<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>topic Re: Getting a quick &amp;quot;connection refused&amp;quot; in Active IQ Unified Manager Discussions</title>
    <link>https://community.netapp.com/t5/Active-IQ-Unified-Manager-Discussions/Getting-a-quick-quot-connection-refused-quot/m-p/20052#M4315</link>
    <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Thanks.&amp;nbsp; We, too,&amp;nbsp; checked it on our NetApp and also on a simulator before I posted my request.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;In our context this request is both "low priority" and "now", affecting an external application.&amp;nbsp; If such a control mechanism were available now within the NetApp, this would be the cleanest overall way to handle it.&amp;nbsp; But if it is not available, then we have sketched out a 'not quite as clean' work-around&amp;nbsp; at the application end.&amp;nbsp; (So although the priority of the issue in our overall service-provision is rising as we migrate to the NetApp, our potential work-around will drop the priority of needing to address it within the NetApp.)&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;So although it is affecting our application, I probably won't raise it with NetApp.&amp;nbsp; (Anyway, the NetApp here is run by a different group; I'll suggest to them that they consider raising the issue, but I suspect the application-level workaround means we won't.)&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Meanwhile, if anyone happens to know an option or mechanism in the NetApp that would allow a low port number to return "connection refused", then we'd be pleased to hear about it.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Fri, 27 Apr 2012 13:25:27 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>MONSOONCAT</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2012-04-27T13:25:27Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Getting a quick "connection refused"</title>
      <link>https://community.netapp.com/t5/Active-IQ-Unified-Manager-Discussions/Getting-a-quick-quot-connection-refused-quot/m-p/20041#M4313</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;A TCP connection towards an arbitrary high port number (&amp;gt;=1024) on the Netapp seems to return "connection refused" instantly.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;By contrast, a connection towards a low port number waits for several minutes, then something times out.&amp;nbsp; I imagine this is related to assisting security etc. &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;As part of our transition from our previous non-NetApp fileserver, it would be very useful if we could persuade the NetApp to return a quick "connection refused" on a particular low port number.&amp;nbsp; But we cannot see a way to adjust this behaviour (either for a particular low port or for all low ports).&amp;nbsp; Is this possible?&amp;nbsp; If so, could you point us to the relevant documentation, please?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 05 Jun 2025 06:28:31 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.netapp.com/t5/Active-IQ-Unified-Manager-Discussions/Getting-a-quick-quot-connection-refused-quot/m-p/20041#M4313</guid>
      <dc:creator>MONSOONCAT</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2025-06-05T06:28:31Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Getting a quick "connection refused"</title>
      <link>https://community.netapp.com/t5/Active-IQ-Unified-Manager-Discussions/Getting-a-quick-quot-connection-refused-quot/m-p/20047#M4314</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;This is the first time ever I hear about such behavior. Would be interesting to see&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;-&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; netstat -an from filer&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;-&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; network trace for connection to port that is definitely not in LISTEN state in above output; you could generate it on NetApp using pktt tool.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Yes, I confirm it (tested on 8.0.2P4). Interesting. There is undocumented option ip.tcp.limit_rsts which sounds like it could be related; but I suggest you open case with NetApp and update this thread if you get this resolved.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Message was edited by: aborzenkov&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 27 Apr 2012 09:57:59 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.netapp.com/t5/Active-IQ-Unified-Manager-Discussions/Getting-a-quick-quot-connection-refused-quot/m-p/20047#M4314</guid>
      <dc:creator>aborzenkov</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2012-04-27T09:57:59Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Getting a quick "connection refused"</title>
      <link>https://community.netapp.com/t5/Active-IQ-Unified-Manager-Discussions/Getting-a-quick-quot-connection-refused-quot/m-p/20052#M4315</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Thanks.&amp;nbsp; We, too,&amp;nbsp; checked it on our NetApp and also on a simulator before I posted my request.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;In our context this request is both "low priority" and "now", affecting an external application.&amp;nbsp; If such a control mechanism were available now within the NetApp, this would be the cleanest overall way to handle it.&amp;nbsp; But if it is not available, then we have sketched out a 'not quite as clean' work-around&amp;nbsp; at the application end.&amp;nbsp; (So although the priority of the issue in our overall service-provision is rising as we migrate to the NetApp, our potential work-around will drop the priority of needing to address it within the NetApp.)&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;So although it is affecting our application, I probably won't raise it with NetApp.&amp;nbsp; (Anyway, the NetApp here is run by a different group; I'll suggest to them that they consider raising the issue, but I suspect the application-level workaround means we won't.)&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Meanwhile, if anyone happens to know an option or mechanism in the NetApp that would allow a low port number to return "connection refused", then we'd be pleased to hear about it.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 27 Apr 2012 13:25:27 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.netapp.com/t5/Active-IQ-Unified-Manager-Discussions/Getting-a-quick-quot-connection-refused-quot/m-p/20052#M4315</guid>
      <dc:creator>MONSOONCAT</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2012-04-27T13:25:27Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Getting a quick "connection refused"</title>
      <link>https://community.netapp.com/t5/Active-IQ-Unified-Manager-Discussions/Getting-a-quick-quot-connection-refused-quot/m-p/20056#M4316</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;After some research - in 8.x ports below 1024 are blocked by explicit firewall rule in low level FreeBSD. These rules are part of read-only root image, so there is no way to change them. Looks like deliberate decision; so the only way to change it (at least, to make it configurable) is to raise issue with NetApp.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 03 May 2012 05:29:25 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.netapp.com/t5/Active-IQ-Unified-Manager-Discussions/Getting-a-quick-quot-connection-refused-quot/m-p/20056#M4316</guid>
      <dc:creator>aborzenkov</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2012-05-03T05:29:25Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

