I too have been wondering about this.
Seems like it would be a tad faster to have it running standalone. It
will also use some resources all the time as opposed to inetd starting
it, sending it the query and letting it shut down. At least if my
understanding of inetd is correct. I don't know what the frequency of
calls to auth would have to be before the overhead of starting and
stoping it becomes a greater load than having it running all the time.
Is there any logging or other security features gained from using inetd
with auth?
Since I have been lurking I have been wondering which processes use
auth? Surely not every connection sends an auth request, but I don't
know in the real world even how often it is used. What would happen if
it was not running?
Bret
Charles Galpin wrote:
>
> Thanks Gordon!
>
> Boy, right in front of my nose too. I knew it was going to be an easy
> fix.
>
> However, two things.
>
> 1. Like Gustav, I would like to know which is better
> 2. I did not have identd selected in ntsysv, and am quite sure I didn't
> start it mayself. So how did it get started? I'm thinking linuxconf is
> trying to do it. If this is true, then maybe the simplest route is to run
> it standalone and remove from inetd.conf. Anyone?
>
> On Mon, 13 Mar 2000, Gordon Messmer wrote:
>
> > Charles Galpin wrote:
> > > Mar 13 22:49:24 server inetd[10663]: auth/tcp: bind: Address already in
> > > use
> > > Mar 13 22:59:24 server inetd[10663]: auth/tcp: bind: Address already in
> > > use
> > >
> > > I have named setup to run at boot time in ntsysv.
> >
> > hehehe... The "bind" in the syslog is referring to the bind() system
> > call, not the BIND software :)
> >
> > You're getting the error because you're trying to run identd (auth
> > service) as a standalone daemon _AND_ through inetd. Turn one of them
> > off.
>
> --
> To unsubscribe: mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe"
> as the Subject.
--
To unsubscribe: mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe"
as the Subject.
