Re: [Fwd: Socks support in CVS]

[Mark D. Baushke]

Larry Jones <lawrence.jones@eds.com> writes:

> Mark D. Baushke writes:
> > 
> > I am given to understand that v4 and v5 really do not interoperate as
> > such, so I guess it makes sense that users could configure to use one or
> > the other.
> 
> It depends on what you mean by interoperate.  As I recall, most SOCKS 5
> servers can also support SOCKS 4 clients and the SOCKS 5 client library
> supports connecting to SOCKS 4 servers.  When I did SOCKS support, I
> had configure look for the SOCKS 4 client library only if it couldn't
> find the SOCKS 5 client library.

Okay.

> > Just to be clear, it would just be the client that needs to worry about
> > getting thru the firewall, right? If so, I do not see a big problem with
> > adding some kind of socks support in theory. 
> 
> I don't think we want to get into the business of supporting every proxy
> server known to man.  My impression is that SOCKS was never very popular
> (look at how often it's been asked for here) and is steadily declining
> in popularity.  I see no value in adding it to the standard source.

Good point.

        Thanks,
        -- Mark