X2200 Remote Console stays "white" ??? - SUN
This is a discussion on X2200 Remote Console stays "white" ??? - SUN ; Hello list,
Yesterday I installed two new X2200 systems, but am unable to get
Remote Console to work. I can reach the ILO / ILOM just fine, reboot,
etc. The small JAVA applet at the top even show the correct ...
-
X2200 Remote Console stays "white" ???
Hello list,
Yesterday I installed two new X2200 systems, but am unable to get
Remote Console to work. I can reach the ILO / ILOM just fine, reboot,
etc. The small JAVA applet at the top even show the correct screen. But
running the Remote Console application gives nothing (white screen).
Tried Mozilla & Safari on Max OS.X and IE6 on Windows 2003. First ones
gives white screen, second one ditto and hangs up the IE window.
I see no traffic flowing but 2 TCP sessions open on ports 443 and 8600.
Shouldn't there be more?
-
Re: X2200 Remote Console stays "white" ???
Welll, I sort'a fixed it. For some obscure reason the X2100M2 ILO will
not run when placed behind a Cisco PIX firewall, even when the firewall
is permitting all ports & traffic in and out. Very strange and not
really what I was expecting. The X4100 ILO runs great, even using NAT
on that...
mousehouse wrote:
> Hello list,
>
> Yesterday I installed two new X2200 systems, but am unable to get
> Remote Console to work. I can reach the ILO / ILOM just fine, reboot,
> etc. The small JAVA applet at the top even show the correct screen. But
> running the Remote Console application gives nothing (white screen).
>
> Tried Mozilla & Safari on Max OS.X and IE6 on Windows 2003. First ones
> gives white screen, second one ditto and hangs up the IE window.
>
> I see no traffic flowing but 2 TCP sessions open on ports 443 and 8600.
> Shouldn't there be more?
-
Re: X2200 Remote Console stays "white" ???
Does the ILO (I guess this is the name for the console app?) use UDP or
TCP? If TCP, I wouldn't expect a problem but if UDP, it might be the
case that instead of sending MTU-sized packets, it sends larger packets
as fragments. TCP shouldn't do this because packet size should simply
be limited by MSS/MTU.
The problem with fragmented packets and firewall is that Linux, which I
am just assuming is the OS for the ILO, sends fragments backwards --
last fragment first -- as an optimization. This breaks stateful firewalls,
which includes NAT even without any firewall rules.
-frank
On 11 Oct 2006 11:10:12 -0700 "mousehouse" wrote:
> Welll, I sort'a fixed it. For some obscure reason the X2100M2 ILO will
> not run when placed behind a Cisco PIX firewall, even when the firewall
> is permitting all ports & traffic in and out. Very strange and not
> really what I was expecting. The X4100 ILO runs great, even using NAT
> on that...
>
>
>
> mousehouse wrote:
>> Hello list,
>>
>> Yesterday I installed two new X2200 systems, but am unable to get
>> Remote Console to work. I can reach the ILO / ILOM just fine, reboot,
>> etc. The small JAVA applet at the top even show the correct screen. But
>> running the Remote Console application gives nothing (white screen).
>>
>> Tried Mozilla & Safari on Max OS.X and IE6 on Windows 2003. First ones
>> gives white screen, second one ditto and hangs up the IE window.
>>
>> I see no traffic flowing but 2 TCP sessions open on ports 443 and 8600.
>> Shouldn't there be more?