Results 1 to 3 of 3

Thread: Amandad udp port assignment

  1. #1

    Default Amandad udp port assignment

    Here is the scenario

    1) Client is Red Hat Enterprise Server 4 or 5 running client rpm make from zmanda source for 2.5.1p3. The udpport range option was used in the spec file. The line --with-udpportrange=850,854 \ was added to the configuration portion.

    2) The server is Solaris 10 running Amanda 2.5.1p3. When running amcheck -c <config> is noticed on several of or clients we would get a failed to ack.

    3) When xinetd is stop and started using amandad I notice that what ever the first Amanda udp entry in the /etc/services file gets assigned. This is verified with the lsof --i4udp:<udp port number> command.

    So here are the questions:

    1) Why does the first amanda udp entry in /etc/services gets assigned for the initial connection between client and server?

    2) Why when one of the private ports gets assigned on the client size (any in the 850-854 range) we get "udp port amanda unreachable"?

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    1,559

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kpearlstein View Post
    Here is the scenario

    1) Client is Red Hat Enterprise Server 4 or 5 running client rpm make from zmanda source for 2.5.1p3. The udpport range option was used in the spec file. The line --with-udpportrange=850,854 \ was added to the configuration portion.

    2) The server is Solaris 10 running Amanda 2.5.1p3. When running amcheck -c <config> is noticed on several of or clients we would get a failed to ack.
    Are you seeing the errors mentioned in the wiki page - [url]http://wiki.zmanda.com/index.php/Selfcheck_request_failed[/url]

    Thanks,
    Paddy

  3. #3

    Default

    Paddy,

    Here are the details:

    Client host running Redhat ES 5 client_1 has an /etc/services files with the following udp entries in the given order:
    amanda 10080/udp
    amanda 850/udp
    amanda 851/udp
    amanda 852/udp
    amanda 853/udp
    amanda 854/udp

    After xinetd is started here are the outputs of the lsof -i4udp:<port number> on client_1
    lsof -i4udp:10080
    xinetd 8308 root 5u IPv4 38857 UDP *:amanda

    lsof -i4udp:850
    <no output>

    lsof -i4udp:851
    <no output>

    lsof -i4udp:852
    <no output>

    lsof -i4udp:853
    <no output>

    lsof -i4udp:854
    <no output>

    The amcheck command from the server server_1 works. The tcpdump provides the following output:

    11:52:45.981189 arp reply client_1 is-at 00:1a:4b:d1:0d:94 (ou
    i Unknown)
    11:52:45.981310 IP server_1.536 > client_1.
    amanda: UDP, length 124
    11:52:45.991938 IP client_1.amanda > server_1.536: UDP, length 50
    11:52:45.996276 IP clinet_1.amanda > server_1.536: UDP, length 89
    11:52:45.996597 IP server_1.536 > client_1.
    amanda: UDP, length 50
    11:52:45.999971 IP server_1.536 > client_1.
    amanda: UDP, length 459

    Client host running Redhat ES 5 client_1 has an /etc/services files with the following udp entries in the given order:


    amanda 850/udp
    amanda 851/udp
    amanda 852/udp
    amanda 853/udp
    amanda 854/udp
    amanda 10080/udp



    After xinetd is started here are the outputs of the lsof -i4udp:<port number> on client_1
    lsof -i4udp:850
    xinetd 8308 root 5u IPv4 38857 UDP *:amanda

    lsof -i4udp:851
    <no output>

    lsof -i4udp:852
    <no output>

    lsof -i4udp:853
    <no output>

    lsof -i4udp:854
    <no output>

    lsof -i4udp:10080
    <no output>


    The amcheck command from the server server_1 does not work. The tcpdump provides the following output:

    13:55:47.489746 arp who-has client_1 (Broadcast) tell server_1
    13:55:47.489843 arp reply client_1 is-at 00:1a:4b:aa:36:c6 (ou
    i Unknown)
    13:55:47.489958 IP server_1.1014 > client_1
    .amanda: UDP, length 124
    13:55:47.490055 IP client_1 > server_1: ICM
    P client_1 udp port amanda unreachable, length 160

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •