Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
There's more than one way to do things

Re^4: Proving a UDP port is closed

by davis (Vicar)
on Feb 01, 2011 at 15:11 UTC ( #885512=note: print w/ replies, xml ) Need Help??

in reply to Re^3: Proving a UDP port is closed
in thread Proving a UDP port is closed

Sorry, I realised the stupidity of what I'd said (the implied magic) fairly quickly! Yeah, grokking the "netstat -af inet" output would almost certainly work for me for both TCP and UDP listeners, but there's still something somehow... cleaner about the attempted connection method, at least in my head.


Comment on Re^4: Proving a UDP port is closed
Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^5: Proving a UDP port is closed
by Anonymous Monk on Feb 01, 2011 at 15:29 UTC

    Is it possible for a listener to black-hole the port, and soak up messages (possibly acting on them) with no replies or indication that it has happened to the outside world?

    Such a case would require checking for listener processes rather than just shouting at the computer and waiting for echoes.

      Another good point. I suppose I could have "nc -lu 111" or similar running, and that might appear to be the same as "unreachable".

      I think this is nudging me down the netstat/lsof route...


Log In?

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://885512]
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others perusing the Monastery: (11)
As of 2015-10-08 19:18 GMT
Find Nodes?
    Voting Booth?

    Does Humor Belong in Programming?

    Results (223 votes), past polls