On 1/2/08, Daniel Pocock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > In a large installation, the state table for port mapping may be > undesirable. It is up to the system administrator to decide which > solution they prefer - although both solutions (port mapping and > listening on an extra port) are equally legitimate. Can we make setuid > operation a wishlist item for Erlang perhaps?
1) It's a separate program which isn't shipped with erlang, so it'd require a separate package; 2) It isn't a drop-in replacement for usual erlang sockets, so ejabberd must be partially rewritten to use it. I think it's infeasible for package maintainer to do that. But you may go directly to upstream bug tracker and file a bug about privileged ports. > > Here is the code I added to /etc/ejabberd/ejabberd.cfg for binding to a > specific IP address and both ports - 5222 (the default) and 443. In > this case, I also tell ejabberd to bind to a specific IP address, > because there is a genuine https service running on the same host: It's easy to redirect only packets that come to a specific IP. > > Also, do you think it is safe for ejabberd to accept new registrations > by default? Has the issue been discussed already? I think all the You're right. Usually this issue with free registration comes to my mind just after uploading a new package. Could you file a bug to make me not to forget it again? -- Sergei Golovan -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
