- Community Home
- >
- Servers and Operating Systems
- >
- Operating Systems
- >
- Operating System - OpenVMS
- >
- Restricting Advanced Server/Pathworks to one LAN
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
Discussions
Forums
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
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
тАО04-04-2006 12:00 PM
тАО04-04-2006 12:00 PM
Restricting Advanced Server/Pathworks to one LAN
I have defined PWRK$KNBDAEMON_DEVICE and _IPADDR, and the PWRK$KNBDAEMON_xxxxxx.LOG file appears to show it doing the right thing but
a) I can see that Pathworks has bound to port 139 on "all interfaces", and
b) I really can Map Network Drive from a PC connected to the second LAN (which will then show an established TCP/IP connection for port 139 on the second interface).
Log file referred to above shows
Tue Apr 4 21:31:09 2006 get_phys_addr: PWRK$KNBDAEMON_DEVICE is set to EIA0:
Tue Apr 4 21:31:09 2006 get_phys_addr: EIA2: PH Address: AA-00-04-XX-XX-XX
Tue Apr 4 21:31:09 2006 get_ip_addr: PWRK$KNBDAEMON_IPADDR is 192.168.1.X
Tue Apr 4 21:31:09 2006 IP Address: 192.168.1.X
Tue Apr 4 21:31:09 2006 ip_brdcst_address : 192.168.1.255
192.168.1.* is the first LAN and 192.168.2.* is the second LAN.
PROD SHOW PROD suggests that I am running Advanced Server 7.3-A4, which based on my reading should be a version good enough to have this functionality working.
Any hints as to whether I am misunderstanding how this is supposed to work / doing something wrong?
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО04-04-2006 07:06 PM
тАО04-04-2006 07:06 PM
Re: Restricting Advanced Server/Pathworks to one LAN
What are the IP addresses and network masks of
the two interfaces?
Dave
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО04-05-2006 11:13 AM
тАО04-05-2006 11:13 AM
Re: Restricting Advanced Server/Pathworks to one LAN
PS Forgot to mention ... VMS version is V7.3-2 and IP implementation is MultiNet V5.0 Rev A-X.
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО04-05-2006 09:25 PM
тАО04-05-2006 09:25 PM
Re: Restricting Advanced Server/Pathworks to one LAN
Jiri
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО04-06-2006 12:18 AM
тАО04-06-2006 12:18 AM
Re: Restricting Advanced Server/Pathworks to one LAN
There's no way in Advanced Server to restrict which interfaces it listens on. Perhaps there's some way to block access to UDP ports 137 and 138 and TCP port 139 on a specific interface with Multinet.?. Of course, a firewall could be employed as well.
The pwrk$knbdaemon logicals control which interface address Advanced Server sends back in response to name queries it receives. For example, if you have interfaces A and B and pwrk$knbdaemon "binds" to interface A, when a client sends a NetBIOS name query to Advanced Server (regardless of which interface it arrives on), in the response Advanced Server will indicate the Advanced Server's IP address is the address to which knbdaemon is bound - interface A in this example. Note this will only occur for clients which are on one of the subnets that the Advanced Server is on and only when such clients use broadcasts (rather than WINS or DNS) to resolve a name.
HTH,
Paul
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО04-11-2006 01:13 PM
тАО04-11-2006 01:13 PM
Re: Restricting Advanced Server/Pathworks to one LAN
>Perhaps there's some way to block access to UDP ports 137 and 138 and TCP port 139 on a specific interface with Multinet?
Yes, there is. We will probably do that. There may be a modest performance loss in enabling that functionality. And in some respects we would prefer to have defence in depth i.e. both stop Pathworks listening where it shouldn't be listening *and* enable packet filtering on the restricted interface.
However there is a short-term reason not to do this that will become the subject of the next thread. (-:
>Of course, a firewall could be employed as well.
Yes, we could do that too (install a separate firewall). That would be somewhat disruptive though.
In fact we thought we were using the Alpha as something of a firewall in its own right i.e. separating the two subnets and controlling traffic between them, but Pathworks is at least in part defeating us.
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО06-01-2006 03:41 AM
тАО06-01-2006 03:41 AM
Re: Restricting Advanced Server/Pathworks to one LAN
http://forums1.itrc.hp.com/service/forums/questionanswer.do?threadId=1019004
that describes how to get Samba and Advanced Server running simultaneously on the same server...
Paul