Re: [PATCH/RFC 00/10] Transparent proxying patches version 4

2007-01-08 Thread KOVACS Krisztian
Hi Evgeniy, On Wednesday 03 January 2007 18:23, Evgeniy Polyakov wrote: > Out of curiosity, would you use netchannels [1] if the implementation > will be much broader? Since what you have created works exactly like > netchannels netfilter NAT target (although it does not change ports, > but it

Re: [PATCH/RFC 00/10] Transparent proxying patches version 4

2007-01-08 Thread Harald Welte
On Sun, Jan 07, 2007 at 05:11:06PM +0100, Lennert Buytenhek wrote: > On Sun, Jan 07, 2007 at 03:11:34PM +0100, Harald Welte wrote: > > > > So instead of using NAT to dynamically redirect traffic to local > > > addresses, we now rely on "native" non-locally-bound sockets and do > > > early socket l

Re: [PATCH/RFC 00/10] Transparent proxying patches version 4

2007-01-07 Thread Lennert Buytenhek
On Sun, Jan 07, 2007 at 03:11:34PM +0100, Harald Welte wrote: > > So instead of using NAT to dynamically redirect traffic to local > > addresses, we now rely on "native" non-locally-bound sockets and do > > early socket lookups for inbound IPv4 packets. > > It's good to see a solid implementatio

Re: [PATCH/RFC 00/10] Transparent proxying patches version 4

2007-01-07 Thread Harald Welte
Hi Krisztian! On Wed, Jan 03, 2007 at 05:33:57PM +0100, KOVACS Krisztian wrote: > So instead of using NAT to dynamically redirect traffic to local > addresses, we now rely on "native" non-locally-bound sockets and do > early socket lookups for inbound IPv4 packets. It's good to see a solid imple

Re: [PATCH/RFC 00/10] Transparent proxying patches version 4

2007-01-04 Thread Lennert Buytenhek
On Thu, Jan 04, 2007 at 01:13:27PM +0100, KOVACS Krisztian wrote: > > I'd also love to see the old tproxy API go away entirely. It was > > always a bit of a pain to use. > > It's gone with these patches: all you need is to bind() to foreign > addresses, like in the Linux 2.2 days. That's how

Re: [PATCH/RFC 00/10] Transparent proxying patches version 4

2007-01-04 Thread KOVACS Krisztian
Hi, On Wednesday 03 January 2007 20:33, Lennert Buytenhek wrote: > I'd also love to see the old tproxy API go away entirely. It was > always a bit of a pain to use. It's gone with these patches: all you need is to bind() to foreign addresses, like in the Linux 2.2 days. -- Regards, Kr

Re: [PATCH/RFC 00/10] Transparent proxying patches version 4

2007-01-03 Thread Lennert Buytenhek
On Wed, Jan 03, 2007 at 05:33:57PM +0100, KOVACS Krisztian wrote: > The following set of patches implement transparent proxying support > loosely modeled on the Linux 2.2 transparent proxying functionality. In a transparent http proxy server I wrote a while ago, we used to use tproxy for making o

Re: [PATCH/RFC 00/10] Transparent proxying patches version 4

2007-01-03 Thread Evgeniy Polyakov
On Wed, Jan 03, 2007 at 05:33:57PM +0100, KOVACS Krisztian ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > The following set of patches implement transparent proxying support > loosely modeled on the Linux 2.2 transparent proxying functionality. > > In the last few years we've been maintaining a set of patches > im

[PATCH/RFC 00/10] Transparent proxying patches version 4

2007-01-03 Thread KOVACS Krisztian
The following set of patches implement transparent proxying support loosely modeled on the Linux 2.2 transparent proxying functionality. In the last few years we've been maintaining a set of patches implementing Netfilter NAT to provide similar functionality. However, as time passed, more and more