>> On ons, 2008-06-11 at 09:56 -0400, Tuc at T-B-O-H.NET wrote: >> > WCCP2 and transparent, yes sir. >> >> Then this problem is more or less unavoidable. Caused by the >> interception sending port 80 to an HTTP proxy. Triggered by people >> abusing port 80 for non-HTTP traffic. >> >> Regards >> Henrik >> > No worries. Just was trying to see if there had been any > other discussion/action/suggestions/etc. I'm having more issues > with fragmentation and swarming from the clients right now than I > am with Squid/WCCPv2 proxying it. :) Ah, I got around most of the port-80 abuse issue by informing clients of the proxy for this type of thing, allowing them to configure their apps to use it as a gateway gets around a few issues. (Great side-effect: Some P2P apps using a proxy send their internal IPs to the server, so remote leeches can't figure out where they are, and other local peers get a direct connection across.) The real solution to all your P2P woes though is to implement IPv6. A growing number of apps will use it anyway and tunnel around. The native addressing scheme also allows P2P to more efficiently identify peers and cause much less use of upstream bandwidth. Amos
