tinc vs. ipchains masquerading

[Guus Sliepen]

On Tue, Mar 05, 2002 at 08:23:30AM -0500, Lars Kellogg-Stedman wrote:

> I missed the TCPOnly option when reading through the docs, and for that I
> apologize.  However, I'll venture that a simple example would have been a
> more appropriate response than attitude.

It's not attitude, I'm just pointing you to the answers of your
question. It is like asking a car salesman if the car you just buyed
will fit into your garage. What answer do you expect from the car
salesman? He can only answer something like "only if it is larger than 3
by 4". The same holds for running applications behind firewalls. We can
only say that you have to punch a hole in it or try some option to
circumvent it, but we can't give an answer for a situation we don't
control. Therefore the answer was short but correct: consult the manual
of your garage. Ehr, firewall :).

> In any case, thanks for the pointer, and I'm sure I shan't bother you
> again.

Sure you can bother me, I don't mind.

-- 
Met vriendelijke groet / with kind regards,
  Guus Sliepen <guus at sliepen.warande.net>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 232 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://brouwer.uvt.nl/pipermail/tinc/attachments/20020305/aac67d44/attachment.pgp