Shachar Shemesh wrote:
> Doesn't that require that the router handling all the traffic be a NAT
> machine? At our place we currently have a CheckPoint FW-1 firewall, and I am
> not sure that it supports transperant proxying (though it is quite possible
> that it does, Linux isn't the only solution, you know). I don't think adding
> another machine will be a good idea.
Shachar,
Why would the router have to perform NAT? It just has to block outgoing
connections to port 80, and reroute them to the port that Squid listens
on.
Gavrie.
--
Gavrie Philipson
Netmor Applied Modeling Research Ltd.
=================================================================
To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command
echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
