Firewalls: Re: transparent proxies

Firewalls
(November 1995)

Indexed By Thread: [Previous] [Next]

Subject:	Re: transparent proxies
From:	"Daniel O'Callaghan" <danny @ miricle . its . unimelb . edu . au>
Date:	Wed, 15 Nov 1995 11:27:13 +1100 (EST)
To:	Fernando da Silveira Montenegro <silveira @ canario . nutec . tche . br>
Cc:	firewalls @ GreatCircle . COM
In-reply-to:	<9511130910 . aa06433 @ canario . canario . nutec . com . br>


On Mon, 13 Nov 1995, Fernando da Silveira Montenegro wrote:

> Hi everybody!
> 
> A few weeks ago there was a thread about transparent proxies, and 
> nobody mentioned Socks. I wonder why not? If the Sockscap effort 
> bears fruit, we would have a WINSOCK.DLL level mechanism, thus 
> invisible to the applications that use it.
> 
> Any thoughts?

You mean like Trumpet Winsock (ftp://ftp.trumpet.com.au/)!!??

Follow-Ups:

Re: transparent proxies
From: FEH Systems Philadelphia <morph_1 @ netaxs . com>

References:

Re: transparent proxies
From: Fernando da Silveira Montenegro <silveira @ canario . nutec . tche . br>

Indexed By Date	Previous:	Re: Configuration From: sgcccdc @ citec . qld . gov . au (Colin Campbell)
Indexed By Date	Next:	Re: NTP through a firewall From: Brian Murrell <murrell @ bctel . net>
Indexed By Thread	Previous:	Re: transparent proxies From: Fernando da Silveira Montenegro <silveira @ canario . nutec . tche . br>
Indexed By Thread	Next:	Re: transparent proxies From: FEH Systems Philadelphia <morph_1 @ netaxs . com>