| |
| |
| |
|
Page: 1 2 3
Comments:
<0> oops
<0> netstat -a -n
<1> there is port 8080
<1> 0.0.0.0:8008 with foreign address as 0.0.0.0
<1> so the local address might not be defined? am I correct in saying this?
<1> or is it defined automatically?
<2> 0.0.0.0 is used to indicate "everywhere"
<1> ok...
<2> when binding interfaces, it means to bind to all availible addresses
<2> that is, all local ones
<1> right..
<1> what might the porblem be then?
<2> when doing routing, it means to match everywhere that doesn't have an explicit route
<1> right..
<0> 8008? not 8080?
<1> 8080
<1> sorry .. I apologise..
<1> 8080
<0> Ap123: maybe some firewalling component remained, or perhaps your isp blocks incoming access to port 8080?
<1> I just called my ISP.. they said .. all's open
<1> It's really gettin on my nerves... wasting a lot of time
<0> Ap123: can you run a known to work something that we can try to connect to?
<1> sorry?
<2> I would look up what your route table defines as the explicit route for your IP
<0> wlfshmn: shouldn't we be able to get there?
<0> Ap123: tomcat is running right now?
<1> yes
<2> Clackwell: If the explicit route points to an external gateway it may make funkey decisions about returning the traffic
<2> Clackwell: but yet, normally I would expect that traffic too to get returned directly
<1> Listen .. what about Windows XP's router..
<2> Ap123: You can check XP's routing table by typing "route print" in a command console
<2> Ap123: look for a line that has your IP address in the first column
<1> In fact it's the 2nd one..
<2> Ap123: the interesting values are the third and fourth column, called gateway and interface
<1> Gateway and Interface are 127.0.0.1
<2> that is att it should then.
<2> s/att/as/
<1> Are they correct values?
<2> then no external system is involved in handling your traffic, it's all you ;)
<1> hmmmmmmmm
<1> Right..
<1> So how can I mingle with the culprit and make it accessible externally?
<2> The onyl remaning reasons for not beieng able to access the port then would be firewall software of some sort, or the software not beeing bound. But with 8080 open on 0.0.0.0 in netstat, it is indeed running
<0> Ap123: how is the computer connected to the internet exactly?
<1> ADSL ... direct connection through a modem
<1> I have to connect manually
<0> Ap123: and that is really just a modem, not a "router"?
<1> no no ..
<1> maybe you've encountered it : Sppedtouch ADSL modem
<1> SpeedTouch
<2> Clackwell: with the IP routed to 127.0.0.1, it has to be a local device
<0> wlfshmn: what you say applies to local access only, right?
<0> Ap123: it looks like a regular firewall stealth mode to me. if i change the ports i keep getting the same error message about the site taking too long to respond.
<2> if he had an router, it would get the IP, and he would use non-routable adressing, or he would use RARP p***through, but except for the unlikely event of the deice acting as a transparent firewall, he would have a non-local gateway
<0> wlfshmn: all this applies to local access, right? i keep trying remote access to his machine and it fails nonetheless.
<1> I cannot even telnet any port...
<2> Clackwell: ah, you ment that way. Yes, your traffic and his, even to the same IP would use diffrent paths until it actually hit the interface to which the external IP is bound
<2> I think he still has firewalling/ip-filtering enabled
<2> Ap123: Are you using XP?
<2> Ap123: The firewall you disabled, was it window's built-in firewall (SP2+) or an enternal system, such as Symantec Internet Security, or whatnot
<2> Ap123: If it was a 3rd party application, your XP2 firewall may well have been enabled automatically after the third party firewall was disabled or removed
<0> wlfshmn: i think so too, or maybe the software for his modem has something in that direction, or his antivirus
<2> Clackwell: Indeed, both might bundle firewalling software
<1> Is there any other setting which I might have skipped?
<1> yes .. xp
<1> no .. It was through the Local Area Connection
<1> (Unchecked the protect my ....)
<1> otherwise.. the modem has no actual bundled software
<0> would you be a customer i would offer support via remote control now, but...;)
<1> I can see.
<1> there is a navapsvc.exe process
<1> which is from the Norton Antivirus package.. installed around 300 years ago.
<0> ugh...norton tainted system...
<1> yes .. that's the word!
<1> and worst of all .. cannot end the process1
<1> can it be a reason for all of this confusion?
<2> well, I must say I have no idea why it doesn't work then..
<2> just the navapsvc.exe process should not affect network connectivity, it's the pure antivirus service
<1> it is..
<0> Ap123: who is the owner of the process? might be system. run this: compmgmt.msc
<2> you may be prevented from temrinating it directly, but you can stop the service if you want to in the administration tools - servies display
<0> then go into the services section and look around for firewall related services from norton and other "security" software.
<1> it's hell .. wasting all this time .. let me check..
<0> i kept installing norton over and over again a few weeks ago.
<0> inside vmware. :]
<0> very satisfying to be able to wipe it off with a mouse click.
<1> There is ..
<1> Norton Antivirus Firewall Monitor Service
<1> but it is not started
<1> I disabled it..
<1> but yet..
<0> Ap123: maybe pick up "process explorer" from sysinternals.com
<2> awsome tool that.. everyone should have it availible, if nothing else to kill references to files you want ot delete but windows refuses to let go of
<0> i has a moronic set of column defaults, but that can be taken care of easily.
<3> grab it while you can, ms bought them a little while ago
<2> what? crap!
<0> trax: what, what?
<0> teh end of teh world!
<2> Clackwell: well, atleast it means the MS OS team (hopefuly) will have a couple of peopel who know what they are doing
<0> "Im very pleased to announce that Microsoft has acquired Winternals Software and Sysinternals." - http://www.sysinternals.com/blog/2006/07/on-my-way-to-microsoft.html
<0> eeks
<3> i think one of the guys originally worked for ms
<0> this is the end.
<1> killed all Symantec processes..
<1> but for nothing..
<2> "As for Sysinternals, the site will remain for the time being while Microsoft determines the best way to integrate it into its own community efforts, and the tools will continue to be free to download."
<2> err. I'll make a backup of that software, thankyouverymuch
<0> did someone say reinstall?
<1> anyways.. thanks for your help guys..
<1> there's nothing apparently I can do..
<4> Hi. How can I convert a ImageIcon to Bytes?
<0> Vetox: no idea. i would have to google to find the answer.
<4> I came from there
<0> then there is no hope.
<4> :(
<4> I get it, thanks
<5> ouch
<5> first link is java though
<0> that faqbotic thing looks weird.
<5> hehe
<0> not that there is anything wrong with that piece of information it has on that question...:)
<5> i guess it is a ripf off system like answers.com
<2> gah.. I hate it when I start ending command-line entries with;
<0> makes you wonder how they feed it.
<0> wlfshmn: you are using the commandline? man, that's so 1970ies
<2> meh, now don't you kids be getting all fancy on me now! command lines were good enough in my day, and they damn well better be good enough for you lot too!
<2> ofcourse, I was only alive for a 1.25 years of the 70s, so my memories of the time period are a little hazy.
<0> :)
<0> http://www.reactos.org/xhtml/en/index.html
<5> Clackwell : i thought command line is so unix :)
<5> Clackwell : or jdk for that matter :-P
<6> sup
<6> anyone good with JSF?
<6> i'm trying to figure out if the "action" attribute on a command button exists strictly for use with the navigation handler
<6> fyi: actions are designed for business logic and participate in navigation handling, whereas action listeners typically perform user interface logic and do not participate in navigation handling
<0> whodis: check #jsf or ##jsf on freenode, possibly.
<5> jsf has its own channel ?
<0> so it seems.
<0> hi dave, mike2_, deano
<7> heya Clackwell
<7> *yawn* How's work for everyone?
<8> evening Clackwell
<8> back home now for me.
<0> mike2_: racing towards the first stable release without any serious glitches. it has been within reach for...the last...8 months or so :>
<7> so, more of a crawl than a race then?
<0> mike2_: oh we race alright, we just had delusions about the length of the track ;>
Return to
#java
or
Go to some related
logs:
#AllNiteCafe
#AllNiteCafe
#AllNiteCafe
''Roger Waters Dawnload''
honey bunny no more
#linux
#AllNiteCafe
#php
#chatzone
#linuxhelp
|
|