[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       openssh-unix-dev
Subject:    Re: PuTTY: Forwarded connection refused by server: Administratively prohibited [open failed]
From:       Darren Tucker <dtucker () zip ! com ! au>
Date:       2014-01-15 13:49:35
Message-ID: CALDDTe0E-GFZzs9sJ6mzcVD17XntiK4xE5_N1O3mFM0jtzdNmg () mail ! gmail ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

On Sun, Jan 12, 2014 at 10:39 PM, Damien Miller <djm@mindrot.org> wrote:
> Yes, OpenSSH uses the standard libc resolver to perform name
> resolution. This is synchronous and blocking, so no other traffic
> is processed while one is in progress.

Note that which side the address is resolved on is under the control
of the SOCKS client. eg, in firefox this is about:config
network.proxy.socks_remote_dns.

The up side is that the client can implement different retry
behaviour.  The down side is that any addrress resolution on the
client side leaks information.

-- 
Darren Tucker (dtucker at zip.com.au)
GPG key 8FF4FA69 / D9A3 86E9 7EEE AF4B B2D4  37C9 C982 80C7 8FF4 FA69
    Good judgement comes with experience. Unfortunately, the experience
usually comes from bad judgement.
_______________________________________________
openssh-unix-dev mailing list
openssh-unix-dev@mindrot.org
https://lists.mindrot.org/mailman/listinfo/openssh-unix-dev
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]