I think is not a problem of firewall because, if i put only one
filesystem in disklist it work.

ND

On Thu, 2004-12-02 at 18:21 +0100, Christoph Scheeder wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> Completly shure?
> many modern linux distros (AFAIK at least suse and redhat) come up
> with default firewall-installations blocking many things if you do
> not explicitly disable these firewalls.
> So there might be a firewall on the linux-box even if you didn't
> configure it.
> 
> Christoph
> 
> Nuno Dias schrieb:
> > No, the two machines are in the same network, no firewall.
> > 
> > ND
> > 
> > On Thu, 2004-12-02 at 17:55 +0100, Christoph Scheeder wrote:
> > 
> >>Nuno Dias schrieb:
> >>
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>> I have a Digital Unix machine that give me some strange results when i
> >>>try to use amanda.
> >>> If i configure disklist with 2 or more disks of the Digital Unix
> >>>machine, "the amanda report" tell me this:
> >>>
> >>>xxxxxxx    /xxxx lev 0 FAILED [Estimate timeout from xxxxxx]
> >>>xxxxxxx    /usr lev 0 FAILED [Estimate timeout from xxxxxx]
> >>>xxxxxxx    / lev 0 FAILED [Estimate timeout from xxxxxx]
> >>>
> >>> The amandad.20041202142753000.debug file in Digital Machine have this
> >>>error:
> >>>
> >>>amandad: time 200.266: dgram_recv: timeout after 10 seconds
> >>>amandad: time 200.266: waiting for ack: timeout, retrying
> >>>amandad: time 210.267: dgram_recv: timeout after 10 seconds
> >>>amandad: time 210.267: waiting for ack: timeout, retrying
> >>>amandad: time 220.267: dgram_recv: timeout after 10 seconds
> >>>amandad: time 220.267: waiting for ack: timeout, retrying
> >>>amandad: time 230.267: dgram_recv: timeout after 10 seconds
> >>>amandad: time 230.267: waiting for ack: timeout, retrying
> >>>amandad: time 240.267: dgram_recv: timeout after 10 seconds
> >>>amandad: time 240.267: waiting for ack: timeout, giving up!
> >>>amandad: time 240.267: pid 22594 finish time Thu Dec  2 14:31:54 2004
> >>>
> >>> The strange thing is, if i configure only one disk in disklist, the
> >>>backup run ok, and no problem is report in "amanda report".
> >>> I increased the etimeout/ctimeout to a big number ... and did not work.
> >>>
> >>> I have a Linux machine that is the master and the Digital Unix machine
> >>>is the client, the version of amanda is 2.4.4p4
> >>>
> >>>Thank's for some help.
> >>>
> >>>ND
> >>
> >>Hi,
> >>could this be a firewall-timeout on the linux-machine?
> >>Christoph
-- 
Nuno Dias <ndias AT lip DOT pt>
LIP