On Thu, Mar 12, 2009 at 02:13:12PM +0100, Holger Levsen wrote: > On Donnerstag, 12. März 2009, Giacomo A. Catenazzi wrote: > > But now I'm not sure about: > > - if it is a good thing to have admin choosed ports > > I dont think so and I guess I'm not alone and thats why there is no best > practice to do that. The only (typo of) package where I can think off where > this is sensible as default, is one which sets up a hidden service. > > What kind of daemon are you packaging?
I'm packaging approx, which for compatibility with apt-proxy defaults to port 9999 (not in /etc/services). That was fine when approx, like apt-proxy, was run as a standalone daemon from an initscript. But I just changed it to run (only) from inetd, hence this thread. Regarding the other thread in -devel about the future of inetd: in my case I found it very sensible to jettison all the code for opening sockets, binding ports, handling IPv6, handling tcp-wrappers, daemonizing processes, etc. and punt it to inetd. Since apt clients keep their connections open for many multiple, the performance hit is negligible. -- Eric Cooper e c c @ c m u . e d u -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
