Brice, > May have some good news and I do have an additional question, now that I > 'think' I have a better understanding. I got Richard to change his ldmd.conf > requests so that they were mirror images of each other on the two clients and > had him restart his LDM sessions. I'm not sure what you mean by "mirror images of each other on the two clients". Please elucidate. > I could see in the logs that the two clients made connections through the > tunnel and that the requests were reversed. I'm not sure what you mean by "the requests were reversed". Please elucidate. > So far I have not seen the obsolete termination messages. I am going to > continue to monitor the logs today. That's good news! > So with this potential success, I have a question. As I add additional > external customers to this tunneling scenario it is going to become > increasingly difficult to make sure that the arrangements of their requests > are different. So I had a thought (painful and dangerous that is). Could I > add a different bogus pattern to each of the requests that would make them > sufficiently different to still work? For instance, if I assigned each > client a designator that would indicate the client, I should have both a > different pattern and a quick look at who is being fed. As an example, > Richard is running servers, Sun and Moon, if he changed his pattern: > > Sun client: request FT4 "Sun|^WT.* " 134.xxx.xxx.aaa > Moon client: request FT4 "Moon|^WT.* " 134.xxx.xxx.aaa, > > then LDM should see those as different patterns and let them through. > Because I know there will never be any 'Sun' or 'Moon' patterns in our data, > I am thinking this would work. Your thoughts? We plan on testing it later > today or tomorrow if things look good with the current configurations. Might > be a useful thing to suggest to folks behind NAT's too. Interesting idea! I see no reason why it shouldn't work -- as long as you can guarantee that, for example, the strings "Sun" and "Moon" will never, ever appear *anywhere* in the product-identifiers. The matching would probably be quicker and less risky for the patterns "^Sun|^WT" and "^Moon|^WT", which, by the way, are equivalent to "^(Sun|WT)" and "^(Moon|WT)". > Thanks again for everything you folks do with LDM. We couldn't live without > it. Oh, I'm sure you'd find something else. :-) > Just for your information, it is going to become the standard streaming data > communication protocol between the NASA centers doing spaceflight support > (JSC, KSC and MSFC), and the Cape Canaveral Air Force Station weather system. Yikes! Just what I need: more support emails! :-) Seriously, we're honored. You know about our training workshops, right? We also visit for on-site training. > Brice > > Brice Biggerstaff, CISSP > Johnson Space Center > Weather Decision Support System > MIDDS Software Support Lead > 281-853-3011 (w) > 713-764-2601 (p) > address@hidden (alpha pager for text and email) > > Res Confacti Erimus > âWe Get Things Done!â Regards, Steve Emmerson Ticket Details =================== Ticket ID: BIG-900661 Department: Support LDM Priority: Normal Status: Closed
NOTE: All email exchanges with Unidata User Support are recorded in the Unidata inquiry tracking system and then made publicly available through the web. If you do not want to have your interactions made available in this way, you must let us know in each email you send to us.