From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1Rq9nG-0004qU-Kg for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Wed, 25 Jan 2012 20:50:10 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 891DCE0747; Wed, 25 Jan 2012 20:50:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-we0-f181.google.com (mail-we0-f181.google.com [74.125.82.181]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9FEF5E0716 for ; Wed, 25 Jan 2012 20:49:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: by werb10 with SMTP id b10so4948994wer.40 for ; Wed, 25 Jan 2012 12:48:59 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=from:reply-to:to:subject:date:user-agent:references:in-reply-to :mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:message-id; bh=VMyuPMSDEM+BTQdol67M6SHSHruIyoPZysV1Q/zihqw=; b=Hwyin4YKBZ/RfUJZfVNplF2v5fkZxJ6xopNAPN8MXFmyQ9WIFDlE/WFpiJrxaUpIi1 l4rCAakxCpXyrLEGwfnQtTPc/C3+S6ZK0BSVTinILZRKe0IWDis2EKyqm9riXZe+BpK8 uKcesre/WviNbHKwBI8FkTJpwIMacHAECGhZE= Received: by 10.180.82.5 with SMTP id e5mr13641542wiy.18.1327524539824; Wed, 25 Jan 2012 12:48:59 -0800 (PST) Received: from dell_xps.localnet (230.3.169.217.in-addr.arpa. [217.169.3.230]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id j16sm5261924wie.4.2012.01.25.12.48.57 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Wed, 25 Jan 2012 12:48:58 -0800 (PST) From: Mick To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Proxy questions Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2012 20:49:05 +0000 User-Agent: KMail/1.13.7 (Linux/3.0.6-gentoo; KDE/4.7.4; x86_64; ; ) References: <20120124170843.GW5190@crowfix.com> <201201241814.43970.michaelkintzios@gmail.com> <20120125171136.GZ5190@crowfix.com> In-Reply-To: <20120125171136.GZ5190@crowfix.com> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="nextPart1434651.o5nuLkpP3v"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <201201252049.06860.michaelkintzios@gmail.com> X-Archives-Salt: 382858ac-73dd-484d-b2a1-5182be28e1d3 X-Archives-Hash: 23f2a5b625fd9658219d7ba6322dcf0c --nextPart1434651.o5nuLkpP3v Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wednesday 25 Jan 2012 17:11:36 felix@crowfix.com wrote: > On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 06:14:22PM +0000, Mick wrote: > > On Tuesday 24 Jan 2012 17:08:43 felix@crowfix.com wrote: > > I'm not entirely clear of your use case scenarios and the constraints y= ou > > are trying to address with a proxy (e.g. why the developer does not > > connect directly to the vendors port(s) to access their service? ) but > > I'll guess that >=20 > Because if the devs connect directly to the vendor, they will take > over the limited connections we are allowed. Thus they need > throttling and/or some kind of NAT. OK, I understand now. I guess some reverse proxies offer the ability to=20 throttle throughput and/or you can also apply QoS so that internal connecti= ons=20 to the vendors are always given priority, while external connections coming= =20 from the devs are constrained appropriately. =2D-=20 Regards, Mick --nextPart1434651.o5nuLkpP3v Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.17 (GNU/Linux) iEYEABECAAYFAk8gasIACgkQVTDTR3kpaLbIwgCfSWamtMIeEkl1hNFkwYsFQTQ/ O2oAoJmGdjSm9khmxfarbJfCqGGrHM6e =WEgU -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart1434651.o5nuLkpP3v--