Are you sure? In wich scenario? I have a pdc on samba and when i check
the "netstat" i have a lot of open conections with the 445 port on the
smbd binary.
Ed Kasky wrote:
I went around and around with this issue for months replacing cables,
switches and nics on a couple of machines all to no avail. I played
around with something I found in the archives:
http://lists.samba.org/archive/samba/2004-April/084048.html
Using iptables to drop port 445, I eliminated the errors. I have not
seen the error return nor experienced any other negative impact on
performance.
Ed
At 08:36 AM Monday, 4/18/2005, Dimitri Yioulos wrote -=>
I've also seen a post somewhere (forgive, don't remember where
"somewhere is)
suggesting that "smb ports = 445" would corect this issue. So, which
is it,
139 or 445?
Dimitri
On Monday 18 April 2005 05:55 am, Fabian Arrotin wrote:
> I've already seen this in my logs...
> A little search on Google shows me that Windows XP client try try to
> connect to port 139 and 445 in parallel and drop the connection to
port
> 139 if the connect to 445 is successful.
> In fact, no one was complaining about real network connection loss ...
> More informations here : http://www.linuxaa.com/ftopic6568.html
> Hope this helps.
>
> On Mon, 2005-04-18 at 03:58 -0300, Guido Lorenzutti wrote:
> > I get this error message "getpeername failed. Error was Transport
> > endpoint is not connected" in my logs very often. Any ideas how
to fix
> > it?
> >
> > Tnxs in advance
--
To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the
instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
Ed Kasky
~~~~~~~~~
Randomly Generated Quote (194 of 477):
"Things may come to those who wait, but only the things
left by those who hustle." - Abraham Lincoln
--
To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the
instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
