From owner-freebsd-questions Sat Sep 5 21:02:05 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id VAA14234 for freebsd-questions-outgoing; Sat, 5 Sep 1998 21:02:05 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from smaug.mfn.org (smaug.mfn.org [204.238.179.9]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id VAA14228 for ; Sat, 5 Sep 1998 21:02:03 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from measl@smaug.mfn.org) Received: (from root@localhost) by smaug.mfn.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id XAA17991 for FreeBSD-Questions@FreeBSD.org; Sat, 5 Sep 1998 23:00:41 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from measl) Date: Sat, 5 Sep 1998 23:00:41 -0500 (CDT) From: User Measl Message-Id: <199809060400.XAA17991@smaug.mfn.org> To: FreeBSD-Questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: ntpdate TCP or UDP Sender: owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Greetings. I noticed that sometimes ntpdate will get past our ipfw rules, and sometimes it won't. The rules are ok, but heres what happens. If I use: ntpdate -b ncar.ucar.edu It always works. If I type: ntpdate -b -d ncar.ucar.edu it *never* works. Typing ntpdate -b -d -t 5 ncar.ucar.edu will work *sometimes* 8=}} The firewall allows udp out for ntp, on port 123. TCP is blocked. I am assuming (yes, dangerous, which is why the question here) that the -b switch alone forces a UDP inquiry, whereas the -b -d switches force TCP. Am I nuts? Or is this accurate? If this is right, what is the reasoning behind it? Yours, John Blau jb214@mfn.org P.S. I'm not on the list, so please answer directly. Thanks. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message