[Council] VOTE: SOCKS5 Bytestreams

Peter Saint-Andre stpeter at jabber.org
Tue Mar 4 10:58:29 CST 2003


Maybe I should put it right in the introduction, that would clarify things
right up front.

Peter

--
Peter Saint-Andre
Jabber Software Foundation
http://www.jabber.org/people/stpeter.php

On Tue, 4 Mar 2003, David Waite wrote:

> I'd slightly prefer it be higher up, but it definately meets my 
> concerns. +1 (and I can't wait to see someone use this tunnelled through 
> a 'regular' SOCKS 5 proxy ;-))
> 
> -David Waite
> 
> Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
> 
> >I have updated the JEP by adding section 10.3 ("Use of Existing SOCKS5
> >Proxies").
> >
> >http://www.jabber.org/jeps/jep-0065.html#sect-id2595426
> >
> >DW, does this address your question?
> >
> >Peter
> >
> >--
> >Peter Saint-Andre
> >Jabber Software Foundation
> >http://www.jabber.org/people/stpeter.php
> >
> >On Sun, 2 Mar 2003, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
> >
> >  
> >
> >>I can update the JEP to make this more explicit. We're using (parts of)
> >>the SOCKS5 protocol in this JEP, but you can't just use an off-the-shelf
> >>SOCKS5 proxy to implement this JEP.
> >>
> >>Peter
> >>
> >>--
> >>Peter Saint-Andre
> >>Jabber Software Foundation
> >>http://www.jabber.org/people/stpeter.php
> >>
> >>On Thu, 27 Feb 2003, Dave Smith wrote:
> >>
> >>    
> >>
> >>>On Thursday, Feb 27, 2003, at 10:41 America/Denver, David Waite wrote:
> >>>
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>>>Quick question (since I know an author is on this list) - can I assume 
> >>>>in a Mediated Connection (Setion 3.2) that the mediator can be a real 
> >>>>SOCKS proxy? In that case, wouldn't I use my 'real' authentication for 
> >>>>that proxy rather than the dynamically generated keypair? Or is it not 
> >>>>possible to use an off-the-shelf SOCKS proxy for this purpose?
> >>>>        
> >>>>
> >>>You simply can't use a SOCKS5 proxy with this. SOCKS5 proxies don't 
> >>>know that they need to wait around for a connection from multiple 
> >>>parties.
> >>>
> >>>I'm surprised this (fundamental) issue didn't come up in the Council 
> >>>review of the JEP.
> >>>
> >>>D.
> >>>
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>>>-David Waite
> >>>>
> >>>>Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>        
> >>>>
> >>>>>We discussed the SOCKS5 Bytestreams proposal (JEP-0065) in the most 
> >>>>>recent
> >>>>>Council meeting and no Council members had objections. Therefore I 
> >>>>>would
> >>>>>like to present this JEP for a vote of the Council. Because this is a
> >>>>>Standards-Track JEP, a +1 vote means you approve of advancing this to
> >>>>>Draft. Please vote or voice your objections on the list.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>http://www.jabber.org/jeps/jep-0065.html
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Thanks.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Peter
> >>>>>
> >>>>>--
> >>>>>Peter Saint-Andre
> >>>>>Jabber Software Foundation
> >>>>>http://www.jabber.org/people/stpeter.php
> >>>>>
> >>>>>_______________________________________________
> >>>>>Council mailing list
> >>>>>Council at jabber.org
> >>>>>http://mailman.jabber.org/listinfo/council
> >>>>>
> >>>>>          
> >>>>>
> >>>>_______________________________________________
> >>>>Council mailing list
> >>>>Council at jabber.org
> >>>>http://mailman.jabber.org/listinfo/council
> >>>>
> >>>>        
> >>>>
> >>>_______________________________________________
> >>>Council mailing list
> >>>Council at jabber.org
> >>>http://mailman.jabber.org/listinfo/council
> >>>
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>_______________________________________________
> >>Council mailing list
> >>Council at jabber.org
> >>http://mailman.jabber.org/listinfo/council
> >>
> >>    
> >>
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >Council mailing list
> >Council at jabber.org
> >http://mailman.jabber.org/listinfo/council
> >  
> >
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Council mailing list
> Council at jabber.org
> http://mailman.jabber.org/listinfo/council
> 




More information about the Council mailing list