Coud we add support to http(s) and sock5(h) proxy

[hawktang]

Coud we add support to http(s) and sock5(h) proxy

[ozeranskii]

Hi, thanks for the idea. I think it's really not bad and could help with the analysis. I'll think about it.

[ozeranskii]

#28

[ozeranskii]

Resolved in #29

[hawktang]

Thank u for ur kindness. Sorry my bad, it might impossible to tracing the behavior of proxy. I love httptap u made Peter Ze TANG (汤赜)

…

On Thu, Oct 30, 2025 at 06:28 Sergei Ozeranskii ***@***.***> wrote: Closed #25 <#25> as resolved. — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#25>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAPJIZZIX2Q2HP26OJA2D4332E5QNAVCNFSM6AAAAACKQO7TI2VHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV45UABFIRUXGY3VONZWS33OIV3GK3TUHI5E433UNFTGSY3BORUW63R3GIZDEOBRGAZA> . You are receiving this because you authored the thread.Message ID: ***@***.*** com>

[ozeranskii]

Please clarify what you mean by "it might be impossible to trace the
behavior of proxy."

[hawktang]

Proxy behavior might be quite complex. Like dns routining and mult jump with different protocol Peter Ze TANG (汤赜)

…

On Thu, Oct 30, 2025 at 06:49 Sergei Ozeranskii ***@***.***> wrote: Please clarify what you mean by "it might be impossible to trace the behavior of proxy." — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#25 (reply in thread)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAPJIZ44M2WTEFSD5NZWZFL32FAAVAVCNFSM6AAAAACKQO7TI2VHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43URDJONRXK43TNFXW4Q3PNVWWK3TUHMYTIOBSGA3TSMQ> . You are receiving this because you authored the thread.Message ID: ***@***.***>