[tech] flame, moray's kernel and transparent proxying
David Luyer
luyer at ucs.uwa.edu.au
Thu Sep 16 15:00:53 WST 1999
> On Thu, Sep 16, 1999 at 02:52:30PM +0800, David Luyer wrote:
> > > It would be much cleaner if you just bound the services to their
> > > correct ports on /flame/'s address. rlinetd lets you do this with the
> > > interfaces command.
> >
> > You could easily modify the driver and moray's inetd to bind() things
> > correctly to support flame.ucc and moray.ucc on the one machine.
> >
> yes, but port 23 and port 80?
Make moray's inetd and httpd bind port 80 to specific interfaces. Probably
sendmail too if you want to do real SMTP on flame.
Make flames driver bind to specific interfaces port 80, 4242 and 23 (and
others). Multiple incoming socket support isn't hard if it isn't there
already.
David.
More information about the tech
mailing list