Re: best practice for updating inetd.conf with a user-chosen port?
On Thu, Mar 12, 2009 at 02:13:12PM +0100, Holger Levsen wrote:
> On Donnerstag, 12. März 2009, Giacomo A. Catenazzi wrote:
> > But now I'm not sure about:
> > - if it is a good thing to have admin choosed ports
>
> I dont think so and I guess I'm not alone and thats why there is no best
> practice to do that. The only (typo of) package where I can think off where
> this is sensible as default, is one which sets up a hidden service.
>
> What kind of daemon are you packaging?
I'm packaging approx, which for compatibility with apt-proxy defaults
to port 9999 (not in /etc/services). That was fine when approx, like
apt-proxy, was run as a standalone daemon from an initscript. But I
just changed it to run (only) from inetd, hence this thread.
Regarding the other thread in -devel about the future of inetd: in my
case I found it very sensible to jettison all the code for opening
sockets, binding ports, handling IPv6, handling tcp-wrappers,
daemonizing processes, etc. and punt it to inetd. Since apt clients
keep their connections open for many multiple, the performance hit is
negligible.
--
Eric Cooper e c c @ c m u . e d u
Reply to: