- Community Home
- >
- Servers and Operating Systems
- >
- Operating Systems
- >
- Operating System - HP-UX
- >
- Re: Impact of increasing tcp_smallest_anon_port
Categories
Company
Local Language
Forums
Discussions
Forums
- Data Protection and Retention
- Entry Storage Systems
- Legacy
- Midrange and Enterprise Storage
- Storage Networking
- HPE Nimble Storage
Discussions
Discussions
Discussions
Forums
Discussions
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
- BladeSystem Infrastructure and Application Solutions
- Appliance Servers
- Alpha Servers
- BackOffice Products
- Internet Products
- HPE 9000 and HPE e3000 Servers
- Networking
- Netservers
- Secure OS Software for Linux
- Server Management (Insight Manager 7)
- Windows Server 2003
- Operating System - Tru64 Unix
- ProLiant Deployment and Provisioning
- Linux-Based Community / Regional
- Microsoft System Center Integration
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Community
Resources
Forums
Blogs
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Mark Topic as New
- Mark Topic as Read
- Float this Topic for Current User
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Printer Friendly Page
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
07-19-2011 11:57 PM
07-19-2011 11:57 PM
Impact of increasing tcp_smallest_anon_port
Dear All.
As Siebel reserves some port in same range where wbem and CIM reserve port for there process on 11.31 (range 49152 -49200) , so as per application requirement we want to raise tcp_smallest_anon_port value to 50001. Before moving ahead with change, i want to know if anyone can share what could be potential impact of raising parameter value except reduction in number of empheral port.
It will be helpful if anyone is having different opinion to deal with this requirement.
Hope to hear from Gurus
Regards
SA
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
07-20-2011 05:08 AM
07-20-2011 05:08 AM
Re: Impact of increasing tcp_smallest_anon_port
I don't really get why you want to raise the value of tcp_smallest_anon_port to tcp_smallest_anon_port. We have several siebel application servers and oracle wants from us to set the value to 1024.
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
07-21-2011 01:07 AM
07-21-2011 01:07 AM
Re: Impact of increasing tcp_smallest_anon_port
Hi Turgay,
It was first question asked by me also to our apps team and they come up with Oracle document where its was suggested Siebel Financial Services CRM - Version: 7.8.2.6 release to increase tcp_tcp_smallest_anon_port value to 50001.
I am still not fully convinced with there reply and asked them to work with oracle for a work around. In the meantime i want to analyse any potential impact of this change.
Regards
SA