Re: Backtesting Java Software on Solaris 10 Question

From: Baillargeon, Sonny (Sonny.Baillargeon_at_bmonb.com)
Date: 04/28/05

  • Next message: Tech Guy: "Re: FC-AL on v880"
    Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 17:26:28 -0400
    To: <sunmanagers@sunmanagers.org>
    
    

    Thanks to Andrei, Russell, and Thomas for replying.

    I am getting closer but still no cigar. I followed your advice on
    running truss and here are the results

    USER:
    5515/1: open("/var/run/rpc_door/rpc_100029.2", O_RDONLY) = 8
    5515/1: open("/dev/udp", O_RDONLY) = 9
    5515/1: open("/dev/udp", O_RDONLY) = 9
    5515/1: open("/dev/udp", O_RDWR) = 9

    ROOT:
    5633/1: open("/var/run/rpc_door/rpc_100029.1", O_RDONLY) = 8
    5633/1: open("/dev/udp", O_RDONLY) = 9
    5633/1: open("/dev/udp", O_RDONLY) = 9
    5633/1: open("/dev/udp", O_RDWR) = 9
    5633/1: open("/var/run/rpc_door/rpc_100029.2", O_RDONLY) = 8
    5633/1: open("/dev/des", O_RDONLY) Err#2
    ENOENT
    5633/1: open("/dev/udp", O_RDONLY) = 9
    5633/1: open("/dev/udp", O_RDONLY) = 9
    5633/1: open("/dev/udp", O_RDONLY) = 9
    5633/1: open("/dev/udp", O_RDONLY) = 9
    5633/1: open("/dev/udp", O_RDONLY) = 9
    5633/1: open("/dev/udp", O_RDONLY) = 9

    As the user open("/var/run/rpc_door/rpc_100029.1", O_RDONLY) = 8 never
    gets called, rpc_200029.2 gets created first. So I'm not sure if that
    signifies anything.

    The snoops look like this for udp traffic:
    USER:
    Using device /dev/bge0 (promiscuous mode)
    ________________________________
     client1 -> server4 ETHER Type=0800 (IP), size = 134 bytes
     client1 -> server4 IP D=10.111.53.24 S=10.111.43.31 LEN=120,
    ID=5745, TOS=0x0, TTL=255
     client1 -> server4 UDP D=111 S=47339 LEN=100
     client1 -> server4 RPC C XID=1115209734 PROG=100000 (PMAP) VERS=2
    PROC=5
     client1 -> server4 PORTMAP C CALLIT prog=NIS+ vers=3 proc=0
     client1 -> server4 NIS+ C Null
    ________________________________
       server4 -> client1 ETHER Type=0800 (IP), size = 74 bytes
       server4 -> client1 IP D=10.111.43.31 S=10.111.53.24 LEN=60,
    ID=40036, TOS=0x0, TTL=253
       server4 -> client1 UDP D=47339 S=32771 LEN=40
       sede1 -> server4 IP D=10.111.53.24 S=10.111.43.31 LEN=160,
    ID=575:rver4 -> client1 RPC R (#1) XID=1115209734 Success
       server4 -> client1 PORTMAP R CALLIT port=32773 len=0
       server4 -> client1 NIS+ R Null
    ________________________________
     client1 -> server4 ETHER Type=0800 (IP), size = 106 bytes
     client1 -> server4 IP D=10.111.53.24 S=10.111.43.31 LEN=92,
    ID=5746, TOS=0x0, TTL=255
     client1 -> server4 UDP D=111 S=47340 LEN=72
     client1 -> server4 RPC C XID=1115215171 PROG=100000 (PMAP) VERS=3
    PROC=3
     client1 -> server4 RPCBIND C GETADDR prog=100300 (NIS+) vers=3
    ________________________________
       server4 -> client1 ETHER Type=0800 (IP), size = 90 bytes
       server4 -> client1 IP D=10.111.43.31 S=10.111.53.24 LEN=76,
    ID=40037, TOS=0x0, TTL=253
       server4 -> client1 UDP D=47340 S=111 LEN=56
       server4 -> client1 RPC R (#3) XID=1115215171 Success
       server4 -> client1 RPCBIND R GETADDR Uaddr=10.111.53.24.128.5

    ROOT:
    ________________________________
     client1 -> server4 ETHER Type=0800 (IP), size = 174 bytes
     client1 -> server4 IP D=10.111.53.24 S=10.111.43.31 LEN=160,
    ID=5755, TOS=0x0, TTL=255
     client1 -> server4 UDP D=111 S=47344 LEN=140
     client1 -> server4 RPC C XID=1114648070 PROG=100000 (PMAP) VERS=2
    PROC=5
     client1 -> server4 PORTMAP C CALLIT prog=NIS+ vers=3 proc=0
     client1 -> server4 NIS+ C Null
    ________________________________
       server4 -> client1 ETHER Type=0800 (IP), size = 74 bytes
       server4 -> client1 IP D=10.111.43.31 S=10.111.53.24 LEN=60,
    ID=40045, TOS=0x0, TTL=253
       server4 -> client1 UDP D=47344 S=32771 LEN=40
       server4 -> client1 RPC R (#1) XID=1114648070 Success
    ________________________________
     client1 -> server4 ETHER Type=0800 (IP), size = 106 bytes
     client1 -> server4 IP D=10.111.53.24 S=10.111.43.31 LEN=92,
    ID=5756, TOS=0x0, TTL=255
     client1 -> server4 UDP D=111 S=47345 LEN=72
     client1 -> server4 RPC C XID=1114648762 PROG=100000 (PMAP) VERS=3
    PROC=3
     client1 -> server4 RPCBIND C GETADDR prog=100300 (NIS+) vers=3
    ________________________________
       server4 -> client1 ETHER Type=0800 (IP), size = 90 bytes
       server4 -> client1 IP D=10.111.43.31 S=10.111.53.24 LEN=76,
    ID=40046, TOS=0x0, TTL=253
       server4 -> client1 UDP D=47345 S=111 LEN=56
       server4 -> client1 RPC R (#3) XID=1114648762 Success
       server4 -> client1 RPCBIND R GETADDR Uaddr=10.111.53.24.128.5
    ________________________________
     client1 -> server4 ETHER Type=0800 (IP), size = 82 bytes
     client1 -> server4 IP D=10.111.53.24 S=10.111.43.31 LEN=68,
    ID=5763, TOS=0x0, TTL=255
     client1 -> server4 UDP D=111 S=47347 LEN=48
     client1 -> server4 RPC C XID=1114680971 PROG=100000 (PMAP) VERS=3
    PROC=6
     client1 -> server4 RPCBIND C GETTIME

    The user never sends the RPCBIND C GETTING packet to the server
    (nyedsdev4). Apparently it is getting stuck opening /dev/udp as RW.

    Thanks for reading.

    -sonny

    |Sonny Baillargeon|Bank of Montreal / Harris Nesbitt|
    |3 Times Square, 27th Floor|New York, NY 10036|
    |Phone: 212.702.1747|Fax: 212.605.1580|Mobile: 917.682.3649|

    <FONT SIZE =
    1>***************************************************************************
    *
    This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential and privileged
    information. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender
    immediately by return e-mail, delete this e-mail and destroy any copies. Any
    dissemination or use of this information by a person other than the intended
    recipient is unauthorized and may be illegal. Unless otherwise stated,
    opinions expressed in this e-mail are those of the author and are not endorsed
    by the author's employer.</FONT>
    _______________________________________________
    sunmanagers mailing list
    sunmanagers@sunmanagers.org
    http://www.sunmanagers.org/mailman/listinfo/sunmanagers


  • Next message: Tech Guy: "Re: FC-AL on v880"