On Fri, Apr 16, 2021 at 12:37:38AM -0700, Eberhard wrote: > It would make monitory not required. I have never been on a system where > inetd failed ... so why monitor? E
Please, please go back and read the original message. The goal is to monitor...... please read the original message. > -----Original Message----- > From: Peter Pentchev <r...@ringlet.net> > Sent: Thursday, April 15, 2021 1:06 PM > To: Eberhard <fl...@vicsmba.com> > Cc: 'Jorge Redondo Flames' <jorge.redo...@gmail.com>; > stunnel-users@stunnel.org > Subject: Re: [stunnel-users] Re: Fwd: Re: Local socket keeps listening > > On Thu, Apr 15, 2021 at 09:42:41AM -0700, Eberhard wrote: > > I’ll toss in an unpopular opinion here. I have used stunnel since day > > one. I had over the years problems with it not answering or the > > parent process dying altogether and other issues. I finally decided > > to run it from inetd rather than as a service. It is logical that > > this is a little slower but with modern machines I don’t notice it. > > inetd always is running. Always. If it is not you pretty much cannot > > use the machine. It has been a service program forever and is dead > > reliable. > > What you get is total reliability for an unnoticeable loss of speed. > > I suppose a heavily loaded machine running at capacity might not like > > this – my answer is throw hardware at it. I need reliable more than > > anything else. I’d at least try it! > > Um. Did you read the original message in this thread? How exactly could inetd > possibly help with the monitoring problem? -- Peter Pentchev r...@ringlet.net r...@debian.org p...@storpool.com PGP key: http://people.FreeBSD.org/~roam/roam.key.asc Key fingerprint 2EE7 A7A5 17FC 124C F115 C354 651E EFB0 2527 DF13
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ stunnel-users mailing list -- stunnel-users@stunnel.org To unsubscribe send an email to stunnel-users-le...@stunnel.org
