Re: Hiding NATs with PF
From: Max Bolingbroke (batterseapower_at_hotmail.com)
Date: 09/28/05
- Next message: Max Bolingbroke: "Re: Hiding NATs with PF"
- Previous message: jpd: "Re: Hiding NATs with PF"
- In reply to: Greg Hennessy: "Re: Hiding NATs with PF"
- Next in thread: Greg Hennessy: "Re: Hiding NATs with PF"
- Reply: Greg Hennessy: "Re: Hiding NATs with PF"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: 28 Sep 2005 10:35:26 -0700
Greg Hennessy wrote:
> >That would be nice, but I've been using that page to diagnose my setup
> >and it stubbonly tells me I am running OpenBSD whatever I do. How did
> >you achieve this signature?
>
>
> That's done using transparent squid in the middle.
Ah, really? Even with my transparent squid setup I still get OpenBSD
detected (which I guess is what I expected, since its the OpenBSD
router which will be initating the connections to be proxied back to
the client). Is there particular squid configuration directives I
should be looking at to get your behaviour?
> Regarding Daniel's comment on proxies, you could do a lot worse than using
> the Dante socks proxy (dunno if it's in the OpenBSD ports tree, it is in
> FreeBSD)
>
> If you're using win32 on the LAN side of your network adding sockscap to
> the mix makes using it seamless from all applications.
Ah, I forgot totally about sockscap! I'll certainly look into that,
thank you.
Thanks again for your help,
Max
- Next message: Max Bolingbroke: "Re: Hiding NATs with PF"
- Previous message: jpd: "Re: Hiding NATs with PF"
- In reply to: Greg Hennessy: "Re: Hiding NATs with PF"
- Next in thread: Greg Hennessy: "Re: Hiding NATs with PF"
- Reply: Greg Hennessy: "Re: Hiding NATs with PF"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|