On Fri, 26 May 2006, Gaby vanhegan wrote:
> I see. What about running them on separate IP addresses (both still
> on the same machine)? Or do they need to be on different physical
> interfaces? Should I use a separate package, such as ftpsesame? Is
> there any way round this problem?
Usi
On 26 May 2006, at 11:31, Camiel Dobbelaar wrote:
> Ah right, running the proxy and server on the same machine is not
> supported.
I see. What about running them on separate IP addresses (both still
on the same machine)? Or do they need to be on different physical
interfaces? Should I use
On Fri, 26 May 2006, Gaby vanhegan wrote:
> When I type the ls command. is the same in each case, the
> firewall, proxy and ftp server are running on the same machine. My
> aim here is to not open a load of ports for ftpd, but to have the
> pftpx part of ftp-proxy only open
On 25 May 2006, at 21:35, Peter Fraser wrote:
> The nice thing about pftpx -- it is symmetrical
Yes, hence my question, and happiness that it replaced ftp-proxy.
Where are I going wrong here? (pf rules and config to be found below).
On 25 May 2006, at 21:42, Spruell, Darren-Perot wrote:
On Thu, 25 May 2006, Gaby vanhegan wrote:
> Is there a working pf.conf that anyone can share with me? I can
> connect to the server but PASV mode fails with the normal error that
> it can't make the data connection.
You have to run two instances of the proxy. One as normal that listens on
t
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > It's been imported as the new ftp-proxy:
> >
> > http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?m=111708277030478
>
> This is good news. However, I can't get the configuration
> correct to
> allow me to put an FTP server behind a PF firewall, and allow
> inbound
> client con
On 25 May 2006, at 20:49, Ray Lai wrote:
> On Thu, May 25, 2006 at 08:28:12PM +0100, Gaby vanhegan wrote:
>> The last mention of this on misc@ was march, and not much prior to
>> that. Does anybody have any good/bad experiences with pftpx? I plan
>> to use it to proxy inc
On Thu, May 25, 2006 at 08:28:12PM +0100, Gaby vanhegan wrote:
> The last mention of this on misc@ was march, and not much prior to
> that. Does anybody have any good/bad experiences with pftpx? I plan
> to use it to proxy incoming FTP connections, the opposite of what I'd
&
Hi,
The last mention of this on misc@ was march, and not much prior to
that. Does anybody have any good/bad experiences with pftpx? I plan
to use it to proxy incoming FTP connections, the opposite of what I'd
use ftp-proxy for...
Gaby
--
Junkets for bunterish lickspittles since
9 matches
Mail list logo
