>On 2/8/06, Mikkel L. Ellertson <mikkel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> J. K. Cliburn wrote:
>> > On 2/8/06, Jacob (=Jouk) Jansen <joukj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> >
>> >>a.apprich@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote on 8-FEB-2006 11:30:21.57
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>>>>>>I try to get the rsh command working to a FC4 system
>> >>
>> >>[snip]
>> >>
>> >>>what does /var/log/messages tell you about login via rsh?
>> >>
>> >>No Route to host
>> >
>> >
>> > I know you said you have the relevant ports unfiltered in iptables,
>> > but isn't this the typical message received when you attempt to access
>> > a blocked port?
>> >
>> Nope. You will get connection refused if the port is set to reject,
>> and a timeout message if it is set to drop. You get the No route to
>> host when there is a network configuration problem.
>
>I disagree, but I won't be able to substantiate my disagreement until
>I get home this evening. Every time I see the "No route to host"
>message, my next step is to look for a filter in the way, and I almost
>always find a port blocked by netfilter.
ports 512-514 are open on both sides. The machines are on the same local
network without any firewall apart from their own ones. portmapper is
running on both sides. So what netfilter can be in the way?
The only thing I'm not sure about is selinux (I do not fully understand the
configuration, which is still "default" on this machine) Can that in the way?
Or do I need other ports than 512-514?
Jouk
Bush : All votes are equal but some votes are more equal than others.
>------------------------------------------------------------------------------<
Jouk Jansen
joukj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Technische Universiteit Delft tttttttttt uu uu ddddddd
Kavli Institute of Nanoscience tttttttttt uu uu dd dd
Nationaal centrum voor HREM tt uu uu dd dd
Lorentzweg 1 tt uu uu dd dd
2628 CJ Delft tt uu uu dd dd
Nederland tt uu uu dd dd
tel. 31-15-2782272 tt uuuuuuu ddddddd
>------------------------------------------------------------------------------<
