Have anyone done it? Any docs? (urls, etc). TIA
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- ** RoMaN SoFt / LLFB **
roman@madrid.com
http://pagina.de/romansoft
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
On Wed, Mar 21, 2001 at 10:58:00AM +0100, RoMaN SoFt / LLFB!! wrote:> > Have anyone done it? Any docs? (urls, etc). TIANot possible. The protocol doesn''t give anything like the http "host" header to identify it''s destination. Mike
What does that have to do with anything? One could probably adapt the ideas used in masquerading into transparent proxying. Transparent proxying of HTTP has noething to do with "host" either; that''s multihoming. On Wed, 21 Mar 2001, Mike Fedyk wrote:> On Wed, Mar 21, 2001 at 10:58:00AM +0100, RoMaN SoFt / LLFB!! wrote: > > > > Have anyone done it? Any docs? (urls, etc). TIA > Not possible. The protocol doesn''t give anything like the http "host" > header to identify it''s destination. > > Mike > > _______________________________________________ > LARTC mailing list / LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl > http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://ds9a.nl/2.4Routing/ >
On Wed, Mar 21, 2001 at 09:31:46PM -0500, John Anthony Kazos Jr. wrote:> What does that have to do with anything? One could probably adapt the > ideas used in masquerading into transparent proxying. Transparent proxying > of HTTP has noething to do with "host" either; that''s multihoming. >Ahh, but you are missing something. IP masq doesn''t know what site is being viewed. It only knows www.something.org port 80. To get transparent proxying of http, you need to get squid to read the "Host" header in http. The best you could get out of ftp on initial connection would be destination. You could watch the traffic go by, and keep track of current directory. Now that I think of it, if you process the entire control connection conversation, you may be able to trans proxy it. So how do you deal with a cache hit? Don''t let that request hit the outside server? or block the incomming ftp-data connection and slink your cached copy in? Anyway, the probelm would be much bigger than ip masq, as all it has to do is sniff for "port" commands and send that incomming connection inside... Mike
Nah. If it were me, I''d just rewrite the FTP standard. :P I may, anyway. On Wed, 21 Mar 2001, Mike Fedyk wrote:> On Wed, Mar 21, 2001 at 09:31:46PM -0500, John Anthony Kazos Jr. wrote: > > What does that have to do with anything? One could probably adapt the > > ideas used in masquerading into transparent proxying. Transparent proxying > > of HTTP has noething to do with "host" either; that''s multihoming. > > > Ahh, but you are missing something. > > IP masq doesn''t know what site is being viewed. It only knows > www.something.org port 80. > > To get transparent proxying of http, you need to get squid to read the > "Host" header in http. > > The best you could get out of ftp on initial connection would be > destination. You could watch the traffic go by, and keep track of current > directory. Now that I think of it, if you process the entire control > connection conversation, you may be able to trans proxy it. > > So how do you deal with a cache hit? Don''t let that request hit the outside > server? or block the incomming ftp-data connection and slink your cached > copy in? > > Anyway, the probelm would be much bigger than ip masq, as all it has to do > is sniff for "port" commands and send that incomming connection inside... > > Mike > > _______________________________________________ > LARTC mailing list / LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl > http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://ds9a.nl/2.4Routing/ >
On Wed, Mar 21, 2001 at 11:52:20PM -0500, John Anthony Kazos Jr. wrote:> Nah. If it were me, I''d just rewrite the FTP standard. :P I may, anyway. >Hmm, if you''re going to do that, take a look at the SFTP protocol, it doesn''t have a large user base, and anything that can get it adopted is a "good thing". Mike