Return to BSD News archive
Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!simtel!swidir.switch.ch!scsing.switch.ch!news.belwue.de!fu-berlin.de!zrz.TU-Berlin.DE!zib-berlin.de!irz401!uriah.heep!bonnie.heep!not-for-mail
From: j@bonnie.heep.sax.de (J Wunsch)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc
Subject: Re: /etc/services
Date: 25 Aug 1995 10:35:09 +0200
Organization: Private U**x site, Dresden.
Lines: 24
Message-ID: <41k1vt$dsa@bonnie.tcd-dresden.de>
References: <41gtu9$knu@news.bu.edu> <87virn9aoy.fsf@hrothgar.mindspring.com> <41htce$91l@news.bu.edu>
Reply-To: joerg_wunsch@uriah.heep.sax.de
NNTP-Posting-Host: 192.109.108.139
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Mikhail Teterin <mi@cs.bu.edu> wrote:
>My impression was, that when inetd hears a connection attempt on the port
>it looks at /etc/services to find out which server to wake up (say telnet).
No, it looks into /etc/inetd.conf at startup time to know on which
ports it has to listen. Once there's an incoming connection on one of
the ports, it invokes the appropriate command. If you've been
specifying the port number as the name of a service, it will be
resolved via /etc/services first. (Btw., don't misuse port # 80, it's
the assigned number for http.)
>Aga, that explains the current behavior, but does not seem reasonable...
>Why can not same service sit and wait for few ports? Seems like a design
>problem to me...
Since "service" is a synonym for "port number", only easier to
memorize for people. Since both refer to the same, you cannot
establish ambiguous defintions.
--
cheers, J"org private: joerg_wunsch@uriah.heep.sax.de
http://www.sax.de/~joerg/
Never trust an operating system you don't have sources for. ;-)