On Mon, 3 Jun 2002 at 8:39am, Rebecca Pakish wrote
> [root@ants root]# amrecover uadaily
> AMRECOVER Version 2.4.2p2. Contacting server on slaw.unterlaw.com ...
> amrecover: cannot connect to slaw.unterlaw.com: Connection refused
>
> ***amrecover debut says:
> amrecover: debug 1 pid 8047 ruid 0
>That's not the file you're looking for. I believe it's
>/etc/xinetd.d/amandaidx that allows amrecover to work remotely.
I don't have that file...I have a file /etc/xinetd.d/amanda that looks like
this...
service amanda
{
protocol= udp
socket_type = dgram
wait
On Mon, 3 Jun 2002 at 9:02am, Rebecca Pakish wrote
> >That's not the file you're looking for. I believe it's
> >/etc/xinetd.d/amandaidx that allows amrecover to work remotely.
>
> I don't have that file...I have a file /etc/xinetd.d/amanda that looks like
> this...
Ah, yes, that should work
Can you telnet to each of thes ports?
$ telent amandaix (use 'quit' to exit)
$ telnet amidxtape ('quit' or CR to exit)
If not, reload xinetd and check the messages file for any errors.
Also make sure that ipchains or iptables is not filtering the port.
On Mon, 3 Jun 2002, Rebecca Pakish wrote
Joshua Baker-LePain wrote:
> On Mon, 3 Jun 2002 at 8:39am, Rebecca Pakish wrote
>
>
>>[root@ants root]# amrecover uadaily
>>AMRECOVER Version 2.4.2p2. Contacting server on slaw.unterlaw.com ...
>>amrecover: cannot connect to slaw.unterlaw.com: Connection refused
>>
>>***amrecover debut says:
>>
>I've got wait=no there, but I don't know that that is your issue.
There's a reason I have wait=yes, but for the life of me I can't remember
what it is.
>What's the output of 'chkconfig --list'?
[root@slaw etc]# chkconfig --list
keytable0:off 1:on2:on3:on4:on5:on6:
On Mon, 3 Jun 2002 at 9:38am, Rebecca Pakish wrote
> xinetd based services:
> chargen-udp:off
> chargen:off
> daytime-udp:off
> daytime:off
> echo-udp: off
> echo: off
> time-udp: off
> time: o
>There's your problem -- the service isn't running. Maybe an xinetd
>upgrade changed the functionality such that the three services in one
>file method doesn't work any longer. In any case, break your
>/etc/xinetd.d/amanda file into three files -- amanda, amandaidx, and
>amidxtape -- and res
>Can you telnet to each of thes ports?
>$ telent amandaix (use 'quit' to exit)
[root@slaw etc]# telnet slaw.unterlaw.com amandaidx
Trying 10.1.7.23...
telnet: connect to address 10.1.7.23: Connection refused
>$ telnet amidxtape ('quit' or CR to exit)
[root@slaw etc]# telnet slaw.unterlaw.com
On Mon, 3 Jun 2002, Joshua Baker-LePain wrote:
- On Mon, 3 Jun 2002 at 9:38am, Rebecca Pakish wrote
-
- > xinetd based services:
- > chargen-udp:off
- > chargen:off
- > daytime-udp:off
- > daytime:off
- > echo-udp: off
- >
>>If not, reload xinetd and check the messages file for any errors.
>>Also make sure that ipchains or iptables is not filtering the port.
>I don't see where they are...
That was very unclear of me...I meant I don't see where they are filtering
the port. (There I go having half the conversation in
>I'm not so sure. I have a similar setup -- all three in one file --
>and chkconfig reports the same thing to me. However, amrecover works
>fine for me.
I've been using the "one-file method" for some time now and it's always
worked for me, as well. That's what's so confusing about this...it's a
On Mon, Jun 03, 2002 at 10:15:34AM -0500, Rebecca Pakish wrote:
> >Can you telnet to each of thes ports?
>
> >$ telent amandaix (use 'quit' to exit)
>
> [root@slaw etc]# telnet slaw.unterlaw.com amandaidx
> Trying 10.1.7.23...
> telnet: connect to address 10.1.7.23: Connection refused
>
Not s
On Mon, 3 Jun 2002, Rebecca Pakish wrote:
- >Can you telnet to each of thes ports?
-
- >$ telent amandaix (use 'quit' to exit)
-
- [root@slaw etc]# telnet slaw.unterlaw.com amandaidx
- Trying 10.1.7.23...
- telnet: connect to address 10.1.7.23: Connection refused
This is definitly a problem.
>Do you have nmap ? Try:
>
># nmap -sT -p 10082 chena
[root@slaw etc]# nmap -sT -p 10082 slaw.unterlaw.com
Starting nmap V. 2.54BETA22 ( www.insecure.org/nmap/ )
The 1 scanned port on slaw.unterlaw.com (10.1.7.23) is: closed
Nmap run completed -- 1 IP address (1 host up) scanned in 1 second
On Mon, 3 Jun 2002 at 2:08pm, Rebecca Pakish wrote
> Where the heck is 10082/tcp amandaidx???
Try this. Do '/etc/init.d/xinetd restart'. Then, look in
/var/log/messages for the messages from xinetd, ending with a line like
this:
Jun 3 15:27:23 $HOST xinetd[29922]: Started wor
>Try this. Do '/etc/init.d/xinetd restart'. Then, look in
>/var/log/messages for the messages from xinetd, ending with a line like
>this:
[root@slaw amanda]# service xinetd restart
Stopping xinetd: [ OK ]
Starting xinetd: [ OK ]
[root@slaw amanda]# tail -n 5 /var/log/messages
Jun 3 14:38
On Mon, 3 Jun 2002, Rebecca Pakish wrote:
- >Do you have nmap ? Try:
- >
- ># nmap -sT -p 10082 chena
-
- [root@slaw etc]# nmap -sT -p 10082 slaw.unterlaw.com
-
- Starting nmap V. 2.54BETA22 ( www.insecure.org/nmap/ )
- The 1 scanned port on slaw.unterlaw.com (10.1.7.23) is: closed
-
- Nmap
Summation:
amandaidx is looping and looping and looping until xinetd can't take it any
more and kills it.
After a fresh restart of xinetd, nmap reveals:
[root@slaw amanda]# nmap slaw.unterlaw.com
Starting nmap V. 2.54BETA22 ( www.insecure.org/nmap/ )
Interesting ports on slaw.unterlaw.com (10.1.
Try changing this and restarting xinetd. See if the problem continues.
- service amandaidx
- {
- protocol= tcp
- socket_type = stream
- wait= yes
- user= amanda
- group = disk
- groups = yes
-
When you change the configuration to nowait ( wait = no ) for amandaidx,
you should see this problem end.
On Mon, 2002-06-03 at 15:59, Rebecca Pakish wrote:
> Summation:
> amandaidx is looping and looping and looping until xinetd can't take it any
> more and kills it.
>
> After a fresh restart
You're right, that worked.
Joshua, I should have tried that sooner when you suggested it. But I'm
racking my notes trying to remember why I changed that to yes in the first
place. I know I just used this configuration to recover a file a couple of
months ago and the wait=yes was in place then!!
On Mon, Jun 03, 2002 at 04:16:11PM -0500, Rebecca Pakish wrote:
> You're right, that worked.
>
> Joshua, I should have tried that sooner when you suggested it. But I'm
> racking my notes trying to remember why I changed that to yes in the first
> place. I know I just used this configuration to re
23 matches
Mail list logo
