxi.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > I don't understand why we have a socks4 port at all. socks5 is upwards > > and backwards compatible with 4, and supports a lot more functionality. > > Give me a working socks5 configuration file that works at HP and I'll be > *more* than glad to remove it. HP uses a modified version of socks4, and > I don't know of any of the Linux weenies there that gotten socks5 to work > with the firewall. (I'll be the first to admit, I don't know much about > socks). I don't see what the problem is. They use identical technology and a socks5 server will gladly server socks4 clients, and I believe socks5 clients can use socks4 servers (though I'm not positive). > > > However, socks is much more general than just security, and as such, that's > > Really? I've only ever heard it come up in firewall/security situations. Oh well, so some folks don't have a lot of imagination. :-)
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199708120411.VAA02736>