Brice, > What I meant by mirror and reversed was this - > > Request FT4 "^WT|^RW|^JS|^LR" > Request FT4 "^LR|^JS|^RW|^WT" Palindromic patterns. Cute! > That seems to work - no terminations since this morning. I'll get Richard to > try the 'client name' concept and let you know how it works. > > I'm still puzzled by the other obsolete entries with the 'direct-connect' > clients. There in an environment that I don't have administrative access > to... yet. So I haven't changed them yet to try anything. How 'deep' does > the 'same server' check go? I wouldn't think it would break on servers > coming out of the same network, but that is the symptom. The server-check by the LDM is on the IP addresses: requests from the same IP address are considered to come from the same downstream host. If your 'direct-connect' clients are behind a NAT, then that would explain the behavior you're seeing. > I should have access to those clients and be able to restructure them. If > you get tired of this, just point me to the module that does the checks and > I'll figure it out. Currently we still have the source on one of our > servers. In the future though, we are looking at installing via RPM and it > doesn't include the LDM source. May have to keep a copy around in my hip > pocket. The source is (as will likely be for quite a while) on GitHub. The relevant file is "ldm_server.c". Search for the string "Reduce". > Anyway, I'll let you know what else comes up. Please do. > Brice 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.