Re: [Licq-main] Jabber plugin for licq
On Wed, Dec 25, 2002 at 04:38:33PM +0300, Dmitry Samersoff wrote: How about to write it ? Don't see much of a need. The Jabber client Psi is very similar to Licq already and with a properly configured Jabber server you have access to your ICQ, Jabber, and other contacts. -- Jamin W. Collins --- This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek Welcome to geek heaven. http://thinkgeek.com/sf ___ LICQ-Main mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/licq-main
Re: Re[2]: [Licq-main] licq with iptables
On Fri, 7 Jun 2002 22:38:10 +0100 Darren Evans [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Thomas, thanks for your email. I don't think it's unprecise. TCP and UDP ports that should be allowed so that licq can function in all configurations. Perhaps it is seen as unprecise as there is no specific configuration that is needed for Licq's current functionality. If you can give a better idea as to what you are having problems with, perhaps someone will be able to assist you. -- Jamin W. Collins ___ Don't miss the 2002 Sprint PCS Application Developer's Conference August 25-28 in Las Vegas - http://devcon.sprintpcs.com/adp/index.cfm?source=osdntextlink ___ Licq-main mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/licq-main
Re: [jcollins@asgardsrealm.net: Re: Re[2]: [Licq-main] licq with iptables]
On Fri, 7 Jun 2002 23:28:50 +0100 Darren Evans [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Is it me or is this not straight forward? I guess not as it's not in the FAQ. A standard firewall generally denies all traffic by default, right? So in order to enable functionality, what ports and hosts does licq use? Ah... now we start getting to the core of the problem. A different perception of standard firewall. I will admit you have the correct technical definition of a firewall. However, from your own subject line you indicate iptables. With iptables it is quite common to use the stateful connection tracking to allow response packets to existing established connections. Additionally, many implimentations of an iptables based firewalls that are providing NAT'ing server are intended to be transparent (as much as possible anyway) to the users they protect and NAT. With the above to conditions met, there is nothing additional that is needed for Licq to work. I run an iptables based firewall in several locations based on my own firewall script. There have been no special allowances made for Licq (or any icq clients for that matter) and they all happily work. ps Jamin, no need to post message to list if it's only intended for me. If it's sent to the list, then it's in the archives. Then the next person that looks for it can find it. -- Jamin W. Collins ___ Don't miss the 2002 Sprint PCS Application Developer's Conference August 25-28 in Las Vegas - http://devcon.sprintpcs.com/adp/index.cfm?source=osdntextlink ___ Licq-main mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/licq-main
Re: [Licq-main] an issue with online notify
On Thu, 2 May 2002 08:08:43 -0500 Jon Keating [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Look in the network log, you'll see that it says they keep coming online. This usually means the person is using GAIM, as all my contacts who use GAIM for ICQ send an online packet every 60 seconds. That would strike me as a bug. They probably implimented as a work around of sorts, but it's a bad one. -- Jamin W. Collins ___ Have big pipes? SourceForge.net is looking for download mirrors. We supply the hardware. You get the recognition. Email Us: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Licq-main mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/licq-main
Re: [Licq-main] some thoughts
On Tue, 26 Mar 2002 12:12:26 +0100 Christian B. Wiik [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: No, they don't ;) They ask the client behind the firewall to try a direct connection in the other direction. Licq does this too. (snip) Sending mesages through server is, in other words, only theoretically needed when both clients are behind firewalls. If it's only theoretically needed, how do you propose to request the remote client (the one behind the firewall) open the door for you by attempting a connection to you? You still need to send at least the initial request through the server (if I'm not mistaken) to get your request to the client behind the firewall. -- Jamin W. Collins ___ Licq-main mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/licq-main
Re: [Licq-main] problems with sending over server (CVS)
On Wed, 13 Mar 2002 13:21:45 -0500 James [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Michael Wojcikiewicz wrote: I've been getting the same behaviour from licq for the last little while (also using CVS compiled version from a few weeks ago). It seems that none of my messages will ever go through after a little while... I am behind a firewall (at work), but no policies have changed in a long time, and it used to work. sounds like mirabilis messing with the protocol again. --mike Hello, I remember writing about having this problem maybe 3 weeks ago. but I think I was dismissed like an old crazy lady..LOL.. But anyway I too can send mesg. for a little while then after disconnect and riconnect, it will start , again, it is a viciuos circle.. it used to work fine and all of the sudden ...??? who knowes what happened.. I use SuSE Linux 7.3 and licq version 1.1.0/SSl QT GUI plugin version 1.04... This problem has been reported on the GnomeICU list several times. I believe they found the problem to be that they were ignoring a message from the ICQ server concerning messages being sent too fast. Perhaps this is the case here too? ___ Licq-main mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/licq-main
Re: [Licq-main] contact list feature
On Sun, 24 Feb 2002 13:10:35 -0500 (EST) Stewart Honsberger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: GnomeICU has support for server side contact lists. Is this feature optional, or forced? AFAIK, it's forced in the latest version. Perhaps, this is part of the new protocol version? Jamin W. Collins ___ Licq-main mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/licq-main
Re: [Licq-main] ICQ Server Source Code.
On Sat, 23 Feb 2002 14:57:35 -0500 (EST) Ho Lee [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Does anybody know where there is ICQ Server source code available? Has somebody written any code for the ICQ Server? Don't know of any clones of the ICQ server. Not really sure why you'd want to reimpliment ICQ anyway. However, if you're looking for an extensible Open Source IM server, perhaps you sould look into Jabber. There are many clients for it and quite a few modules that provide a variety of functions. Jamin W. Collins ___ Licq-main mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/licq-main
Re: [Licq-main] Setting the default port
On Wed, 13 Feb 2002 08:07:04 -0800 Milosz Habiau [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm not the admin of this firewall so I'm not able to open or close any ports. This would appear to be a problem then. Many of my friends are behind the same firewall but they work with windows and use mirabilis icq 2000b. They don't have any problems to go online, and I'm sure they don't use the port 5190. It seems they connect to 64.12.25.41 on port 20. I highly doubt this. I've just checked a Windows 2000b client and it does indeed establish a connection to login.icq.com on port 5190 just as licq is trying to do. Additionally, cursory checks don't reveal anything listening on at 64.12.25.41 on port 20 for connections. Unless the firewall in question is altering destination ports on it's own, I don't see this working. Tell me please how to set another server and default port, how to tell licq not to connect to login.icq.com. None of this will much matter, unless the other server is listening on the specified port. Jamin W. Collins ___ Licq-main mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/licq-main
Re: [Licq-main] Setting the default port
On Wed, 13 Feb 2002 11:35:03 -0500 Dan Boger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wed, Feb 13, 2002 at 10:25:42AM -0600, Jamin W. Collins wrote: Many of my friends are behind the same firewall but they work with windows and use mirabilis icq 2000b. They don't have any problems to go online, and I'm sure they don't use the port 5190. It seems they connect to 64.12.25.41 on port 20. I highly doubt this. I believe login.icq.com has every port set up as an icq port - so you can point your client at any port, and it'll still work. It does appear that login.icq.com does listen on most every port (least ones I've tried). However, you must still point to a server that is listening. The IP address specified is not one of those returned by a DNS lookup of login.icq.com, thus it will not work. I do agree, licq should have a way to assign which port to connect on, as an easy way to bypass packet filtering firewalls. This is a bit of a touchy subject. The idea of a firewall is that it not be bypassed. Jamin W. Collins ___ Licq-main mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/licq-main
Re: [Licq-main] 1.1.0 release coming soon?
On Wed, 2002-02-13 at 17:06, Tim van Erven wrote: I think these could be pushed off for a while, maybe added an update release to follow. GnomeICU doesn't have support for these yet, either. The big thing would be to get a functional release out that provides support for most the new protocol. This would be highly benificial for those that don't normally run the CVS version. Why? I think releasing licq in its current state would only confuse people not on this list. At least if they get it from CVS they'll know they're running a devel version. If they're running an official release they'll start to expect things like all features working and all that. Mainly for two reasons: 1) contrary to popular believe not all linux users know how to use CVS and compile applications 2) the current actual release of Licq is broken (ICQ no longer supports use of that protocol version) Jamin W. Collins ___ Licq-main mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/licq-main
[Licq-main] Why not a combined icq communication library?
I've been wondering for a while now, why there isn't a central abstracted ICQ communication library for the various ICQ clients? It seems that it would make more sense for the various client developers to coordinate on a central abstracted library that they could all benefit from, rather than each working to implement redundant functionality separately. Then each project could link to the library in more generic ways and changes to the protocol would possibly only mean changes to the core library leaving clients largely unaffected. From what I've seen, LICQ and GnomeICU seem to be two of the most advanced ICQ clones available. Combined effort from these two projects would most likely result in a very useful core library. Has anything like this been looked at? Jamin W. Collins ___ Licq-main mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/licq-main
