| Author | Message | Time |
|---|---|---|
| Topaz | Thanks, including function subs and stuff wouldn't hurt either. | September 5, 2005, 5:21 AM |
| PaiD | um there is a 'Search' feature on the forum. This has been covered over and over | September 5, 2005, 5:29 AM |
| R.a.B.B.i.T | Protocols generally don't have function subs. | September 5, 2005, 4:34 PM |
| KkBlazekK | Actually, by protocol he means, Give me all the code to do it, in such a way I can easily insert it into my already leached project. (Rough translation) | September 5, 2005, 7:00 PM |
| Topaz | We're rather negative today, aren't we? You also have poor interpretation skills. | September 5, 2005, 10:24 PM |
| UserLoser. | September 5, 2005, 11:06 PM | |
| Myndfyr | [quote author=daRktYpE link=topic=12714.msg126991#msg126991 date=1125959064] We're rather negative today, aren't we? You also have poor interpretation skills. [/quote] Topaz, I would figure you would know that most of us would direct you to Google to search for "SOCKS protocol specification." While that didn't absolutely give me a term (I didn't check for sure), but the first search result specified RFC 1928, which -- as it happens -- is SOCKS 5. All of this, including posting this thorough and (hopefully somewhat) condescending post took me < 2 minutes. | September 6, 2005, 7:30 AM |