[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: [UCLA-LUG] ssh via proxy?



Dear Yoshio:

Hi. You don't know me, but the Internet has caused our paths to cross.
I found a solution that can help us both when it comes to using Los
Angeles Free-Net to make remote ssh/ftp/telnet connections through
LAFN's socks proxy.

While looking for a solution, I found a post you made back in February
where you say "currently I get 'no route to host' when I try commands
telnet/ftp/ssh":

  "[UCLA-LUG] ssh via proxy?"
   http://www.linux.ucla.edu/pipermail/linux/2001-February/004507.html


Then I found this message (which was written by me, alas, then
forgotten about) from April on the debian-firewall list:

  "Re: Using socks4-clients with proxy at L.A. Free-Net (LAFN)"
   http://lists.debian.org/debian-firewall-0104/msg00031.html


All that's needed is to edit a file (refer to ``man socks.conf'').
Here's what mine looks like:

   ~$ cat /etc/socks.conf
   # socks configuration
   #direct                  127.0.0.1       255.255.255.255
   #direct                  10.7.10.255     255.255.255.0
   #sockd                   0.0.0.0         0.0.0.0
   #direct                  0.0.0.0         0.0.0.0
   sockd @=206.117.18.6 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 ppp0
   ~$

I think the solution there should work on your Red Hat 7.0 box.  It
works for me on a Debian GNU/Linux (2.2r3) box.  Perhaps more students
and staff at UCLA would get an account with LAFN (for just $40/year)
if they knew how to configure their GNU/Linux computer to work through
proxy servers (so far I've been able to configure "everything" to work
with LAFN).

Below is an example (commands + stderr).  We can see that the
connection is established.  Mr. Joost Kooij said it was going to be a
simple solution, and sure enough it was!  Unfortunately I saw many
dozens of email messages and Usenet postings that had the "no route to
host" problem behind a proxy firewall, but almost none mentioned
socks.conf (the default route in /etc/socks.conf is "direct", thus the
"no route to host").  I think it's just a matter of self-education,
and educating the educators.

hope this email helped...

-------------------------------------------------------
~$ ssh -v rcymbala@marxists.org
SSH Version 1.2.27 [i686-unknown-linux], protocol version 1.5.
Standard version.  Does not use RSAREF.
debian: Reading configuration data /etc/ssh-nonfree/ssh_config
debian: Applying options for *
debian: ssh_connect: getuid 1000 geteuid 0 anon 0
debian: Connecting to marxists.org [216.39.174.30] port 22.
debian: Allocated local port 1023.
debian: Connection established.
debian: Remote protocol version 1.99, remote software version OpenSSH_2.9p2
debian: Waiting for server public key.
debian: Received server public key (768 bits) and host key (1024 bits).
Host key not found from the list of known hosts.
Are you sure you want to continue connecting (yes/no)? no
~$
-------------------------------------------------------
~# ifconfig
lo        Link encap:Local Loopback  
          inet addr:127.0.0.1  Mask:255.0.0.0
          UP LOOPBACK RUNNING  MTU:3924  Metric:1
          RX packets:22135 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0
          TX packets:22135 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0
          collisions:0 txqueuelen:0 

ppp0      Link encap:Point-to-Point Protocol  
          inet addr:192.168.9.43  P-t-P:206.117.18.15  Mask:255.255.255.255
          UP POINTOPOINT RUNNING NOARP MULTICAST  MTU:1500  Metric:1
          RX packets:452 errors:1 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:1
          TX packets:426 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0
          collisions:0 txqueuelen:10 
~#
-------------------------------------------------------
P.S.
Command ``ssh'' comes from:
http://packages.debian.org/stable/non-us/ssh-socks.html


Regards,
-- 
 Robert Cymbala     QUEBEC CITY:                                   ///
 cymbaLa@Lafn.org    Leaders of 34 Western Hemisphere nations promised
                     to create a hemisphere in which `no one is left
                     behind.'     J. GERSTENZANG (LA Times), 4/23/2001



Reply to: