- From: Mike Dierken <mdierken@hotmail.com>
- Date: Sun, 6 Nov 2005 12:37:05 -0800
> On Oct 18, 2005, at 06:14, S. Mike Dierken wrote: > > > Okay. Outbound messages are obviously not a problem. Accepting > > unsolicited inbound messages isn't feasible (& the > unsolicited part is > > an invitation to spam). Having the client initiate the connection & > > then receiving/ responding to inbound requests is what it > sounds like > > you would need. > > If the browser had an HTTP daemon built-in, would that work? > > A HTTP daemon in the browser is not strictly required. > > Rumor (which I have not verified) has it that there are > successful IP over HTTP implementations for the purpose of > circumventing strict corporate firewalls. An HTTP client > behind the firewall issues requests to an accomplice HTTP > server outside the firewall which routes the IP packets to > and from the Internet. Outbound packets are POSTed to the > server. The server sends inbound packets in the response > stream of the most recent POST. The responses are closed on > the server only upon seeing the next POST request. > Sure, tunneling is always technically possible. But I'm trying to avoid 'circumventing' anything and am trying to use exisitng standards and technology - it's better that writing our own bugs and tends not to get shut down by administrators.
Received on Sunday, 6 November 2005 12:37:05 UTC