On 15 Jan 2004 at 5:54, S wrote: > telnet 127.0.0.1 8888 > > Hit Enter. When the connection opens, type: > > HEAD / HTTP/1.0
Had to blind-type this -- nothing echoed. > HTTP/1.1 302 Moved Temporarily > Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2004 05:43:59 GMT > Pragma: no-cache > Location: /servlet/nodeinfo/ > Expires: Mon, 26 Jul 1997 05:00:00 GMT > Cache-Control: post-check=0, pre-check=0 > Connection: close > Content-length: 191 > Content-type: text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1 > Server: Fred 0.5 (build 5060) HTTP Servlets Bingo. Right down to the build number. > Probably transparent proxying. Yuck. Still shouldn't affect localhost, > though. Have you checked your browser configuration to see if > 66.185.84.80 has been explicitly defined as a proxy? If so, assuming IE, > is "Bypass proxy for local addresses" checked? I never changed the browser configuration when I went from dial-up to cable. Then again, since it is a Microsoft product, maybe it's going around changing things behind my back and exercising more autonomy than it should. I'll check... All there is in LAN settings (which I assume will be used for anything going through the network card, including cable inet) is "automatically detect settings". There's a "bypass proxy server for local addresses" option, but checking it would require taking off "automatically detect settings" and setting who knows what else to make normal Web browsing work again. Why on earth is this proving to be so complicated... *sigh* No other p2p software I've got has had the slightest hiccup associated with the transition to cable -- the speed boost and stabler connections are all they seem to notice. :) Also, browsing locally hasn't been affected before, now that I think of it. Several things on my system have documentation in plain-jane HTML, notably GTKRadiant, and those render OK in IE. Seems like it has no problem with static local content, only local services on loopback? Lastly, is this port 8888 being exposed to the Internet going to pose a security risk, or is the fproxy service reasonably robust against the usual things, e.g. buffer overflow exploits. The only thing I can imagine being more trouble than an exposed and exploitable service opening a port on my machine is an exposed and exploitable service whose port on my machine is reachable from every other box on the net except mine, rendering me blind to whatever's going on in there. :) _______________________________________________ Support mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support
