Chris Pepper wrote:At 2:21 PM +0100 2003/11/08, Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
On 7 Nov 2003, at 21:11, Sam Ruby wrote:
It is worth noting that gump will run a number of tests, so from time to time you will find projects have tests that use well known ports (like 8080).
ouch. we plan to be running servlets on moof, that's for sure and 8080 is very likely to be already used on that machine (even if we can install the servlet engine in some other port, since it's going to be proxypassed anyway)
This shouldn't be too bad -- the built-in ipfw is quite capable of blocking 8080; just make sure there's already a listener on any open ports before starting gump, and attempts to listen on such ports (by gump processes) should generate an error rather than a security hole. Not that I've tested this theory...
"sudo ipfw list".
Generating an error would result in a test failing which would result in emails sent to developers indicating that there is a bug which needs to be addressed... in general, this is not the desired behavior.
Sure. I figured a 'real' version of Apache would run on port 80, and 8080 would be blocked by ipfw, so it wouldn't matter if a gump program started listening on 8080, as it would be blocked.
My point about errors is that you wouldn't want to leave port 8080 open with no listener running when gump starts, as then a gump program might come up and listen on that (unblocked) port without admin knowledge or oversight.
Hope that's slightly clearer.
Chris -- Chris Pepper: <http://www.reppep.com/~pepper/> Rockefeller University: <http://www.rockefeller.edu/>
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
