Firewall Wizards mailing list archives
RE: MSN... stay away? or OK?
From: Joe Matusiewicz <joem () nist gov>
Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 11:06:28 -0400
At 09:55 AM 10/19/00, Michael.Owen () net-tel co uk wrote:
> Actually, it's just a teensy weensy more involved than that. From > Microsoft's recommendation at: > http://www.microsoft.com/Windows/Netmeeting/Corp/ResKit/Chapter4/default > .asp Yes, but spreading such details just encourages people to try it. ;-) Though interestingly enough, you found "Pass through secondary TCP and UDP connections on dynamically assigned ports (1024-65535)." While this Microsoft article makes no mention of secondary TCP... http://support.microsoft.com/support/kb/articles/Q158/6/23.asp?LN=EN-US&SD=gn&FR=0I'm not entirely sure which one is right. Possibly the secondary TCP is needed for the "Dynamic H.323 call control?"
I've played with NetMeeting and I've found with sniffing the line that it does use dynamic TCP ports. Looking at my notes, for one session it started using TCP port 1030 and then incremented the port number as the session went on. Kinda hard to nail it down. But I guess it's OK if you block ports lower than 1024. Yeah right.
-- Joe _______________________________________________ firewall-wizards mailing list firewall-wizards () nfr com http://www.nfr.com/mailman/listinfo/firewall-wizards
Current thread:
- MSN... stay away? or OK? Don Harris (Oct 14)
- Re: MSN... stay away? or OK? Joseph S D Yao (Oct 16)
- RE: MSN... stay away? or OK? Michael . Owen (Oct 18)
- Message not available
- RE: MSN... stay away? or OK? Joe Matusiewicz (Oct 19)
- Message not available
- RE: MSN... stay away? or OK? ark (Oct 19)
- Message not available
- RE: MSN... stay away? or OK? Joe Matusiewicz (Oct 19)
- RE: MSN... stay away? or OK? Michael . Owen (Oct 19)
- RE: MSN... stay away? or OK? Joe Matusiewicz (Oct 19)