DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT <http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=8325>. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=8325 McAfee firewall: operation attempted on something not a socket. winnt_accept: AcceptEx failed [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|REOPENED |RESOLVED Keywords| |FAQ Resolution| |INVALID Summary|operation attempted on |McAfee firewall: operation |something not a socket. |attempted on something not a |winnt_accept: AcceptEx |socket. winnt_accept: |failed. Attempting to |AcceptEx failed |recover. | ------- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2002-09-20 04:49 ------- Sorry [EMAIL PROTECTED] ... The Apache server expects a robust implementation of the TCP/IP stack layer, and that is obviously not true of the McAfee product. Microsoft makes it fairly trivial to write a stripped down TCP/IP provider or hook, but it is relatively difficult to design one to properly handle socket handle inheritence. See the ancient issues of the Aventail connent VPN client... which didn't work properly for a very long time {if ever}. <http://httpd.apache.org/docs/misc/FAQ.html#WSADuplicateSocket> All we can advise is that you upgrade to a more robust firewall product or consider dealing with your firewall issues at your router or dedicated firewall box. Based on feedback, I'm closing this report and reclassing as an FAQ. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
