Re: 832894 phish fix -- TCP broken

From: Clyde (b26440510_at_DELETEyahoo.com)
Date: 02/05/04 

Date: Wed, 04 Feb 2004 23:01:40 -0500

I'd like to hear what would cause local access to ports not to respond
but remote machines access those ports fine. I don't see the
difference between creating a local connection to a port -vs- a remote
machine connecting to the port but I'm no TCP/IP guru. Whether I used
127.0.0.1 or the static IP of the box, no local connections were
accepted.

"local" refers to using machine A to connect to the port machine A.
"remote" means using any other machine besides machine A to connect to
the port on machine A.

Oh, I also tried uninstalling and reinstalling the TCP/IP protocol but
that didn't help either.

The email server and web server were running during the install (same
as the other countless Windows Updates done before) but the FTP server
wasn't, but I still could not connect locally to FTP.

And I'm not blaming MS, but it is very suspicious that no problems
were evident until that patch was installed and the machine rebooted.
I understand that the layers are involved and there are several
players involved, but since the patch was the laast change, it will be
the first suspect.

All I can say is something, somewhere, got royally hosed because none
of the attempts to repair the damage were successful.

"Scott Harding - MS MVP" <scrockel@**NO_SPAM**hotmail.com> wrote:

>Your firewalls could have been damaged by the patch and that would cause the
>ports to possibly be hosed....er......closed....were you running them during
>the install? Was your Virus scanner running during the install? What was the
>state of the services when the problem happened? Was the email service
>running during install? Since a lot of these are 3rd party they all could
>been the cause of the issue. The patch may have replaced/updated a shared
>system file thus causing these other things to crash. My point is that I
>have 9 web servers running all the latest patches and have not had similar
>issues so is this a MS problem? Hard to say, probably. I certainly
>understand your pain and believe me I have felt the same but MS is not
>always to blame and it really is a catch 22 with patching and such because
>MS can never know all the different software/hardware people are using when
>they issue these patches. I really do commend you on your ghosting process
>though. What a nice way to get your system back eh? Ghost Rules! Anways I
>know that we are not really working on an issue here but these newsgroups
>are really great and there are a lot of great people who help out so keep
>using them! Take care.