Re: inetd vs xinetd

["nate" <debian-user@aphroland.org>]

<quote who="Craig Dickson">
> From reading about xinetd lately, I thought I'd like to try using
> it instead of the traditional inetd.
>

in my experience .....

pros to xinetd:
- easy to have a service bind to a single interface(like localhost)
- faster and more robust then inetd
- has fine grain access controls for turning services on/off during
certain times of the day.
cons:
- any change in xinetd requires a RESTART. kill -HUP won't do it. and
this can cause problems if you have sockets in use(e.g. you run a mail
server). sometimes ive had to shut xinetd down and all services for 20
minutes waiting for sockets to clear, inetd doesn't care it just fires
up anyways.- uses it's own hosts allow/deny that is inside xinetd.conf, which you
have to restart xinetd to change anyways so....
i use xinetd for the binding services to specific interfaces(works
good on network gateways), and for the fast access lists it has.
though i curse everytime i have to restart it ...
and yes none of the packages officially support xinetd from
my experience but its not hard to manually add a service to xinetd.

i use xinetd wherever i can if its a debian system.

nate