I take no offense in what you call pedantic but has it ever occurred to you that it is NAT that labels a session as MIRC when port 6667 is being used? I overlooked that and so I asked about it. Luckily someone knowledgeable answered my question and I am gratefull for that.
Take care, P On Tue, 26 Apr 2005 09:27:32 +1200, "Phillip Hutchings" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > On 26/04/05, Maps Baps <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Is there any MIRC involved in freenet? I noticed the presence of MIRC > > like sessions sometime ago, just yet I looked again and found two > > machines that deviate from the normal freenet pattern. They both start > > normally as inbound connections but soon after these two show up in NAT > > as being connected with type MIRC. > > > > Can anyone tell me what is happening here? > > Can we _PLEASE_ drop that stupid M? The protocol is IRC, the client is > mIRC. It's like saying you're recieving your Outlooks instead of > emails. > > Sorry, being pedantic, but it really annoys me when people start using > the wrong name. > > -- > Phillip Hutchings > http://www.sitharus.com/ > [EMAIL PROTECTED] / [EMAIL PROTECTED] > _______________________________________________ > Support mailing list > [email protected] > http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support > Unsubscribe at > http://dodo.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support > Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Maps Baps [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ Support mailing list [email protected] http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support Unsubscribe at http://dodo.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
