|
Re: amrecover, ruserok and rhosts authentication
2003-04-24 15:36:26
Regarding question 2:
I had this problem yesterday-- I had recently upgraded from version
2.4.2p2 to version 2.4.4. I changed the lines in inetd.conf (Solaris 8)
to point to my new installation (/usr/local/libexec/amandad -->
/usr/local/amanda/libexec/amandad) but I forgot to restart inetd! It
hadn't reread its configuration file, so it was still sending amanda
communications to the older binary. Sending an -HUP signal to the
process fixed my problem.
Basically, the index server is starting up the older amanda binary
instead of the newer one. It's up to you to figure out why based on
your configuration.
Sorry if this doesn't apply-- like if you haven't just upgraded... in
that case, I have no idea!
~Alisa Manning
DK Smith wrote:
I have a couple of basic questions related to this transcript of.
Essentially, my biggest question is how to use rhosts authentication
(in the scenario below) and ruserok not fail.
# /usr/local/amanda/sbin/amrecover -s tapeserver
AMRECOVER Version 2.4.4. Contacting server on tapeserver ...
220 tapeserver AMANDA index server (2.4.2p2) ready.
500 Access not allowed: [access as amanda not allowed from
root@client] ruserok failed
Things I have not been able to determine:
1. rhosts auth is used in this setup. I saw the comments for debugging
a similar situation when using amandahosts. The stated solution was to
the following entry into amandahosts.
localhost root
my.server root
Is something similar done for rhosts authentication?
2. Why does the version number 2p2 show on this index server?
####
Thanks for the extra eyes...
PS: If someone wants to suggest a better way (i.e. using amandahosts,
or maybe some combination of tcpwrappers and rhosts or something... I
am all ears... However I would like to learn what is required on Unix
to make this particular rhosts auth operate.
Cheers,
DK
--
Alisa Knodle Manning
Networking Group
Information Technology Services
School of Management
Boston University
|
|
|
