9.3.2 behavior - explain please
Barry Margolin
barmar at alum.mit.edu
Thu Aug 2 01:41:35 UTC 2007
In article <f8pa2b$d1v$1 at sf1.isc.org>, Pavel Urban <urbanp at mlp.cz>
wrote:
> Pavel Urban wrote:
> > [root at dns ~]# lsof -i udp:53
> > COMMAND PID USER FD TYPE DEVICE SIZE NODE NAME
> > named 6982 named 20u IPv4 19672544 UDP dns.iol.cz:domain
> > named 6982 named 22u IPv4 19672546 UDP dns.iol.cz:domain
> > named 6993 named 20u IPv4 19672564 UDP dns.iol.cz:domain
> > named 6993 named 21u IPv4 19672566 UDP dns.iol.cz:domain
> >
> > Strange...
> >
>
> Huh... I can see it now. There were indeed two instances of named. How
> could that happen I don't know... Thanks a lot!
That's very strange. It's not supposed to be possible for multiple
processes to bind to the same local address and UDP port. Are you sure
6993 and 6982 aren't threads of the same process? On Linux, the PID
identifies the thread, not the process.
--
Barry Margolin, barmar at alum.mit.edu
Arlington, MA
*** PLEASE post questions in newsgroups, not directly to me ***
*** PLEASE don't copy me on replies, I'll read them in the group ***
More information about the bind-users
mailing list