[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: [Samba]: getpeername failed. Error was Transport endpoint is not connected



opa!
Apenas no caso de integraçao com o ambiente AD 2003R2 que nao aceita
fall-back para 139. Para todo resto a porta 445 pode ser bloqueada.

Abraço.
t+.


Em Qua, 2006-07-05 às 18:22 -0300, Marcos Vinicius Lazarini escreveu:
> Marlos Sedrez schrieb:
> 
> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> > Hash: SHA1
> > 
> > Boa Tarde Lista!  mais uma encrenca.. heheheh
> > 
> > Seguinte tenho um servidor e esta ocorrendo o seguinte erro no messages:
> > 
> > Jul  5 16:19:28 srv smbd[17067]: [2006/07/05 16:19:28, 0]
> > lib/util_sock.c:get_peer_addr(1000)
> > Jul  5 16:19:28 srv smbd[17067]:   getpeername failed. Error was
> > Transport endpoint is not connected
> > Jul  5 16:19:28 srv smbd[17067]: [2006/07/05 16:19:28, 0]
> > lib/util_sock.c:get_peer_addr(1000)
> > Jul  5 16:19:28 srv smbd[17067]:   getpeername failed. Error was
> > Transport endpoint is not connected
> > Jul  5 16:19:28 srv smbd[17067]: [2006/07/05 16:19:28, 0]
> > lib/util_sock.c:write_socket_data(430)
> > Jul  5 16:19:28 srv smbd[17067]:   write_socket_data: write failure.
> > Error = Connection reset by peer
> > Jul  5 16:19:28 srv smbd[17067]: [2006/07/05 16:19:28, 0]
> > lib/util_sock.c:write_socket(455)
> > Jul  5 16:19:28 srv smbd[17067]:   write_socket: Error writing 4 bytes
> > to socket 5: ERRNO = Connection reset by peer
> > Jul  5 16:19:28 srv smbd[17067]: [2006/07/05 16:19:28, 0]
> > lib/util_sock.c:send_smb(647)
> > Jul  5 16:19:28 srv smbd[17067]:   Error writing 4 bytes to client.
> > - -1. (Connection reset by peer)
> > 
> > Procurei pelo google e achei algumas coisa .. mas acho q talvez até
> > resolva mas não confio, acho que não que não por ai que pode ser o
> > problema..
> >            http://lists.samba.org/archive/samba/2004-April/084048.html
> > aqui tb tem referencia a esta lista
> >            http://lists.zerezo.com/samba/msg01574.html  
> > e até onde eu sei a porta 445 tem que esta liberada !
> > 
> > aqui esta meu smb.conf
> > 
> > [root@orasrv ~]# testparm /etc/samba/smb.conf
> > Load smb config files from /etc/samba/smb.conf
> > Processing section "[netlogon]"
> > Processing section "[Senior]"
> > Processing section "[Sistema]"
> > Processing section "[Usuarios]"
> > Loaded services file OK.
> > Server role: ROLE_DOMAIN_PDC
> > Press enter to see a dump of your service definitions
> > 
> > # Global parameters
> > [global]
> >         workgroup = DOMINIO
> >         server string = Servidor
> >         interfaces = 192.168.0.3/24, 127.0.0.1/8
> >         bind interfaces only = Yes
> >         log level = 1
> >         log file = /var/log/samba/%m
> >         time server = Yes
> >         add machine script = /usr/sbin/adduser -n -g estacoes -c
> > Estacoes  -d /dev/null -s /bin/false %u
> >         logon script = netlogon.bat
> >         logon path = \\orasrv\Usuarios\%U\profile
> >         logon home =
> >         domain logons = Yes
> >         os level = 100
> >         preferred master = Yes
> >         domain master = Yes
> >         wins support = Yes
> >         comment = Servidor de Dominio Samba
> > 
> > [netlogon]
> >         path = /var/samba/Netlogon
> >         read only = No
> >         create mask = 0600
> >         directory mask = 0700
> > 
> > [SistemaSE]
> >         comment = Sistemas
> >         path = /var/samba/SistemasSE
> >         read only = No
> >         create mask = 0660
> >         directory mask = 0770
> > 
> > [Sistema]
> >         comment = Diretorio Sistema
> >         path = /var/samba/Sistema
> >         read only = No
> >         create mask = 0660
> >         directory mask = 0770
> > 
> > [Usuarios]
> >         path = /var/samba/Usuarios
> >         read only = No
> >         create mask = 0600
> >         directory mask = 0700
> > 
> > 
> >  espero que alguem possa me dar alguma dica..
> 
> Bom, olhei no log e achei exatamente as mesmas coisas... e aqui tudo 
> funciona normal. Nao vi ainda motivos p/ se preocupar...
> 
> Outra coisa: se nao me engano, até as versões mais antigas do win, tudo era 
> via porta 139... do 2000 p/ cima passaram a usar a 445, mas com 
> possibilidade de 'fall-back' p/ 139 qdo nao funcionasse a 445 (pro cado de 
> um win2000 falar com o win98). Então, nao sei se teria realmente problema em 
> bloquear a 445...
> 
> De qualquer maneira, não acho que seja um problema sério ter essas msgs no 
> log...
> 
> -- 
> Marcos
> 
> 



Reply to: