Articles delegate-en/4477-4495 of [1-5169] on the server localhost:119
  upper oldest olders older1 this newer1 newers latest
[Top/Up] [oldest] - [Older+chunk] - [Newer+chunk] - [newest + Check]
range 4477 - 4495   digest:
ASN.1 custom filter
  06/02-20:38 . 4477  <> [75]
  Hi, I'm still learning to use Delegated. I was wondering if I understood the help correctly: with a FTOSV filter (let's say pointing to a perl script) I could filter data coming from 1 client to dis
FTP client to implicit FTPS server
  06/04-01:08 . 4478  Marvin Tapessur <> [63]
  Yutaka, The STLS="-fsv,im=0.5" breaks 'normal' ftp connections using PORT. PASV connections work just fine. Any thought? Rgds, Marvin
  06/04-03:32 . 4479 (Yutaka Sato) [106]
  Hi, It should be "im0.5", not "im=0.5". And I can't reproduce the problem with the following test. delegated -P9999 SERVER=ftp STLS=-fsv,im=0.5 -fv -vd CACHE=no FTPCONF=nopasv:sv 06/04 03:26:44.67 [
  06/04-03:40 . 4480  Marvin <> [158]
  Yep, that was a typo on my end. I have it correct in my config though. This is what I use: delegated -P21 STLS="-fsv,im0.5" ADMIN=bla@bla.. If I remove the STLS all together active ftp works just fi
  06/04-03:49 . 4481 (Yutaka Sato) [22]
  Comparing and seeing the difference between your LOGFILEs with and without STLS will give us hints. As shown by my LOGFILE, I could not reproduce your problem. Cheers, Yutaka 9 9 Yutaka Sato <y.sato
  06/04-03:50 . 4482  Marvin <> [212]
  Below the logging of a failed active connection: 06/03 20:46:08.50 [7541] 1+0: -- Fork(OnetimeServer): 7522 -> 7541 06/03 20:46:08.52 [7541] 1+0: (0) accepted [48] -@[]eupdwsappb308.acm
  06/04-03:58 . 4483  Marvin <> [95]
  And this is one of a succesful connection with STLS removed. I'm using version 9.9.4-pre5. Thanks for your help. 06/03 20:54:40.11 [7774] 2+0: -- Fork(OnetimeServer): 7765 -> 7774 06/03 20:54:40.11
  06/05-17:55 . 4484 (Yutaka Sato) [85]
  Hi, I can't see why this problem is described as: What does "normal ftp connection" mean ? First I thought it as the non-SSL connection, but your broken PORT connection seems SSL based. How "PASV" w
ASN.1 custom filter
  06/05-18:41 . 4485 (Yutaka Sato) [22]
  Hi, With "iptables" on Linux or "ipfw" on BSD, you can forward TCP connections via DeleGate to the original destination host (server) with "odst.-" as follows: SERVER=tcprelay://dst.- Cheers, Yutaka
STLS=-mitm parameter and HTTPS sniffing
  06/05-19:00 . 4486 (Yutaka Sato) [41]
  Hi, STLS=mitm is available only in the binary distribution of DeleGate. <URL:> STLS=mitm does more than decryption/encryption of SSL. Acting as a
FTP client to implicit FTPS server
  06/05-19:11 . 4487  Marvin <> [103]
  I see what you mean. I need to connect through active ftp to this server however it seems that this server also accepts ftps connections throwing delegate off. Is there a way to force a ftp instead
  06/05-20:34 . 4488 (Yutaka Sato) [34]
  Hi, What is the server? You can restrict the application of STLS as follows: STLS="-fsv:ftp:!specific-server" If the firewall just translates addresses but not ports, you can specify the IP-address
ie8 with ftp proxy
  06/16-18:17 . 4489  rewat pathumthawornsakul <> [15]
  IE8 cant access to ftp server with delegated ftp proxy. How to fix it ?
IPv6 SRCIF support
  06/25-17:28 . 4490  Chris Murton <> [85]
  Hi, I was wondering if there are plans to support the setting of the source IPv6 address of outgoing traffic from Delegate (as per SRCIF for IPv4 connections)? Thanks, Chris
  06/26-02:26 . 4491 (Yutaka Sato) [17]
  Hi, I'm not so sure but SRCIF seems supporting IPv6 already... Cheers, Yutaka 9 9 Yutaka Sato <> ( ~ ) National Institute of Advanced Industrial Scienc
  06/26-03:16 . 4492  Chris Murton <> [27]
  Hi Yutaka, How about in a condition where the proxy has both IPv4 and IPv6 networks attached to it, and you want to specify a different outgoing source address for both v4 and v6? :) Thanks, Chris
  06/26-03:40 . 4493 (Yutaka Sato) [22]
  Hi, You can specify multiple SRCIF conditionally on the address family of the destination using a pseudo hostname "_4" and "_6" for IPv4/IPv6 respectively. Thus it could be as this for example: SRCI
  06/26-03:57 . 4494  Chris Murton <> [29]
  Hi Yutaka, That's working perfectly, thanks for your help! Chris
  06/26-04:08 . 4495 (Yutaka Sato) [36]
  Hi Chris, Since I have no real experience with IPv6, feedbacks like yours are very welcome. Yutaka
  admin search upper oldest olders older1 this newer1 newers latest
[Top/Up] [oldest] - [Older+chunk] - [Newer+chunk] - [newest + Check]
Generated:02/19 20:41:57 (1 sec) Expires:02/20 02:41:56 @_@V