Hello everyone !
My server's name is "constellation"
I don t know waht does this thing mean.....like the "get_peer_addr "
Can you excplain me thk you
Oct 20 13:41:09 constellation smbd[3927]: [2005/10/20 13:41:09, 0] lib/util_sock.c:get_peer_addr(1150) Oct 20 13:41:09 constellation smbd[3927]: getpeername failed. Error was Transport endpoint is not connected
Oct 20 13:41:09 constellation smbd[3927]: [2005/10/20 13:41:09, 0] lib/util_sock.c:write_socket_data(430) Oct 20 13:41:09 constellation smbd[3927]: write_socket_data: write failure. Error = Connection reset by peer Oct 20 13:41:09 constellation smbd[3927]: [2005/10/20 13:41:09, 0] lib/util_sock.c:write_socket(455) Oct 20 13:41:09 constellation smbd[3927]: write_socket: Error writing 4 bytes to socket 5: ERRNO = Connection reset by peer Oct 20 13:41:09 constellation smbd[3927]: [2005/10/20 13:41:09, 0] lib/util_sock.c:send_smb(647) Oct 20 13:41:09 constellation smbd[3927]: Error writing 4 bytes to client. -1. (Connection reset by peer) Oct 20 14:13:09 constellation smbd[4254]: [2005/10/20 14:13:09, 0] lib/util_sock.c:get_peer_addr(1150) Oct 20 14:13:09 constellation smbd[4254]: getpeername failed. Error was Transport endpoint is not connected Oct 20 14:13:09 constellation smbd[4254]: [2005/10/20 14:13:09, 0] lib/util_sock.c:write_socket_data(430) Oct 20 14:13:09 constellation smbd[4254]: write_socket_data: write failure. Error = Connection reset by peer Oct 20 14:13:09 constellation smbd[4254]: [2005/10/20 14:13:09, 0] lib/util_sock.c:write_socket(455) Oct 20 14:13:09 constellation smbd[4254]: write_socket: Error writing 4 bytes to socket 24: ERRNO = Connection reset by peer Oct 20 14:13:09 constellation smbd[4254]: [2005/10/20 14:13:09, 0] lib/util_sock.c:send_smb(647) Oct 20 14:13:09 constellation smbd[4254]: Error writing 4 bytes to client. -1. (Connection reset by peer) -- Franck
Franck Y wrote:
I don t know waht does this thing mean.....like the "get_peer_addr "
Can you excplain me thk you
Oct 20 13:41:09 constellation smbd[3927]: [2005/10/20 13:41:09, 0] lib/util_sock.c:get_peer_addr(1150) Oct 20 13:41:09 constellation smbd[3927]: getpeername failed. Error was Transport endpoint is not connected
getpeername failed => failed DNS/hostname lookup.
-- Rex
Rex Dieter wrote:
Franck Y wrote:
I don t know waht does this thing mean.....like the "get_peer_addr "
Can you excplain me thk you
Oct 20 13:41:09 constellation smbd[3927]: [2005/10/20 13:41:09, 0] lib/util_sock.c:get_peer_addr(1150) Oct 20 13:41:09 constellation smbd[3927]: getpeername failed. Error was Transport endpoint is not connected
getpeername failed => failed DNS/hostname lookup.
-- Rex
No, that would be gethostbyaddr(). getpeername() is a system call that looks for the address of the other side (the remove side) of an association or socket pair.
Of course, if you're using connectionless sockets (i.e. datagrams), then it won't return an endpoint... For that, you'd have to use recvfrom() and note the endpoint from individual requests.
-Philip
I believe that you are running samba, which allows for FC to be a Windows file server. You can turn this off by typing: service smb stop, and it should be shutdow if that is what you want, if that is NOT what you want then the responses previously supplied should suffice.
Philip Prindeville wrote:
Rex Dieter wrote:
Franck Y wrote:
I don t know waht does this thing mean.....like the "get_peer_addr "
Can you excplain me thk you
Oct 20 13:41:09 constellation smbd[3927]: [2005/10/20 13:41:09, 0] lib/util_sock.c:get_peer_addr(1150) Oct 20 13:41:09 constellation smbd[3927]: getpeername failed. Error was Transport endpoint is not connected
getpeername failed => failed DNS/hostname lookup.
-- Rex
No, that would be gethostbyaddr(). getpeername() is a system call that looks for the address of the other side (the remove side) of an association or socket pair.
Of course, if you're using connectionless sockets (i.e. datagrams), then it won't return an endpoint... For that, you'd have to use recvfrom() and note the endpoint from individual requests.
-Philip
Philip Prindeville wrote:
Rex Dieter wrote:
Franck Y wrote:
I don t know waht does this thing mean.....like the "get_peer_addr "
Can you excplain me thk you
Oct 20 13:41:09 constellation smbd[3927]: [2005/10/20 13:41:09, 0] lib/util_sock.c:get_peer_addr(1150) Oct 20 13:41:09 constellation smbd[3927]: getpeername failed. Error was Transport endpoint is not connected
getpeername failed => failed DNS/hostname lookup.
-- Rex
No, that would be gethostbyaddr(). getpeername() is a system call that looks for the address of the other side (the remove side) of an association or socket pair.
Of course, if you're using connectionless sockets (i.e. datagrams), then it won't return an endpoint... For that, you'd have to use recvfrom() and note the endpoint from individual requests.
-Philip
OK guys, I've been following this thread, because I've had this error pop up for years. Initially I tried to look it up and fix it. I could never find the true answer and it didn't affect my samba so I ignored it.
However, it seems that now you guys actually know what this error means. You've given a technical (programmers?) perspective of what has happened.
Is there any chance you can convert that to lamens terms?
i.e. Does anyone know how to get rid of the error message or how my configuration for samba is wrong?
P.S. I've had this configuration for samba more or less since RH 5.2 (meaning I changed things as samba changed). This error did not show up till RH9 or Fedora 1 from memory. It's probably caused by something deprecated or the like in my smb.conf, but do we have any idea what?
Regards, Ed.
On Fri, 2005-10-21 at 10:37 +0800, Edward Dekkers wrote:
Philip Prindeville wrote:
Rex Dieter wrote:
Franck Y wrote:
I don t know waht does this thing mean.....like the "get_peer_addr "
Can you excplain me thk you
Oct 20 13:41:09 constellation smbd[3927]: [2005/10/20 13:41:09, 0] lib/util_sock.c:get_peer_addr(1150) Oct 20 13:41:09 constellation smbd[3927]: getpeername failed. Error was Transport endpoint is not connected
getpeername failed => failed DNS/hostname lookup.
-- Rex
No, that would be gethostbyaddr(). getpeername() is a system call that looks for the address of the other side (the remove side) of an association or socket pair.
Of course, if you're using connectionless sockets (i.e. datagrams), then it won't return an endpoint... For that, you'd have to use recvfrom() and note the endpoint from individual requests.
-Philip
OK guys, I've been following this thread, because I've had this error pop up for years. Initially I tried to look it up and fix it. I could never find the true answer and it didn't affect my samba so I ignored it.
However, it seems that now you guys actually know what this error means. You've given a technical (programmers?) perspective of what has happened.
Is there any chance you can convert that to lamens terms?
i.e. Does anyone know how to get rid of the error message or how my configuration for samba is wrong?
P.S. I've had this configuration for samba more or less since RH 5.2 (meaning I changed things as samba changed). This error did not show up till RH9 or Fedora 1 from memory. It's probably caused by something deprecated or the like in my smb.conf, but do we have any idea what?
---- No - the explanation was correct. Typically this will come from a Win2K or WinXP client connection which will simultaneously connect to port 139 and 445 and drop one or the other as unnecessary - hence the log entry. Samba developers sort of consider this to be rude client behavior. ;-)
If you want that type of activity to not be logged, then in the general section, declare the smb port...
smb port = 139 #mix of Win95/98/2K/XP as Win95, Win98, WinME only connect to port 139 or smb port = 445 #win2K & WinXP clients only
the default is both ports are active for smb
personally, I would recommend that people not concern themselves with the logged entries and leave it alone since it isn't broken.
If you want an in depth dissection of the ports that Microsoft uses, see http://support.microsoft.com/kb/832017
Craig
Hello, So we have to forget it ?
Franck On 10/20/05, Craig White craigwhite@azapple.com wrote:
On Fri, 2005-10-21 at 10:37 +0800, Edward Dekkers wrote:
Philip Prindeville wrote:
Rex Dieter wrote:
Franck Y wrote:
I don t know waht does this thing mean.....like the "get_peer_addr "
Can you excplain me thk you
Oct 20 13:41:09 constellation smbd[3927]: [2005/10/20 13:41:09, 0] lib/util_sock.c:get_peer_addr(1150) Oct 20 13:41:09 constellation smbd[3927]: getpeername failed. Error was Transport endpoint is not connected
getpeername failed => failed DNS/hostname lookup.
-- Rex
No, that would be gethostbyaddr(). getpeername() is a system call that looks for the address of the other side (the remove side) of an association or socket pair.
Of course, if you're using connectionless sockets (i.e. datagrams), then it won't return an endpoint... For that, you'd have to use recvfrom() and note the endpoint from individual requests.
-Philip
OK guys, I've been following this thread, because I've had this error pop up for years. Initially I tried to look it up and fix it. I could never find the true answer and it didn't affect my samba so I ignored it.
However, it seems that now you guys actually know what this error means. You've given a technical (programmers?) perspective of what has happened.
Is there any chance you can convert that to lamens terms?
i.e. Does anyone know how to get rid of the error message or how my configuration for samba is wrong?
P.S. I've had this configuration for samba more or less since RH 5.2 (meaning I changed things as samba changed). This error did not show up till RH9 or Fedora 1 from memory. It's probably caused by something deprecated or the like in my smb.conf, but do we have any idea what?
No - the explanation was correct. Typically this will come from a Win2K or WinXP client connection which will simultaneously connect to port 139 and 445 and drop one or the other as unnecessary - hence the log entry. Samba developers sort of consider this to be rude client behavior. ;-)
If you want that type of activity to not be logged, then in the general section, declare the smb port...
smb port = 139 #mix of Win95/98/2K/XP as Win95, Win98, WinME only connect to port 139 or smb port = 445 #win2K & WinXP clients only
the default is both ports are active for smb
personally, I would recommend that people not concern themselves with the logged entries and leave it alone since it isn't broken.
If you want an in depth dissection of the ports that Microsoft uses, see http://support.microsoft.com/kb/832017
Craig
-- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean.
-- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
-- Franck
Either that or make a better effort to comprehend my answer.
Craig
On Thu, 2005-11-17 at 15:42 -0500, Franck Y wrote:
Hello, So we have to forget it ?
Franck On 10/20/05, Craig White craigwhite@azapple.com wrote:
On Fri, 2005-10-21 at 10:37 +0800, Edward Dekkers wrote:
Philip Prindeville wrote:
Rex Dieter wrote:
Franck Y wrote:
I don t know waht does this thing mean.....like the "get_peer_addr "
Can you excplain me thk you
Oct 20 13:41:09 constellation smbd[3927]: [2005/10/20 13:41:09, 0] lib/util_sock.c:get_peer_addr(1150) Oct 20 13:41:09 constellation smbd[3927]: getpeername failed. Error was Transport endpoint is not connected
getpeername failed => failed DNS/hostname lookup.
-- Rex
No, that would be gethostbyaddr(). getpeername() is a system call that looks for the address of the other side (the remove side) of an association or socket pair.
Of course, if you're using connectionless sockets (i.e. datagrams), then it won't return an endpoint... For that, you'd have to use recvfrom() and note the endpoint from individual requests.
-Philip
OK guys, I've been following this thread, because I've had this error pop up for years. Initially I tried to look it up and fix it. I could never find the true answer and it didn't affect my samba so I ignored it.
However, it seems that now you guys actually know what this error means. You've given a technical (programmers?) perspective of what has happened.
Is there any chance you can convert that to lamens terms?
i.e. Does anyone know how to get rid of the error message or how my configuration for samba is wrong?
P.S. I've had this configuration for samba more or less since RH 5.2 (meaning I changed things as samba changed). This error did not show up till RH9 or Fedora 1 from memory. It's probably caused by something deprecated or the like in my smb.conf, but do we have any idea what?
No - the explanation was correct. Typically this will come from a Win2K or WinXP client connection which will simultaneously connect to port 139 and 445 and drop one or the other as unnecessary - hence the log entry. Samba developers sort of consider this to be rude client behavior. ;-)
If you want that type of activity to not be logged, then in the general section, declare the smb port...
smb port = 139 #mix of Win95/98/2K/XP as Win95, Win98, WinME only connect to port 139 or smb port = 445 #win2K & WinXP clients only
the default is both ports are active for smb
personally, I would recommend that people not concern themselves with the logged entries and leave it alone since it isn't broken.
If you want an in depth dissection of the ports that Microsoft uses, see http://support.microsoft.com/kb/832017
Craig
-- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean.
-- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
-- Franck
-- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
Hello Thank you craig ! I read it 2 times more and now, I understand it !:-) I only have win2000 and and XP client. But i have a network printer (Xerox), and she is "writing" the same error.
So i will try tomorow to forces Xp/Win2k to use the port = 445.
Thank you Franck On 11/17/05, Craig White craigwhite@azapple.com wrote:
Either that or make a better effort to comprehend my answer.
Craig
On Thu, 2005-11-17 at 15:42 -0500, Franck Y wrote:
Hello, So we have to forget it ?
Franck On 10/20/05, Craig White craigwhite@azapple.com wrote:
On Fri, 2005-10-21 at 10:37 +0800, Edward Dekkers wrote:
Philip Prindeville wrote:
Rex Dieter wrote:
Franck Y wrote:
> I don t know waht does this thing mean.....like the "get_peer_addr " > > Can you excplain me thk you > > Oct 20 13:41:09 constellation smbd[3927]: [2005/10/20 13:41:09, 0] > lib/util_sock.c:get_peer_addr(1150) > Oct 20 13:41:09 constellation smbd[3927]: getpeername failed. Error > was Transport endpoint is not connected
getpeername failed => failed DNS/hostname lookup.
-- Rex
No, that would be gethostbyaddr(). getpeername() is a system call that looks for the address of the other side (the remove side) of an association or socket pair.
Of course, if you're using connectionless sockets (i.e. datagrams), then it won't return an endpoint... For that, you'd have to use recvfrom() and note the endpoint from individual requests.
-Philip
OK guys, I've been following this thread, because I've had this error pop up for years. Initially I tried to look it up and fix it. I could never find the true answer and it didn't affect my samba so I ignored it.
However, it seems that now you guys actually know what this error means. You've given a technical (programmers?) perspective of what has happened.
Is there any chance you can convert that to lamens terms?
i.e. Does anyone know how to get rid of the error message or how my configuration for samba is wrong?
P.S. I've had this configuration for samba more or less since RH 5.2 (meaning I changed things as samba changed). This error did not show up till RH9 or Fedora 1 from memory. It's probably caused by something deprecated or the like in my smb.conf, but do we have any idea what?
No - the explanation was correct. Typically this will come from a Win2K or WinXP client connection which will simultaneously connect to port 139 and 445 and drop one or the other as unnecessary - hence the log entry. Samba developers sort of consider this to be rude client behavior. ;-)
If you want that type of activity to not be logged, then in the general section, declare the smb port...
smb port = 139 #mix of Win95/98/2K/XP as Win95, Win98, WinME only connect to port 139 or smb port = 445 #win2K & WinXP clients only
the default is both ports are active for smb
personally, I would recommend that people not concern themselves with the logged entries and leave it alone since it isn't broken.
If you want an in depth dissection of the ports that Microsoft uses, see http://support.microsoft.com/kb/832017
Craig
-- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean.
-- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
-- Franck
-- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
-- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean.
-- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
-- Franck
On Thu, 2005-10-20 at 13:14 -0500, Rex Dieter wrote:
Franck Y wrote:
I don t know waht does this thing mean.....like the "get_peer_addr "
Can you excplain me thk you
Oct 20 13:41:09 constellation smbd[3927]: [2005/10/20 13:41:09, 0] lib/util_sock.c:get_peer_addr(1150) Oct 20 13:41:09 constellation smbd[3927]: getpeername failed. Error was Transport endpoint is not connected
getpeername failed => failed DNS/hostname lookup.
No... Actually it means that the peer that connected to the Samba smb socket on port 139 or 445 dropped the connections before the getpeername function was called. That's what the "Transport endpoint is not connected" means. I means that your peer went away before you could look him up. It's not uncommon with all the worm scanning going on for ports 139/tcp and 445/tcp. But it also seems to happen a lot with normal clients.
-- Rex
Mike