Hal Rottenberg wrote on 11/ 8/06 06:44 PM:
> wow, I had no idea it was in use to any great degree if
at all! I
> mean when was the last time you used Netscape v3 to
browse the web?
I'm almost tempted to try and get NSCA Mosaic running again.
http://1997.webhistory.org/www.lists/www-talk.1993
q1/0262.html
Ahhh, memories...
~Iain
> but I understand you aren't in the position to pick and
choose. I
> assume you have tried socksifying Psi (not using the
internal V5 code)
> and for some reason couldn't get it to work?
>
>
>
> On 11/8/06, lilliput Fab <psi saycure.com> wrote:
>> I agree, I had the same pb as Matthias, back a year
ago I could not
>> use psi because of that.
>> The socksv4 protocol is really simple and should
not be more difficult
>> than the HTTP proxy. And as you said socksv4 is an
old protocol ..
>> and unfortunatly over used out there.
>>
>> It is not *THE* killer functionnality but it will
allow psi to be 4x4
>> on all the network.
>>
>> Fabien
>>
>> On 11/8/06, matthias sweertvaegher <gmatti3gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Wed, 08 Nov 2006 23:27:40 +0100, Hal
Rottenberg <halr9000gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> can you give a compelling reason to add
support for an older version
>>>> of a protocol for which we already support?
doesn't make sense to me.
>>> a v5 client is not downwards compatible. It's
not because you support v5
>>> that
>>> people _stuck_ with a v4 server are helped out.
On a lot of intranets
>> there
>>> is still only a socks4 server available. Since
most of the times there
>>> is a strict policy, you as small user can't
convince a company to upgrade
>>> to another socks server. On the forum I have
seen similar requests for
>>> socks4 support. Most users don't complain, but
use another client instead.
>>> That's what I did actually. At work I use Gaim,
at home Psi. But I guess
>>> most users would choose to go with one app and
stick with for example
>> Gaim.
>>> btw, this was after I tried the HTTP Connect
which demands the
>>> jabberserver to set its ports to allowed ports
by the web proxy (being
>>> only 80 and 443 for example!). Most of the
times, you don't have the
>> luxury
>>> of changing the ports of a jabber server ;)
Even then, it's problematic.
>>>
>>> I believe, if you want people to use your
client, you can't make them
>>> install an external socksclient. It's like
releasing a web browser
>>> without proxy support.
>>>
>>> Why limit the choices? Why scare off potential
new users? It's not
>>> that Psi would get bloated by this really small
addition..
>>>
>>> Other clients support it too. And the reason
they support it, is not
>>> because socks v5 did not exist at that time ;)
>>>
>>> I hope it makes a little bit more sense to you
now? 
>>>
>>> greets
>>> matthias
>>> --
>>> Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> psi-devel mailing list
>>> psi-devellists.affinix.com
>>> http://lists.affinix.com/listinfo.cgi/psi-devel-affin
ix.com
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> psi-devel mailing list
>> psi-devellists.affinix.com
>> http://lists.affinix.com/listinfo.cgi/psi-devel-affin
ix.com
>>
>
>
_______________________________________________
psi-devel mailing list
psi-devellists.affinix.com
http://lists.affinix.com/listinfo.cgi/psi-devel-affin
ix.com
|