[leaf-user] rdate is probably no different

2006-11-30 Thread Mats Erik Andersson
Hi all Bering-users and in particular Erich Titl, my problem with rdate has been solved since the posting of Erich Titl made thinking matters through. It turned out I had forgotten it is port 37/tcp , i.e. time, which is used by rdate. My focus was on ntp 123/tcp all the time as I tried to fig

Re: [leaf-user] rdate is probably no different

2006-11-30 Thread Eric Spakman
Hi Mats, > Hi all Bering-users and in particular Erich Titl, > > > my problem with rdate has been solved since the posting of Erich Titl made > thinking matters through. It turned out I had forgotten it is port 37/tcp > , i.e. time, > which is used by rdate. My focus was on ntp 123/tcp all the tim

Re: [leaf-user] rdate is probably no different

2006-11-30 Thread Martin Hejl
> On the other hand, one interesting phenomenon did turn > > up from this: every entry in shorewall.log reporting > > REJECT TCP (whatever) 37 > > has time stamp Jan 1 00:00:00, but every entry > before and after retain very plausable time stamps. > Is this to be expected? This has

Re: [leaf-user] rdate is probably no different

2006-11-30 Thread Erich Titl
Hi Mats Mats Erik Andersson wrote: > Hi all Bering-users and in particular Erich Titl, > > my problem with rdate has been solved since the > posting > of Erich Titl made thinking matters through. It turned > out I had forgotten it is port 37/tcp , i.e. time, > which is used by rdate. My focus