wicinski@nrl-cmf.UUCP (Tim Wicinski) (12/11/88)
Dave Platt asked awhile ago why getzones failed with an error of -1096,
and all i told him was 'yea, it did the same for me."this only happens
when you use the new port assignments (200 and up)
Bug: getzones failed when using the new NIC port assignments (200 and
up), but would work fine otherwise.
Fix: lib/kip/abkip.c incorrectly defined the service "at-kip" and
"at-kis". the simple fix is below:
*** lib/cap/abkip.c.old Sat Dec 10 03:00:37 1988
--- lib/cap/abkip.c Sat Dec 10 03:01:04 1988
***************
*** 161,167
WKS_entry("at-rtmp",rtmpSkt),
WKS_entry("at-nbp",nbpNIS),
WKS_entry("at-echo",echoSkt),
! WKS_entry("at-zis",zipZIS),
WKS_entry(NULL, 0)
};
--- 161,167 -----
WKS_entry("at-rtmp",rtmpSkt),
WKS_entry("at-nbp",nbpNIS),
WKS_entry("at-echo",echoSkt),
! WKS_entry("at-zip",zipZIS),
WKS_entry(NULL, 0)
};
dik@uva.UUCP (Casper H.S. Dik) (12/11/88)
In article <154@nrl-cmf.UUCP> wicinski@nrl-cmf.UUCP (Tim Wicinski) writes: >Dave Platt asked awhile ago why getzones failed with an error of -1096, >and all i told him was 'yea, it did the same for me."this only happens >when you use the new port assignments (200 and up) > >Bug: getzones failed when using the new NIC port assignments (200 and >up), but would work fine otherwise. > >Fix: lib/kip/abkip.c incorrectly defined the service "at-kip" and >"at-kis". the simple fix is below: > Change >! WKS_entry("at-zis",zipZIS), To >! WKS_entry("at-zip",zipZIS), Or not? A colleague of mine had the same problem resently. We both had installed KIP & CAP on our systems, but getzones failed only on his. We both used the new ddprange. The only difference was that I got the names from the CAP documentation and he from the kip documentation. After carefully rereading both 'KIP Installation instructions' [K] and 'CAP installation procedure'[C] we found the following: [C, page 1, bottom line] ... "at-nbp", "at-rtmp", "at-echo", "at-zis". .... ^ [K,section DDP START RANGE] In April, 1988, the NIC assigned a range of ports for using by KIP for "static" or "well known" assignments. In particular it assigned: 201 - AT-RMTP .... 206 - AT-ZIS .... ^ [K, 15 lines down] Following are the entries for /etc/services .... at-zip 206/udp # udp: zip ^ It seemed to me that the last one is a typo. But is there someone who knows[NIC?] and can tell whether to apply the patch (as Tim suggested) or change the /etc/services entry (as I did)? ____________________________________________________________________________ Casper H.S. Dik University of Amsterdam | dik@uva.uucp The Netherlands | ...!uunet!mcvax!uva!dik