Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2001 22:37:42 -0800 From: "Crist J. Clark" <cjclark@reflexnet.net> To: Arcady Genkin <antipode@thpoon.com> Cc: freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG, cjclark@alum.mit.edu Subject: Re: stunnel configuration (-l option) Message-ID: <20010122223742.Q10761@rfx-216-196-73-168.users.reflex> In-Reply-To: <87puhf29zl.fsf@tea.thpoon.com>; from antipode@thpoon.com on Mon, Jan 22, 2001 at 04:48:30AM -0500 References: <874rys45pu.fsf@tea.thpoon.com> <20010121214404.G10761@rfx-216-196-73-168.users.reflex> <87puhf29zl.fsf@tea.thpoon.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, Jan 22, 2001 at 04:48:30AM -0500, Arcady Genkin wrote: > "Crist J. Clark" <cjclark@reflexnet.net> writes: > > > # stunnel -d 993 -l /usr/local/libexec/imapd -- imapd > > > > Doesn't work? Once someone connects, a separate stunnel should fork > > leaving the listener bound on 993/tcp. > > Shouldn't I be seeing one extra child of stunnel per every imapd > process? If I understand correctly, there should be one parent > stunnel, spawning two children for each connection: one more stunnel > to do the decryptiong magic, and one to exec the actual server to pipe > the decrypted stream to. Am I right? Now I only see one stunnel > process in "ps aux", and one imapd process. But I think that already > this should be two stunnels and one imapd. I do not remember for sure, but I don't think it spawns two new stunnel's per connection. -- Crist J. Clark cjclark@alum.mit.edu To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20010122223742.Q10761>