{#} Replies are directed back to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
{#} To reply to the author, write to Jason Townsend <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Try this in Terminal:
% telnet messenger.hotmail.com 1863
and see if you can at least get a connection established to the server
we're using. I guess the next step if that is successful is to take a
look at an EtherPeek trace of what happens when trying to connect in the
failure and success cases.
-Jason
On Tuesday, June 11, 2002, at 07:54 PM, Alex Kac wrote:
> I agree. That's why I'm perplexed. I was using NAT through a hardware
> linksys box. I'm now using NAT through a software FreeBSD box. The
> FreeBSD
> box is using natd - a daemon that comes with FreeBSD 4.5. There are NO
> firewall rules at this time.
>
> OS X:
> MSN Messenger 2.1 works with this
> MSN Messenger 3.0 works with this
> AIM works with this
> Yahoo IM works with this
> ICQ works with this
> Fire AIM/ICQ/Yahoo work with this
> Fire MSN does NOT work at this time in this config
> Proteus MSN does NOT work at this time in this config
>
> Windows:
> Trillian works with this
> MSN Messenger 4.6 works with this
>
> So since Fire and Proteus share the same MSN lib, my guess is that
> there is
> a bug or problem with the MSN lib. But since I know this CAN work
> through
> NAT and the only change has been the move to natd from the Linksys
> box, I
> can only assume that there is something there. Now I'm not a natd
> expert,
> though I DO know unix and networking fundamentals fairly well. Since I
> don't
> see getting the MSN lib fixed quickly, I'd rather look at what in natd
> breaks the MSN library. But since I'm new at natd, I'm not even sure
> what to
> look for or possibly common issues. I'm also not sure if perhaps I'd be
> better of downloading a better NAT daemon and using that...
>
> --
> Alex Kac, CEO/Developer
>
> Innovation in Personal and Business Information Management
> http://www.pocketinformant.com/
>
> zoomzoom
>
>
>> From: "David V. Baker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 21:05:21 -0400
>> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> Subject: Re: Firewall/NAT problem?
>>
>> {#} Replies are directed back to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> {#} To reply to the author, write to "David V. Baker"
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>
>>
>> In response to a problem email, Eric said:
>>
>>> Fire is not supported through any kind of firewall or natd connection.
>>> We have tried to make sure it *might* work, but there are no
>>> guarantees.
>>
>> Alex Kac said:
>>
>>> I not do think its a great idea to not support firewalls/natd. I
>>> don't like the idea that I have to choose between securing my network
>>> or keeping it open just for chat. And considering that most of the
>>> world does use some sort of firewall/natd...well, it just doesn't
>>> seem right.
>>
>> It dawned on me that most everyone is behind a NAT router these days;
>> this cannot be a widespread problem. I am behind two NATs at home
>> (Airport and SpeedStream PPPoE router to DSL), two at the office, plus
>> some strict firewall rules at work. But I have never had any trouble
>> with Fire because of NAT routers or my firewalls.
>>
>> I think it is because Fire and many (all?) of its various clients are
>> "normal" clients that connect from an unprivileged high-port to a
>> well-known destination port; the response stream from the server comes
>> back to the source port, just like most everything. *All* NAT systems
>> should be able to figure that out; it is fundamental functionality.
>> (Things like peer-to-peer AIM voice-talking or file-sharing require
>> different functionality and they are almost always hosed by NAT.)
>>
>> So, as long as AOL and Yahoo and whoever keep their server models the
>> same, Fire will work through NAT routers, and it'll work through
>> firewalls, just like a web browser or POP or telnet or any other
>> service. I think the only thing that will cause any real trouble are
>> firewall rules specifically designed to keep chat traffic out.
>>
>> And if this NAT/firewall discussion all really started because some AIM
>> TOC servers went down today, then...umm, sorry, and uhh, *nevermind*.
>>
>> Dave Baker
>> --
>> -----------------------------------------------------------------
>> David V. Baker Voice/Cell:617-331-1642 Fax: 603-806-8545
>> mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] www.whysheep.com
>>
>> It's easy to downgrade people by dwelling on their
>> weaknesses. It's harder to look at them with
>> fresh eyes and identify their strengths -- and how
>> they can help the organization to function.
>> pg 32, Finding a Way To Win, Bill Parcells
>>
>> {#} ----------------------------------------------------+[ fire ]+---
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> {#} ----------------------------------------------------+[ fire ]+---
>
>
{#} ----------------------------------------------------+[ fire ]+---
