* David Malone ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [990723 18:41]:
if ((bi-bi_socktype == sep-se_socktype
strcmp(bi-bi_service, sep-se_service) == 0) ||
matchservent(bi-bi_service, sep-se_service,
* David Malone (dwmal...@maths.tcd.ie) [990723 18:41]:
if ((bi-bi_socktype == sep-se_socktype
strcmp(bi-bi_service, sep-se_service) == 0) ||
matchservent(bi-bi_service, sep-se_service,
[Hijacked from cvs-committers and cvs-all]
On Fri, 23 Jul 1999 11:28:12 +0200, Andre Albsmeier wrote:
I observed some kind of denial of service on -STABLE: I was
playing with the new nmap and did a 'nmap -sU printfix'.
inetd was running as "inetd -l" and started sucking all the
CPU time
On Fri, 23-Jul-1999 at 14:29:19 +0200, Sheldon Hearn wrote:
[Hijacked from cvs-committers and cvs-all]
On Fri, 23 Jul 1999 11:28:12 +0200, Andre Albsmeier wrote:
I observed some kind of denial of service on -STABLE: I was
playing with the new nmap and did a 'nmap -sU printfix'.
On Fri, 23 Jul 1999 15:06:02 +0200, Andre Albsmeier wrote:
But when inetd is run without -l it get 100%.
Are you avoiding my question on purpose? :-)
On Fri, 23-Jul-1999 at 14:29:19 +0200, Sheldon Hearn wrote:
What does "sucking all the CPU time" mean? Does it mean that other
programs
Sheldon Hearn [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I know exactly why you see what you see when you do what you do. All I
can say is "don't do that", because I can't think of a why to cater for
what you're doing in a sensible fashion.
I think you're jumping to conclusions. What I'd like to see is a
On Fri, 23-Jul-1999 at 15:09:12 +0200, Sheldon Hearn wrote:
On Fri, 23 Jul 1999 15:06:02 +0200, Andre Albsmeier wrote:
But when inetd is run without -l it get 100%.
Are you avoiding my question on purpose? :-)
Sorry. The machine wasn't stressed by other programs so
it was "the only
On Fri, 23-Jul-1999 at 15:16:14 +0200, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
Sheldon Hearn [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I know exactly why you see what you see when you do what you do. All I
can say is "don't do that", because I can't think of a why to cater for
what you're doing in a sensible fashion.
Andre Albsmeier [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Comes in private email. It's about 130KB after which tcpdump crashed with:
zsh: 5741 segmentation fault tcpdump -i fxp0 150 udp or icmp
Weird. Very weird.
DES
--
Dag-Erling Smorgrav - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL
On Fri, 23-Jul-1999 at 15:35:48 +0200, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
Andre Albsmeier [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Comes in private email. It's about 130KB after which tcpdump crashed with:
zsh: 5741 segmentation fault tcpdump -i fxp0 150 udp or icmp
Weird. Very weird.
Just to overcome
Andre Albsmeier [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Just to overcome speculations :-) I just tested it on another machine
with the same result. If have tested it now between all 3 machines in
each direction. Same result.
Weird. I'm unable to reproduce it; my test box responds to UDP queries
but does
I've found the problem - it looks like a bug in the code for matching
internal service names to /etc/service names. The code says:
if ((bi-bi_socktype == sep-se_socktype
strcmp(bi-bi_service, sep-se_service) == 0) ||
[Hijacked from cvs-committers and cvs-all]
On Fri, 23 Jul 1999 11:28:12 +0200, Andre Albsmeier wrote:
I observed some kind of denial of service on -STABLE: I was
playing with the new nmap and did a 'nmap -sU printfix'.
inetd was running as inetd -l and started sucking all the
CPU time even
On Fri, 23-Jul-1999 at 14:29:19 +0200, Sheldon Hearn wrote:
[Hijacked from cvs-committers and cvs-all]
On Fri, 23 Jul 1999 11:28:12 +0200, Andre Albsmeier wrote:
I observed some kind of denial of service on -STABLE: I was
playing with the new nmap and did a 'nmap -sU printfix'.
inetd
On Fri, 23 Jul 1999 15:06:02 +0200, Andre Albsmeier wrote:
But when inetd is run without -l it get 100%.
Are you avoiding my question on purpose? :-)
On Fri, 23-Jul-1999 at 14:29:19 +0200, Sheldon Hearn wrote:
What does sucking all the CPU time mean? Does it mean that other
programs
Sheldon Hearn sheld...@uunet.co.za writes:
I know exactly why you see what you see when you do what you do. All I
can say is don't do that, because I can't think of a why to cater for
what you're doing in a sensible fashion.
I think you're jumping to conclusions. What I'd like to see is a
On Fri, 23-Jul-1999 at 15:09:12 +0200, Sheldon Hearn wrote:
On Fri, 23 Jul 1999 15:06:02 +0200, Andre Albsmeier wrote:
But when inetd is run without -l it get 100%.
Are you avoiding my question on purpose? :-)
Sorry. The machine wasn't stressed by other programs so
it was the only
On Fri, 23-Jul-1999 at 15:16:14 +0200, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
Sheldon Hearn sheld...@uunet.co.za writes:
I know exactly why you see what you see when you do what you do. All I
can say is don't do that, because I can't think of a why to cater for
what you're doing in a sensible fashion.
Andre Albsmeier andre.albsme...@mchp.siemens.de writes:
Comes in private email. It's about 130KB after which tcpdump crashed with:
zsh: 5741 segmentation fault tcpdump -i fxp0 150 udp or icmp
Weird. Very weird.
DES
--
Dag-Erling Smorgrav - d...@flood.ping.uio.no
To Unsubscribe: send mail
On Fri, 23-Jul-1999 at 15:35:48 +0200, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
Andre Albsmeier andre.albsme...@mchp.siemens.de writes:
Comes in private email. It's about 130KB after which tcpdump crashed with:
zsh: 5741 segmentation fault tcpdump -i fxp0 150 udp or icmp
Weird. Very weird.
Just to
Andre Albsmeier andre.albsme...@mchp.siemens.de writes:
Just to overcome speculations :-) I just tested it on another machine
with the same result. If have tested it now between all 3 machines in
each direction. Same result.
Weird. I'm unable to reproduce it; my test box responds to UDP
I've found the problem - it looks like a bug in the code for matching
internal service names to /etc/service names. The code says:
if ((bi-bi_socktype == sep-se_socktype
strcmp(bi-bi_service, sep-se_service) == 0) ||
22 matches
Mail list logo
