From owner-freebsd-security Wed May 24 21:57: 2 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-security@freebsd.org Received: from kobold.compt.com (jcicorp-gw.compt.com [207.231.193.3]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 83FD737B66E for ; Wed, 24 May 2000 21:56:57 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from klaus@kobold.compt.com) Date: Thu, 25 May 2000 00:56:53 -0400 From: Klaus Steden To: freebsd-security@freebsd.org Subject: named, and socket bindings Message-ID: <20000525005653.X6137@cthulu.compt.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org I was playing a bit with 'sockstat' on the FreeBSD 3.4 boxen we have around here that offer name service. On both I noticed something that was, to me, a bit odd. The sockets that named had bound were, as expected, the domain port on all the machine's interfaces, but also, a random high UDP port. I checked two BSDI boxes (4.0) and they don't seem to have the same situation. What gives? Did I miss or forget something obvious? Why would named have to grab a port that's not port 53, unless it was doing a zone transfer (and that doesn't seem to be the case) ... is this a bit of a labour-saving measure, the FreeBSD named pre-allocates a port and uses it for zone transfers the lifetime of the whole named process? I'm curious. Anyone have the answer? thanks, Klaus -- Klaus Steden | Unix Systems Administrator | Command Post Toybox | TODO: http://www.compt.com/ | 1) Learn to use my new Unix account. klaus@compt.com | 2) Learn how to change this list. Phone: (416) 585-9995 x345 | Fax: (416) 979-0428 | To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-security" in the body of the message