From: | "Nigel J(dot) Andrews" <nandrews(at)investsystems(dot)co(dot)uk> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Network Administrator <netadmin(at)vcsn(dot)com>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: - what protocol for an Internet postgres |
Date: | 2003-05-17 16:53:33 |
Message-ID: | Pine.LNX.4.21.0305171717510.14921-100000@ponder.fairway2k.co.uk |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Sat, 17 May 2003, Tom Lane wrote:
> "Nigel J. Andrews" <nandrews(at)investsystems(dot)co(dot)uk> writes:
> > I probably wasn't clear. The rule was a _permit_ from localhost to any remote
> > host/port for something that looked like a core Windows service. I never saw
> > the network traffic (with tcpdump of course) for the port forwarding until I
> > disabled that permit rule, thereby actually tightening the firewall.
>
> [ scratches head... ] That makes no sense at all to me; does it to you?
None what so ever. Is it any surprise I couldn't make it work earlier?
Indeed, having fired things up again so I could say the executable associated
with the rule I find it all working straight away [after starting a ssh session
of course] and that's with the rule automatically enabled after the
reboot. Just fwiw, the executable for the rule is \winnt\system32\services.exe.
I do dislike getting different behaviour out of systems, even if the
different behaviour is the working one.
--
Nigel J. Andrews
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bruno Wolff III | 2003-05-17 17:43:23 | Re: Executing External Programs |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2003-05-17 16:13:04 | Re: disk space usage enlarging despite vacuuming |