Re: RE :Cu-SeeMe and the LAN

Robert D Prociak (
Tue, 28 Jul 1998 15:26:29 -0400

-----Original Message-----
From: Brian Godette <>
To: <>
Date: Tuesday, July 28, 1998 2:54 PM
Subject: Re: RE :Cu-SeeMe and the LAN

>At 12:30 PM 7/28/98 -0400, you wrote:
>>On Mon, 27 Jul 1998, Robert wrote:
>>>He just happened to be online to ICQ whenever I got to this. :)
>>>Here's what he said:
>>>"Gee, I usually sell that information at $1000/pop...<g> But seriously,
>>>really depends on the Proxy configuration. If you don't have access
>>>control enabled, then it's just a simple matter of modifying the
>>>mspclnt.ini file (Entries to follow). If you have access control enabled,
>>>then you need to setup a "cu-seeme" protocol definition on the server AND
>>>modify the mspclnt.ini file.
>>>Perhaps that will mean much more to you than it does to me. It only works
>>>with Enhanced CU.
>>Now this is what I want ! Unfortunately just changing the port map
>>in the client ini probably will not get Cu-SeeMe to work on the Msproxy
>>server past the point that the client can connect to the server, see the
>>conference list and chose a conference. Unfortunately I doubt you could
>>even the MOTD to come up let alone receive vidio,but I'm willing to try
>>extensive test and see what happens. It would be nice to get it to work.
>>your friend actually get cu to connect to a reflector and send video?
>Ok, this is how this works, and only with WP ECU... Doing the above allows
>the TCP connection to go thru msproxy but is masqueraded as the world
>visable IP address of the proxy server, the client then gets its own
>address from getsockname() off the connected socket (which is at that point
>the world visable IP address of the proxy server). This means that only
>*one* system inside the proxy can connect to an external source

Thank you for the clarification Brian.
In that case you can only get one client at a time like Linux. But that is
one more strategy that can be used to get more connectivity with cu.

I wonder if you would like to comment on the statement from Jason that
without a HOST command, with Eref it binds to ALL
interfaces. WITH a HOST command, it binds to one and only one interface? I
still never got it to work although I think it can some how.

Robert Prociak