Subject:
|
Re: Ports that make firewalls happy?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.general
|
Date:
|
Wed, 7 Oct 1998 16:31:24 GMT
|
Reply-To:
|
mattdm@mattdm(Spamcake).org
|
Viewed:
|
570 times
|
| |
|
|
Todd Lehman <lehman@javanet.com> wrote:
> Anyone seen a good list anywhere of ports that work with "most" corporate
> firewalls? Every firewall is gonna be different, but they probably all
> allow, say, port 8080. LarryP and I were running some news experiements
> back in mid-August on port 8080, and he could get to that through his
> corporate firewall. But I hesitate to mirror 199->8080 because 8080 is
> traditionally for HTTP proxy servers...
If the firewall is designed to keep people out rather than keep people in
(probably not necessarily the state of most corporations), anything above
1024 is likely to work.
8080 is probably an ok choice, if it indeed is allowed most places. I've
seen it used for experimental web servers (ie testing Apache when moving
from NCSA) and the like as often as I've seen it used as a proxy port.
Another thing to keep in mind is that some people are behind
application-proxy firewalls, and there's probably nothing that can be done
for them, short of making the web interface really good.
--
Matthew Miller ---> mattdm@mattdm.org
Quotes 'R' Us ---> http://quotes-r-us.org/
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Ports that make firewalls happy?
|
| Anyone seen a good list anywhere of ports that work with "most" corporate firewalls? Every firewall is gonna be different, but they probably all allow, say, port 8080. LarryP and I were running some news experiements back in mid-August on port 8080, (...) (26 years ago, 7-Oct-98, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
3 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
