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@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://ds9a.nl/2.4Routing/ >
