similar to: rpcclient problem - no connect to 0.0.0.0

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Hey all, I'm running Samba 3.0.11 on HP-UX 11i. My only recent change was moving from smbpasswd to tdbsam, but this issue has suddenly cropped up: [2008/03/04 07:50:34, 0] smbd/service.c:make_connection(796), pacsd1 (130.219.4.160) couldn't find service %u ...which doesn't make any sense to me. Of interest might be the pdbedit - -Lv

First, I _do_ believe Samba is better than sliced bread (hey - you can't get fat by using too much Samba :), and I have enormous admiration and gratitude for the Samba Team. (Okay, no, I haven't sent any pizza vouchers...) But, I've got a problem (what else is new?) Win 95 clients in our public labs/classrooms are experiencing failed logins for good accounts and occasional failures

https://bugzilla.netfilter.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1287 Bug ID: 1287 Summary: rule for 0.0.0.0/8 is added as 0.0.0.0/0 Product: nftables Version: unspecified Hardware: x86_64 OS: Debian GNU/Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P5 Component: iptables over nftable Assignee:

I have founded that 0.0.0.0:port could be "closed" by setting up socket address = wishing IP addresses, for example socket address = 127.0.0.1 192.168.0.254 2015-01-11 17:46 GMT+03:00 CpServiceSPb . <cpservicespb at gmail.com>: > Thanks for this answer. > As I understood, for example if parameter > bind interfaces only = yes is and > interfaces = lan0 (192.168.0.254)

Rowland, as I you mentioned firstly, I have 3 faces: lo, lan, wan. And you are right, 0.0.0.0 are all IPs. I need only either listen to lo and lan or lan only, but not wan also. But in my case and because of 0.0.0.0 are all faces, listening 0.0.0.0 doesn' t equal lo and lan (127.0.0.1 and 192.168.0.254) . Yes, there is no 95.95.95.14 in netstat list, but 0.0.0.0 should cover and 95.95.95.14

I have Samba4 4.1.14 (built from sources) installed at Ubuntu 14.04 LTS x32 and acting as Standalone server at the time. Here are 3 faces at Ubuntu: lo, lan and wan. There are lines: bind interfaces only = yes interfaces = lo lan0 in smb.conf But netstat -tulpn shows 0.0.0.0 binded address: tcp 0 0 192.168.0.254:139 0.0.0.0:* LISTEN smbd udp 0 0

Rowland, as I you mentioned firstly, I have 3 faces: lo, lan, wan. And you are right, 0.0.0.0 are all IPs. I need only either listen to lo and lan or lan only, but not wan also. But in my case and because of 0.0.0.0 are all faces, listening 0.0.0.0 doesn' t equal lo and lan (127.0.0.1 and 192.168.0.254) . Yes, there is no 95.95.95.14 in netstat list, but 0.0.0.0 should cover and 95.95.95.14

Hmmm, I founded some at https://lists.samba.org/archive/samba-technical/2012-July/085752.html As I saw these patches was already implemented. But is it possible to receive broadcast not to 0.0.0.0 but to x.y.z.255 ? This is network broadcast either. And opened 0.0.0.0 even with checking of source net is quite insecure from net security point of view. I think so. May be is it necessary to add

Thanks for this answer. As I understood, for example if parameter bind interfaces only = yes is and interfaces = lan0 (192.168.0.254) is and if broadcast packet goes from 95.95.95.14 such packet will be dropped (in other words) ? Am I right ? And other thing. Why is 192.168.0.255 (network broadcast) opened for ? May be exact such address (network broadcast) is inbtended for receiving broadcasts

Hellou I found a interesting problem with my tinc instalation: Log messages from main router. tinc.vpn1[1959]: tincd 1.0pre7 starting tinc.vpn1[1959]: /dev/tun is a Linux tun/tap device tinc.vpn1[1959]: Can't bind to 0.0.0.0 port 655/tcp: Permission denied tinc.vpn1[1959]: Unable to create any listening socket! tinc.vpn1[1959]: Unrecoverable error #cat

Not sure what port is using, Need help on the same urgently. Thanks, Manish Jain ______________________________

Need help in resolving above mentione error message, unable to start smbd on Solaris. Thanks,

Hi, there is a cosmetic problem in openssh (all versions AFAIK): When you start sshd with no "ListenAddress" lines in sshd_config, it tries to bind address "::" (successfuly) and then "0.0.0.0" and it fails with "Address already in use". Moreover it can happen that "0.0.0.0" is in addr list sooner than "::" so sshd than will listen

On Sat, Jun 20, 2015 at 5:09 PM, Gene Cumm <gene.cumm at gmail.com> wrote: > Starting a new thread for the moment and BCCing the two reporters of the issue. > > Looking over the code, I think I finally see why we get junk data from > the PXE base. If we tell the PXE base that a buffer is 0 bytes long, > we should expect junk/null data. > > I'm hoping to have a patch

Ady2 suggested to me on IRC to add additional information to the ML. With BIOS P89 v1.32 (03/05/2015) I saw errors from core_udp_sendto: Getting cached packet My IP is 0.0.0.0 core_udp_sendto: stalling on configure with no mapping core_udp_sendto: stalling on configure with no mapping core_udp_sendto: stalling on configure with no mapping core_udp_sendto: stalling on configure with no mapping

On Mon, Jun 22, 2015 at 2:54 AM, S. Schauenburg <s.schauenburg at gmail.com> wrote: > Hello Gene, > > thanks a lot for your patch! It doesn't work yet, but I have some more > information. > > Before the patch, the boot sequence ended with the following: > NBP file download successfully. > Getting cached packet > My IP is 0.0.0.0 > > After the patch it

On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 11:54 AM, Patrick Masotta <masottaus at yahoo.com> wrote: > Yes I know what you mean; > "I think" the handle of the running image (our code) has a "path" telling us where > was laded from. That would solve this thing. I just found we already found the handle before in a more reliable manner and we already found it in the beginning of

>>> Commit 23b2707 should resolve this.? Please let me know if you need test binaries -- -Gene <<< 1) About the Service Binding protocols, PXE protocol, etc having the same handle# is clear if we see that the number is in fact the "Device Handle" supporting all those protocols. (clearly said at UEFI_Driver_Writer_Guide_V1.0.1_120308.pdf) 2) about your

>>> It's a handle to the device that loaded Syslinux, in this case a NIC plus IP-stack (IPv4 or IPv6). <<< Yes it is the handle of the device (NIC) that loaded syslinux plus IP stack (as you said) but also all the attached Service Binding Protocols, PXE Protocol, and some more. All of them sharing the same device handle. >>> > 2.2) > I think

On Fri, Jul 3, 2015 at 11:05 AM, Patrick Masotta <masottaus at yahoo.com> wrote: >>>> > Lovely, the ServiceBindings are on a handle that resembles the NIC > while the Pxebc is IP-type specific. Looks like we should try to do a > ServiceBinding based on Pxebc but fall back to MAC-based searching, > saving all 3 handles, the image handle, Pxebc handle, and