Patrik Arvhult wrote: > I did take a look at the sources and it seems most networking stuff related > to > seems to be in core/sockets.c (0.96b), and thought - maybe I could try. So I > wrote a little routine trying to talk to my SOCKS5 proxy; especially trying > to get the proxy bind a port for remote listening. I tell the proxy to listen > at port 10000, but it hands another port back, and listens to that one > instead of the one i want. So I get it doing stuff, but it doesnt do exactly > what i specify it to do. I hope this is a bug in the proxy or me doing it the > wrong way. If its the right behavior: if listening for tcp connections with > the proxy, the outside (WAN) port changes for each incoming connection - i > dont think it looks very good / feasible, at least not for serving multiple > incoming TCP connections.
SOCKS looks indeed less useful than I thought initially. The support for creating a listening socket seems to be aimed at FTP. As you've also noticed the RFC itself more or less restricts incoming connections to hosts that you have connected to before. Maybe some implementations still allow arbitrary incoming connections but after a single incoming connection, you have create another socket, if I read correctly. If at all, this only seems to be useable for push transfers albeit only if it allows arbitrary incoming connections. The UDP support looks a little more useful. If Gtk-Gnutella supported NAT-to-NAT transfers over UDP like LimeWire or BearShare, this might work with SOCKS. Though I don't know the details of UDP-based transfers in Gnutella because that's not completely documented yet. Does your SOCKS proxy support UDP? What SOCKS proxy software do you use actually? Maybe we're lucky and there's a common extension to make TCP support more useful. Do you know any application with SOCKS support for incoming connections? By the way, I think it's better to continue this on the -devel mailing list. -- Christian
pgpKfsh4qy4Ia.pgp
Description: PGP signature
