Re: [Bacula-users] Packet size too big (NOT a version mismatch)

On Wed, Jan 5, 2022 at 6:53 AM Graham Sparks wrote: > I've just checked the "Privacy" screen and I actually have "bacula-fd", > "bacula", "bconsole" AND "sh" in the Full Disk Access list. I probably > shouldn't have "sh" in that list. That might actually be worse than your > suggestion to run

Re: [Bacula-users] Packet size too big (NOT a version mismatch)

Brodbeck Sent: 05 January 2022 00:19 To: Graham Sparks Cc: bacula-users Subject: Re: [Bacula-users] Packet size too big (NOT a version mismatch) On Tue, Jan 4, 2022 at 4:56 AM Graham Sparks mailto:g...@hotmail.co.uk>> wrote: I've personally not run in to problems with System Integrity Pro

Re: [Bacula-users] Packet size too big (NOT a version mismatch)

On 1/4/22 17:18, Stephen Thompson wrote: > > Thanks Bill, you nailed it. > > 04-Jan-2022 16:13:52 FD: backup.c:1356-884680 > fname=/Users/USER/Library/Containers/com.apple.Safari.CacheDeleteExtension > snap=/Users/USER/Library/Containers/com.apple.Safari.CacheDeleteExtension >

Re: [Bacula-users] Packet size too big (NOT a version mismatch)

On Tue, Jan 4, 2022 at 4:56 AM Graham Sparks wrote: > I've personally not run in to problems with System Integrity Protection, > although I do give the bacula-fd executable "Full Disk" permissions. > What I find is bacula-fd is unable to back up files in users Desktop, Documents, etc. folders

Re: [Bacula-users] Packet size too big (NOT a version mismatch)

Thanks Bill, you nailed it. 04-Jan-2022 16:13:52 FD: backup.c:1356-884680 fname=/Users/USER/Library/Containers/com.apple.Safari.CacheDeleteExtension snap=/Users/USER/Library/Containers/com.apple.Safari.CacheDeleteExtension

Re: [Bacula-users] Packet size too big (NOT a version mismatch)

Machine do add attributes to files). Many thanks to Bill for showing how additional debugging can be used too.  I'm sure that will come in handy! -- Graham Sparks From: Graham Sparks Sent: 04 January 2022 19:55 To: bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: [Bacula-users] Packet size too big

Re: [Bacula-users] Packet size too big (NOT a version mismatch)

cula-users@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: [Bacula-users] Packet size too big (NOT a version mismatch)   However, even just backing up /Users results in... 04-Jan 11:31 SD JobId 88: Fatal error: bsock.c:530 Packet size=1387166 too big from "client:1.2.3.4:9103". Maximum permitted 100. Te

Re: [Bacula-users] Packet size too big (NOT a version mismatch)

On 1/4/22 12:26, Stephen Thompson wrote: > > Yes, backing up a single file on my problem hosts does succeed. > > H... > > Stephen Hello Stephen, This issue looked familiar to me, so I checked internally and I think I found something. I am pretty sure that this is an issue due to the larger

Re: [Bacula-users] Packet size too big (NOT a version mismatch)

Thanks. I have large file support off, though I am not sure that's intentional. I will double check that. On 1/4/22 11:55 AM, Graham Sparks wrote: I'm afraid I don't enable encryption in my backup jobs (I know I should ) so I don't know if that causes an issue. I'll have a quick look

Re: [Bacula-users] Packet size too big (NOT a version mismatch)

I do give the bacula-fd executable "Full Disk" permissions. Thanks. -- Graham Sparks From: David Brodbeck Sent: 03 January 2022 18:36 Cc: bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net < bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net> Subject: Re: [Bacula-users] Packet size too big (NOT a version

Re: [Bacula-users] Packet size too big (NOT a version mismatch)

Graham, Thanks. I am confident that it's not a networking issue (at least one external to the Macs). The new problem only shows on hosts that have been updated to Big Sur or Monterey (with or without rebuilt client, both 9x and 11s). High Sierra and earlier hosts never yield the 'too

Re: [Bacula-users] Packet size too big (NOT a version mismatch)

n, although I do give the bacula-fd executable "Full Disk" permissions. Thanks. -- Graham Sparks From: David Brodbeck Sent: 03 January 2022 18:36 Cc: bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net < bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net> Subject: Re: [Bacula-users] Packet size too big (NOT a

Re: [Bacula-users] Packet size too big (NOT a version mismatch)

ula-users@lists.sourceforge.net < bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net> Subject: Re: [Bacula-users] Packet size too big (NOT a version mismatch) I'm curious if anyone has moved away from Bacula on macOS and what alternatives they're using. Even before this, it was getting more and more awkward t

Re: [Bacula-users] Packet size too big (NOT a version mismatch)

ot > >> for good reason---just laziness). Both v9 and v11 clients were compiled > >> from source (setting the linker flags to "-framework CoreFoundation" as > >> already suggested). > >> > >> I've personally not run in to problems with System Integri

Re: [Bacula-users] Packet size too big (NOT a version mismatch)

g Mac user, I'm afraid. It seems that just owning a Mac automatically makes one the "Mac guy" . Thanks. -- Graham Sparks From: Stephen Thompson Sent: 04 January 2022 16:13 To: Graham Sparks Cc: bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: [Bacula-users] Packet size too big (

Re: [Bacula-users] Packet size too big (NOT a version mismatch)

ry 2022 18:36 Cc: bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: [Bacula-users] Packet size too big (NOT a version mismatch)   I'm curious if anyone has moved away from Bacula on macOS and what alternatives they're using. Even before this, it was getting more and more awkward to set up -- bacula rea

Re: [Bacula-users] Packet size too big (NOT a version mismatch)

y suggested). >> >> I've personally not run in to problems with System Integrity Protection, >> although I do give the bacula-fd executable "Full Disk" permissions. >> >> Thanks. >> -- >> Graham Sparks >> >> >> >> From: David B

Re: [Bacula-users] Packet size too big (NOT a version mismatch)

> already suggested). > > I've personally not run in to problems with System Integrity Protection, > although I do give the bacula-fd executable "Full Disk" permissions. > > Thanks. > -- > Graham Sparks > > > > From: David Brodbeck > Sent: 03 January 20

Re: [Bacula-users] Packet size too big (NOT a version mismatch)

ry 2022 18:36 Cc: bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: [Bacula-users] Packet size too big (NOT a version mismatch)   I'm curious if anyone has moved away from Bacula on macOS and what alternatives they're using. Even before this, it was getting more and more awkward to set up -- bacula rea

Re: [Bacula-users] Packet size too big (NOT a version mismatch)

I'm curious if anyone has moved away from Bacula on macOS and what alternatives they're using. Even before this, it was getting more and more awkward to set up -- bacula really doesn't play well with SIP, for example, and running "csrutil disable" on every system is not a security best practice.

Re: [Bacula-users] Packet size too big (NOT a version mismatch)

Disappointing... I am having the same issue on BigSur with the 11.0.5 release as I had with 9x. 08-Dec 15:42 SD JobId 878266: Fatal error: bsock.c:530 Packet size=1387166 too big from "client:1.2.3.4:8103". Maximum permitted 100. Terminating connection. Setting 'Maximum Network Buffer

Re: [Bacula-users] Packet size too big (NOT a version mismatch)

Not sure if this is correct, but I've been able to at least compile bacula client 11.0.5 on Big Sur by doing before configure step: LDFLAGS='-framework CoreFoundation' We'll see next up whether it runs and whether it exhibits the issue seen under Big Sur for 9x client. Stephen On Tue, Nov 23,

Re: [Bacula-users] Packet size too big (NOT a version mismatch)

Josh, Thanks for the tip. That did not appear to be the cause of this issue, though perhaps it will fix a yet to be found issue that I would have run into after I get past this compilation error. Stephen On Mon, Nov 22, 2021 at 9:22 AM Josh Fisher wrote: > > On 11/22/21 10:46, Stephen

Re: [Bacula-users] Packet size too big (NOT a version mismatch)

On 11/22/21 10:46, Stephen Thompson wrote: All, I too was having the issue with running a 9x client on Big Sur.  I've tried compiling 11.0.5 but have not found my way past: This might be due to a libtool.m4 bug having to do with MacOS changing the major Darwin version from 19.x to 20.x.

Re: [Bacula-users] Packet size too big (NOT a version mismatch)

All, I too was having the issue with running a 9x client on Big Sur. I've tried compiling 11.0.5 but have not found my way past: Linking bacula-fd ... /Users/bacula/src/bacula-11.0.5-CLIENT.MAC/libtool --silent --tag=CXX --mode=link /usr/bin/g++ -L../lib -L../findlib -o bacula-fd filed.o

Re: [Bacula-users] Packet size too big (NOT a version mismatch)

Hello, On 11/15/21 21:46, David Brodbeck wrote: To do that I'd have to upgrade the director and the storage first, right? (Director can't be an earlier version than the FD, and the SD must have the same version as the director.) In general yes, the code is designed to support Old FDs but can

Re: [Bacula-users] Packet size too big (NOT a version mismatch)

To do that I'd have to upgrade the director and the storage first, right? (Director can't be an earlier version than the FD, and the SD must have the same version as the director.) On Mon, Nov 15, 2021 at 12:16 AM Eric Bollengier via Bacula-users < bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net> wrote: >

Re: [Bacula-users] Packet size too big (NOT a version mismatch)

Hello David, On 11/12/21 23:14, David Brodbeck wrote: I'm getting this error trying to back up a macOS client. I recently re-installed bacula from macports on this client, after an upgrade to macOS Big Sur. | russell.math.ucsb.edu-sd JobId 80985: Fatal error: bsock.c:520 Packet size=1387166

Re: [Bacula-users] Packet size too big (NOT a version mismatch)

On Fri, Nov 12, 2021 at 3:16 PM Heitor Faria wrote: > Hello They, > > Are all the NICs using the same MTU? > Yes, all have an MTU of 1500. > Have you checked for network layer problems? > None of the machines involved show any network errors. The network in between is out of my hands, but it's

Re: [Bacula-users] Packet size too big (NOT a version mismatch)

David, Sorry I can't offer a solution, but I can report that am I getting the same error when trying to run bacula-fd 9.x on Big Sur (hand compiled). I've tried the other suggestion of Maximum Network Buffer Size to no avail. Stephen On 11/12/21 2:14 PM, David Brodbeck wrote: I'm

Re: [Bacula-users] Packet size too big (NOT a version mismatch)

Hello They, Are all the NICs using the same MTU? Have you checked for network layer problems? I have no clue regarding your error, but I would try to limit the packet size with the following FD directive: Maximum Network Buffer Size =  Rgds. -- MSc Heitor Faria (Miami/USA) CEO Bacula LatAm

[Bacula-users] Packet size too big (NOT a version mismatch)

I'm getting this error trying to back up a macOS client. I recently re-installed bacula from macports on this client, after an upgrade to macOS Big Sur. | russell.math.ucsb.edu-sd JobId 80985: Fatal error: bsock.c:520 Packet size=1387166 too big from "client:128.111.88.29:62571". Maximum

Re: [Bacula-users] Packet Size too big from client

On 05/01/2018 04:58 PM, Alan Li wrote: > Hello Bacula Users: > > We have a Bacula backup server on a Debian 9 machine with both bacula-director > and bacula-fd version 7.4.4. It backs up other Debian hosts that have > bacula-fd version 7.4.4 just fine. Today we bring up another Debian host that >

[Bacula-users] Packet Size too big from client

Hello Bacula Users: We have a Bacula backup server on a Debian 9 machine with both bacula-director and bacula-fd version 7.4.4. It backs up other Debian hosts that have bacula-fd version 7.4.4 just fine. Today we bring up another Debian host that runs bacula-fd version 9.0.7 and when we try

Re: [Bacula-users] Packet size too big errors

Hmm.  The fact that the error message is reported with JobId 113 is actually a bug in new code that I implemented in version 9.0.x.  I didn't notice it in my first response, so must admit that yes it is confusing.  The reason for this problem is that error messages are reported by any

Re: [Bacula-users] Packet size too big errors

Hello, The error in question is simply because some program other than one furnished by Bacula or using the Bacula protocol has tried to connect to Bacula.  Bacula reports that and in my view what is reports is very clear (at least for a technical person). To alleviate your concerns, I

Re: [Bacula-users] Packet size too big errors

> On Mon, 5 Mar 2018 22:19:14 +, Shawn Rappaport said: > Content-ID: > > On 3/5/18, 2:37 PM, "Josip Deanovic" wrote: > > Josip DeanovicOn Monday 2018-03-05 22:23:08 wrote: > > On Monday

Re: [Bacula-users] Packet size too big errors

On Monday 2018-03-05 22:19:14 Shawn Rappaport wrote: > On 3/5/18, 2:37 PM, "Josip Deanovic" wrote: > > Actually Shawn didn't say that the backup failed. > > He just said that when he manually started the backup job the next > > day, it finished successfully, without

Re: [Bacula-users] Packet size too big errors

On 3/5/18, 2:37 PM, "Josip Deanovic" wrote: Josip DeanovicOn Monday 2018-03-05 22:23:08 wrote: > On Monday 2018-03-05 14:38:07 Dimitri Maziuk wrote: > > On 03/05/2018 02:27 PM, Josip Deanovic wrote: > > > On Monday 2018-03-05 14:16:34 Dimitri Maziuk

Re: [Bacula-users] Packet size too big errors

On 03/05/2018 03:35 PM, Josip Deanovic wrote: > Shawn, can you confirm that both backups were successfully completed? Yes, if an unsuccessful connection attempt kills a running backup, that would be unpleasant. The log doesn't look like it, though, it seems to log a "jobid 0" for just the

Re: [Bacula-users] Packet size too big errors

Josip DeanovicOn Monday 2018-03-05 22:23:08 wrote: > On Monday 2018-03-05 14:38:07 Dimitri Maziuk wrote: > > On 03/05/2018 02:27 PM, Josip Deanovic wrote: > > > On Monday 2018-03-05 14:16:34 Dimitri Maziuk wrote: > > >> That's not an error if a security op's workstation is also a backup > > >>

Re: [Bacula-users] Packet size too big errors

On Monday 2018-03-05 14:38:07 Dimitri Maziuk wrote: > On 03/05/2018 02:27 PM, Josip Deanovic wrote: > > On Monday 2018-03-05 14:16:34 Dimitri Maziuk wrote: > >> That's not an error if a security op's workstation is also a backup > >> client. > > > > Yes, and I would like to know if that was the

Re: [Bacula-users] Packet size too big errors

On Monday 2018-03-05 19:41:45 Shawn Rappaport wrote: > No, 10.32.12.18 is not the IP of the client to be backed up. I’m > guessing that was the IP of the Nessus scanner. In that case everything is ok except I don't understand why the backup failed because some other server tried to open a

Re: [Bacula-users] Packet size too big errors

On 03/05/2018 02:27 PM, Josip Deanovic wrote: > On Monday 2018-03-05 14:16:34 Dimitri Maziuk wrote: >> That's not an error if a security op's workstation is also a backup >> client. > > Yes, and I would like to know if that was the case. I tend to have a blanket iptables rule allowing local

Re: [Bacula-users] Packet size too big errors

On Monday 2018-03-05 14:16:34 Dimitri Maziuk wrote: > On 03/05/2018 12:45 PM, Josip Deanovic wrote: > > The question is: is the IP 10.32.12.18 the IP of the client that had > > to be backed up? > > > > > > > > If yes then the vulnerability scan overtook the client's IP. > > That's not an error

Re: [Bacula-users] Packet size too big errors

On 03/05/2018 12:45 PM, Josip Deanovic wrote: > The question is: is the IP 10.32.12.18 the IP of the client that had > to be backed up? > > If yes then the vulnerability scan overtook the client's IP. That's not an error if a security op's workstation is also a backup client. -- Dimitri

Re: [Bacula-users] Packet size too big errors

No, 10.32.12.18 is not the IP of the client to be backed up. I’m guessing that was the IP of the Nessus scanner. --Shawn On 3/5/18, 11:48 AM, "Josip Deanovic" wrote: On Monday 2018-03-05 12:32:50 Dimitri Maziuk wrote: > On 03/05/2018 12:00 PM, Josip

Re: [Bacula-users] Packet size too big errors

No, I don’t have that configured on my Bacula server. --Shawn On 3/5/18, 11:02 AM, "Josip Deanovic" wrote: On Monday 2018-03-05 17:08:45 Shawn Rappaport wrote: > Thank you, Patti! You were correct. It turns out there was a > vulnerability scan run

Re: [Bacula-users] Packet size too big errors

On Monday 2018-03-05 12:32:50 Dimitri Maziuk wrote: > On 03/05/2018 12:00 PM, Josip Deanovic wrote: > > On Monday 2018-03-05 17:08:45 Shawn Rappaport wrote: > >> Thank you, Patti! You were correct. It turns out there was a > >> vulnerability scan run against that network at that time. > > > > Did

Re: [Bacula-users] Packet size too big errors

On 03/05/2018 12:00 PM, Josip Deanovic wrote: > On Monday 2018-03-05 17:08:45 Shawn Rappaport wrote: >> Thank you, Patti! You were correct. It turns out there was a >> vulnerability scan run against that network at that time. > > Did you configure your bacula to use SSL/TLS connection? > I wonder

Re: [Bacula-users] Packet size too big errors

On Monday 2018-03-05 17:08:45 Shawn Rappaport wrote: > Thank you, Patti! You were correct. It turns out there was a > vulnerability scan run against that network at that time. Did you configure your bacula to use SSL/TLS connection? I wonder if that would help in your case. -- Josip Deanovic

Re: [Bacula-users] Packet size too big errors

users@lists.sourceforge.net" <bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net> Subject: Re: [Bacula-users] Packet size too big errors Not from your backup. You have something on the network that is scanning the server your director is running on. Probably Nessus. I’m sure the client IP is a clue.

Re: [Bacula-users] Packet size too big errors

acula-users@lists.sourceforge.net" <bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net> Subject: [Bacula-users] Packet size too big errors I’m running Bacula 9.0.6 on CentOS 7.3. Today I received the following errors when my catalog was backing up: 03-Mar 12:27 xbacdirector01-lv.internal.shutterfly.com-dir: ERROR

[Bacula-users] Packet size too big errors

I’m running Bacula 9.0.6 on CentOS 7.3. Today I received the following errors when my catalog was backing up: 03-Mar 12:27 xbacdirector01-lv.internal.shutterfly.com-dir: ERROR in authenticate.c:330 UA Hello from client:10.32.12.18:9101 is invalid. Len=0 03-Mar 12:27

Re: [Bacula-users] Packet size too big from client

This is a very frequently problem if you have a damaged network card. Best regards, Ana On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 2:56 PM, Kern Sibbald wrote: > Many Windows machines do not support (i.e. get errors) network buffer > sizes greater than 32K. This is likely the case for you.

Re: [Bacula-users] Packet size too big from client

Hello, 2015-12-17 19:33 GMT+01:00 Gilberto Nunes : > 17-Dec 16:30 storage-global-sd: ERROR in bget_msg.c:95 bget_msg: unknown > signal -1827994119 > 17-Dec 16:30 storage-global-sd JobId 1003: Fatal error: bsock.c:570 Packet > size=2102457799 too big from

Re: [Bacula-users] Packet size too big from client

Hello I change bacula to other server, and works perfectly! Thank you! 2015-12-18 7:52 GMT-02:00 Radosław Korzeniewski : > Hello, > > 2015-12-17 19:33 GMT+01:00 Gilberto Nunes : > >> 17-Dec 16:30 storage-global-sd: ERROR in bget_msg.c:95

Re: [Bacula-users] Packet size too big from client

Many Windows machines do not support (i.e. get errors) network buffer sizes greater than 32K.  This is likely the case for you.   The manual probably explains this a bit more.  The problem can be resolved (if it is this particular problem) by getting a better

[Bacula-users] Packet size too big from client

Hello bacula users... Suddenly, bacula return me this error: Packet size too big from client This error happens just from one server. The server is Linux Debian 64 bits. I already down firewall for a while, just to check... No effect. Change the network interface and cable, to isolate

Re: [Bacula-users] Packet size too big from client

> hello bacula users... > Suddenly, bacula return me this error: > Packet size too big from client > This error happens just from one server. > The server is Linux Debian 64 bits. > I already down firewall for a while, just to check... No effect. > Change the network interface and cable,

Re: [Bacula-users] Packet size too big from client

Well... If the situation was that, I agreed with you, but that is not the case I have several clients... And one of them the bacula client is the exactly same version of bacula directory: 5.2.6... And I get the exactly the same error 2015-12-17 15:12 GMT-02:00 Heitor Faria

Re: [Bacula-users] Packet size too big from client

I will try update bacula to 7.2... Somebody know where I can find deb package for Debian?? Thanks a lot 2015-12-17 15:20 GMT-02:00 Gilberto Nunes : > Well... > If the situation was that, I agreed with you, but that is not the case > I have several clients... >

Re: [Bacula-users] Packet size too big from client

Oh boy! I change bacula version to 7.2.0, set net keepalive to 60, set Spool Size, like this Maximum Spool Size = 500G Maximum Block Size = 1032192 Maximum Network Buffer Size = 65536 Spool Directory = /var/spool/bacula in bacula-sd.conf, but still get the error bellow: 17-Dec 16:30

Re: [Bacula-users] Packet size too big from client

Hi again I note that this trouble occurs just with Incremental backups. I turn back to my old configuration with Diff backups and everythins to be ok... I will go forward to Diff's backups... Thanks 2015-12-17 14:41 GMT-02:00 Gilberto Nunes : > Hello bacula users...

[Bacula-users] Packet size too big failures

Hello I'm using bacula 5.0.3 on Ubuntu 10.0.4(TLS) as Director and Storage host, and windows machines run bacula client, and i alltime got Packet size too big failure: Fatal error: bsock.c:507 Packet size too big from What this can be?

Re: [Bacula-users] Packet size too big failures

Am 13.04.2011 19:20, schrieb ruslan usifov: Hello I'm using bacula 5.0.3 on Ubuntu 10.0.4(TLS) as Director and Storage host, and windows machines run bacula client, and i alltime got Packet size too big failure: Fatal error: bsock.c:507 Packet size too big from What this can be?

Re: [Bacula-users] Packet size too big + xinetd client

On Tue, 19 Sep 2006, Junior Cunha wrote: I recently upgrade all my clients to run under xinetd Um. why? - Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the

[Bacula-users] Packet size too big + xinetd client

Hi I recently upgrade all my clients to run under xinetd and i realize that now i have a lot of messages like this: Packet size too big from File daemon:(...). If i run the client as a deamon, work perfectly. Maybe is something wrong with my xinetd configuration (see below). Can anybody

Re: [Bacula-users] Packet size too big + xinetd client

Running clients under xinetd is no longer supported, and I intend to remove the code that permits users to run it in that manner, so you will be better off to run the clients as daemons. On Tuesday 19 September 2006 19:49, Junior Cunha wrote: Hi I recently upgrade all my clients to

[Bacula-users] Packet size too big

I'm seeing what seems to be a similar error message to what Dominic Marks reported earlier this month. Director is running on a SGI Irix machine (Irix 6.5.3), bacula version 1.38.6. File daemon is running on a FreeBSD 5 machine, Bacula 1.38.9. Here is the error output: 19-May 16:34

[Bacula-users] Packet size too big

Hello, One of our systems is repeatedly giving this error. I found in the documentation that the reported fix was to upgrade but both the client and server are running 1.38.8. Any other suggestions? Thanks, Dominic Bacula Report 05-May 13:00 bacula-dir: No prior Full backup Job record found.