"address family not supported" error

[Jeremy Begg]

Hi,

Process Software MultiNet V5.2 Rev A-X, HP rx2660 (1.59GHz/9.0MB), OpenVMS
I64 V8.3-1H1

I'm trying to set up CIFS T1.1 on this machine and it seems to be working.
(Note that it requires each user account to have SYSLCK privilege by
default, this will be fixed in due course I am told!)

Today I tried to get this machine to join a Windows domain (actually our
local Advanced Server PDC) but instead I saw this error:

[2008/08/07 16:49:40, 3] DKA0:[SAMBA.V11_EFT.SOURCE.LIB]UTIL_SOCK.C;2:(868)
Connecting to 192.168.1.2 at port 139
[2008/08/07 16:49:40, 2] DKA0:[SAMBA.V11_EFT.SOURCE.LIB]UTIL_SOCK.C;2:(904)
error connecting to 192.168.1.2:139 (address family not supported )

Does this imply the CIFS routines have been compiled or linked in such a way
that they are incompatible with MultiNet's socket library?

Thanks,

Jeremy Begg

[Geoff Bryant]

We have found that CIFS is doing something not quite right, but that said
there are ecos in the works to handle the problem.

Post by Jeremy Begg
Hi,
Process Software MultiNet V5.2 Rev A-X, HP rx2660 (1.59GHz/9.0MB), OpenVMS
I64 V8.3-1H1
I'm trying to set up CIFS T1.1 on this machine and it seems to be working.
(Note that it requires each user account to have SYSLCK privilege by
default, this will be fixed in due course I am told!)
Today I tried to get this machine to join a Windows domain (actually our
[2008/08/07 16:49:40, 3] DKA0:[SAMBA.V11_EFT.SOURCE.LIB]UTIL_SOCK.C;2:(868)
Connecting to 192.168.1.2 at port 139
[2008/08/07 16:49:40, 2] DKA0:[SAMBA.V11_EFT.SOURCE.LIB]UTIL_SOCK.C;2:(904)
error connecting to 192.168.1.2:139 (address family not supported )
Does this imply the CIFS routines have been compiled or linked in such a way
that they are incompatible with MultiNet's socket library?
Thanks,
Jeremy Begg

[Richard Whalen]

MultiNet V5.n uses BSD 4.4 sockaddr data structures internally. These
have 1 byte of length, 1 byte of address family, 2 bytes for port, and 4
bytes for address (for IPv4). The drivers (BG and INET) provide
backwards compatibility for the support of BSD 4.3 sockaddr data
structures that prior versions of MultiNet used. (2 bytes of address
family, 2 bytes for port, etc.) Which type of data structure is expected
is determined by the IO function code - those that use BSD 4.4 sockaddrs
have the IO$M_EXTEND bit set. The code in the drivers to change the
data structures is very mechanical - move the address family and put the
length in. If a BSD 4.4 sockaddr were to be passed to the driver with a
BSD 4.3 IO call, then it would end up putting in an unexpected address
family. While it could easily be argued that the right place to fix
this would be in the drivers, we have other problems that we were fixing
in the kernel and this minimized the number of patches created.

-----Original Message-----
From: Jeremy Begg [mailto:***@vsm.com.au]
Sent: Thursday, August 07, 2008 2:58 AM
To: info-***@process.com
Cc: ***@vsm.com.au
Subject: "address family not supported" error

Hi,

Process Software MultiNet V5.2 Rev A-X, HP rx2660 (1.59GHz/9.0MB),
OpenVMS
I64 V8.3-1H1

I'm trying to set up CIFS T1.1 on this machine and it seems to be
working.
(Note that it requires each user account to have SYSLCK privilege by
default, this will be fixed in due course I am told!)

Today I tried to get this machine to join a Windows domain (actually our
local Advanced Server PDC) but instead I saw this error:

[2008/08/07 16:49:40, 3]
DKA0:[SAMBA.V11_EFT.SOURCE.LIB]UTIL_SOCK.C;2:(868)
Connecting to 192.168.1.2 at port 139
[2008/08/07 16:49:40, 2]
DKA0:[SAMBA.V11_EFT.SOURCE.LIB]UTIL_SOCK.C;2:(904)
error connecting to 192.168.1.2:139 (address family not supported )

Does this imply the CIFS routines have been compiled or linked in such a
way
that they are incompatible with MultiNet's socket library?

Thanks,

Jeremy Begg

[Jeremy Begg]

Hi Richard,

Thanks for the detail, and thanks for addressing this so quickly. I was
guessing it might be a BSD 4.3 vs 4.4 problem of some sort, so it's nice to
know I was on the right track :-)

Regards,

Jeremy Begg

Post by Richard Whalen
MultiNet V5.n uses BSD 4.4 sockaddr data structures internally. These
have 1 byte of length, 1 byte of address family, 2 bytes for port, and 4
bytes for address (for IPv4). The drivers (BG and INET) provide
backwards compatibility for the support of BSD 4.3 sockaddr data
structures that prior versions of MultiNet used. (2 bytes of address
family, 2 bytes for port, etc.) Which type of data structure is expected
is determined by the IO function code - those that use BSD 4.4 sockaddrs
have the IO$M_EXTEND bit set. The code in the drivers to change the
data structures is very mechanical - move the address family and put the
length in. If a BSD 4.4 sockaddr were to be passed to the driver with a
BSD 4.3 IO call, then it would end up putting in an unexpected address
family. While it could easily be argued that the right place to fix
this would be in the drivers, we have other problems that we were fixing
in the kernel and this minimized the number of patches created.
-----Original Message-----
Sent: Thursday, August 07, 2008 2:58 AM
Subject: "address family not supported" error
Hi,
Process Software MultiNet V5.2 Rev A-X, HP rx2660 (1.59GHz/9.0MB), OpenVMS
I64 V8.3-1H1
I'm trying to set up CIFS T1.1 on this machine and it seems to be working.
(Note that it requires each user account to have SYSLCK privilege by
default, this will be fixed in due course I am told!)
Today I tried to get this machine to join a Windows domain (actually our
[2008/08/07 16:49:40, 3]
DKA0:[SAMBA.V11_EFT.SOURCE.LIB]UTIL_SOCK.C;2:(868)
Connecting to 192.168.1.2 at port 139
[2008/08/07 16:49:40, 2]
DKA0:[SAMBA.V11_EFT.SOURCE.LIB]UTIL_SOCK.C;2:(904)
error connecting to 192.168.1.2:139 (address family not supported )
Does this imply the CIFS routines have been compiled or linked in such a way
that they are incompatible with MultiNet's socket library?
Thanks,
Jeremy Begg