No responses, I'll take it there is no issue then. Al
On Tue, 2006-07-18 at 14:33 -0700, Al Chu wrote: > Is there a portability issue on some OS that makes this function a > requirement? I see no reason for it: > > A) The IPMI ports are < 1023, which means they are reserved ports > > B) Reserved ports shouldn't be gained via an ephemeral port (i.e. bind > to port 0). > > Unless there is some wierd OS where 'B' is true? > > Al > -- Albert Chu [EMAIL PROTECTED] 925-422-5311 Computer Scientist High Performance Systems Division Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory _______________________________________________ Freeipmi-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/freeipmi-devel
