What do you mean you can't proxy Live Messenger? A word of warning as I am sure you know there are even older tech articles on the MS web site that would have you open even more ports.
Jon On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 10:04 AM, Kurt Buff <[email protected]> wrote: > Hey, it was nearly the first hit. > > I actually have only had to open one port beyond 80 and 443, though I > can't remember which it was off the top of my head, but that's one > port too many, since I can't proxy it. > > Kurt > > On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 04:25, Michael B. Smith <[email protected]> > wrote: > > That is SO not current. > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Kurt Buff [mailto:[email protected]] > > Sent: Wednesday, December 09, 2009 12:55 AM > > To: NT System Admin Issues > > Subject: Re: A new challenge for me... > > > > http://support.microsoft.com/kb/927847 - yuck... > > > > On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 19:51, Brian Desmond <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> I'd +1 all the recommendations for OCS. It really is a fantastic product > (having been a user of it). > >> > >> That said I'm not sure why you need to make firewall changes for MSN > Messenger audio/video? I've used this before through various firewalls. > >> > >> Thanks, > >> Brian Desmond > >> [email protected] > >> > >> c – 312.731.3132 > >> > >> > >>> -----Original Message----- > >>> From: Kurt Buff [mailto:[email protected]] > >>> Sent: Tuesday, December 08, 2009 2:58 PM > >>> To: NT System Admin Issues > >>> Subject: A new challenge for me... > >>> > >>> Our new CEO want her direct reports to use Live Messenger accounts > >>> for IM/chat, and a couple of them (out of the country) to have web > >>> cam conferencing. > >>> > >>> This, of course, means poking holes in the firewall and installing > >>> the client, both of which I'm not happy about. Does anyone have some > >>> arguments as to why this isn't a good idea? > >>> > >>> Along with that, does anyone have thoughts on something I could > >>> install (probably in a DMZ) to provide this service? > >>> > >>> Open Source is definitely not out of the question, as far as I'm > >>> concerned, but commercial is fine too. > >>> > >>> Kurt > >>> > >>> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ > >>> <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/> ~ > >> > >> > >> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ > >> <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/> ~ > > > > ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ < > http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/> ~ > > > > > > ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ > > ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/> ~ > > ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ > ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/> ~ > > ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/> ~
