Home
| Calendar
| Mail Lists
| List Archives
| Desktop SIG
| Hardware Hacking SIG
Wiki | Flickr | PicasaWeb | Video | Maps & Directions | Installfests | Keysignings Linux Cafe | Meeting Notes | Linux Links | Bling | About BLU |
In a previous episode Glenn Burkhardt said... :: :: On a tangential topic, why would anyone want to use proxy services when :: IP masquerading was available? * l4 switches are a massive layering violation. * the l3 end-to-end design of the network is impt. * because HTTP is an extensible protocol and proxies need to reject methods they don't understand.. so hijacking HTTP requests can result in a defacto firewall when that's not what you wanted.. case in point would be Microsoft Outlook's new beta that does DAV stuff that gets stymied by this kind of thing (which, if done at the application level Outlook could fallback to direct connect if its primary proxy couldn't handle a method).. Outlook is doing nothing wrong here. a more interesting question in my mind is why would you want transparent servicing/redirection of any kind of protocol? I can only think of one answer: automatic client configuration. Frankly there are much better ways to do service discovery and I certainly hope that it becomes the norm for this class of problem. -P - Subcription/unsubscription/info requests: send e-mail with "subscribe", "unsubscribe", or "info" on the first line of the message body to discuss-request at blu.org (Subject line is ignored).
BLU is a member of BostonUserGroups | |
We also thank MIT for the use of their facilities. |