Sockets - any ideas ?

Sockets - any ideas ?

Post by nick_buck.. » Tue, 13 Jun 2000 04:00:00



Hi All,

Bull EPC 400 cluster running AIX 4.3.1

I'm trying to rsh from a cluster node to the Power Console and I have
started getting the following message:

The socket name is already in use.

The system has worked fine for ages, but all of sudden ... no dice.

I get the same message regardless of the node where I issue the rsh.
From this I concluded that the Power Console was the source of the
problem.

I have rebooted the Power Console to try to "release" the socket, but
the message is still there.

Any ideas what might be causing this behaviour?

Regards to all,

Nick Buckley
Senior AIX Systems Administrator
NCM
Cardiff,
UK.


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.

 
 
 

Sockets - any ideas ?

Post by gbe.. » Tue, 13 Jun 2000 04:00:00


Another process has port 514 (shell - look in /etc/inetd.conf and
/etc/services).  Do a netstat -an | grep 514, if this shows a listener
on that port then you need to track down the offending program (see util
"lsof").  If there is nothing on that port then restart inetd and it
should pick it up this time.  Could be somthing grabs port 514 during
bootup.

Regards,
G.L. Bevan.



> Hi All,

> Bull EPC 400 cluster running AIX 4.3.1

> I'm trying to rsh from a cluster node to the Power Console and I have
> started getting the following message:

> The socket name is already in use.

> The system has worked fine for ages, but all of sudden ... no dice.

> I get the same message regardless of the node where I issue the rsh.
> From this I concluded that the Power Console was the source of the
> problem.

> I have rebooted the Power Console to try to "release" the socket, but
> the message is still there.

> Any ideas what might be causing this behaviour?

> Regards to all,

> Nick Buckley
> Senior AIX Systems Administrator
> NCM
> Cardiff,
> UK.


> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Before you buy.

Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.

 
 
 

1. Allow binding to sockets < 1024 -- good idea?



No, it is not a good idea but, no, you are not crazy.  Using ports with
specific numbers to indicate trust has always been a damn-fool idea,
but unfortunately that is the way things are.  If you implement your
code, then you will introduce a lot of security exposures (though no
more than allowing users to run Windows 95).

But you can perfectly well use specified port numbers ABOVE 1024.
Most WWW proxy servers use 8080, at least when being tested.

Nick Maclaren,
University of Cambridge Computer Laboratory,
New Museums Site, Pembroke Street, Cambridge CB2 3QG, England.

Tel.:  +44 1223 334761    Fax:  +44 1223 334679

2. Dial in problems with SCO 5.0.4

3. unixbench result for kernel 2.5.62.

4. multi-threaded server dies when doing socket send - any idea why ?

5. x problem on armada 110

6. Allow binding to sockets < 1024 -- good idea?

7. vcd, .dat files and isofs problem

8. Poor socket performance...any ideas?

9. any ideas? good idea...

10. Sockets sockets and more sockets

11. Socket, Socket, whose got the socket?

12. Socket, socket, who's got the socket?