Andreas Schlager wrote:
> Am 8 Aug 2002, um 6:30 Uhr schrieb Joe Cooper:
>
>
>>[...]
>>This doesn't sound quite right to me. What makes you think this is a
>>good solution to your problem? (I don't see how having the client come
>>in one port, and redirected to another IP:port is going to fix anything.
>> If the protocol can't be proxied, just bypass the proxy for that
>>protocol.)
>>
>>That said, you can use a redirector to alter the outgoing destination
>>port, I think. But I'm pretty certain you're barking up the wrong tree.
>>[...]
>
>
> Hi Joe,
>
> first thanks for the ultra-very-hyper-fast replies (also to Lieven
> and Daniel)!!!
>
> Maybe I don't explaned it clear.
> The software I use is speaking "MBS"-protocol. This means (here in
> austria) "Multi Banking System", and is developed and used by
> (almost?) all bankes with their software.
>
> The only choice I have to setup there is an IP-address and a port-
> number of the bank-server. No chance to specify a proxy or socks-
> server here.
>
> The problem is, that our PC's resides behind a proxy and a firewall
> (how it should be). So I want to configure the proxy only to reach
> through the traffic which is coming from such a PC to the proxy on a
> defined port outside to a IP-address and port-number of a bank-server.
>
> Daniel and Lieven suggested to use the cache_peer directive. I think,
> I try this.
If I were a betting man, I'd give very good odds against that working.
But I'm not, so I'll say give it a try.
In your situation, I believe I would configure port and IP forwarding on
the firewall (and poke a small hole in the firewall). I suspect it will
be necessary to make this work...I've been wrong before, however. Give
the Squid-only suggestion a go first, though, and let us know how it goes.
-- Joe Cooper <joe@swelltech.com> Web caching appliances and support. http://www.swelltech.comReceived on Thu Aug 08 2002 - 05:58:46 MDT
This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Tue Dec 09 2003 - 17:09:33 MST