From owner-freebsd-newbies@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Feb 17 16:05:50 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-newbies@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9E20716A4CE for ; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 16:05:50 -0800 (PST) Received: from deerite.fhcrc.org (deerite.fhcrc.org [140.107.52.11]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8C84143D1D for ; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 16:05:50 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from jgoodlea@fhcrc.org) Received: from e500a.fhcrc.org (e500a.fhcrc.org [140.107.42.21]) i1I05oMh027850 for ; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 16:05:50 -0800 Received: from jarlite.fhcrc.org(140.107.42.11) by e500a.fhcrc.org via csmap id 28883; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 16:05:05 -0800 (PST) Received: from shemp.fhcrc.org (shemp.fhcrc.org [140.107.42.41]) i1I04QS8022110 for ; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 16:04:26 -0800 Received: by shemp.fhcrc.org with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2657.72) id ; Tue, 17 Feb 2004 16:04:25 -0800 Message-ID: From: "Goodleaf, John M" To: "'freebsd-newbies@freebsd.org'" Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2004 16:04:25 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2657.72) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-FHCRC: INTERNAL Subject: NEVERMIND: dang: how to display the process ass'd with an active port X-BeenThere: freebsd-newbies@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Gathering place for new users List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2004 00:05:50 -0000 I found the right google string to answer the question. If anyone's curious (and as ill-informed as I), the answer is lsof. So for me, lsof -i TCP: yielded the answer. Thanks anyway, John > -----Original Message----- > From: Goodleaf, John M > Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2004 3:49 PM > To: 'freebsd-newbies@freebsd.org' > Subject: dang: how to display the process ass'd with an active port > > Under 4.9, how can I tell which process is associated with a port? I've > noticed a few oddball ports open on a machine, and I'd like to know which > process did that. Seems straightforward and yet I don't know the answer. > > Thanks, > John >