 |
 |
a small correction: the "failing" xrootd connection is indeed xrdcp -d 3 root:// stormgf1.pi.infn.it//store/mc/SAM/GenericTTbar/AODSIM/CMSSW_9_0_0_90X_mcRun1_realistic_v4-v1/10000/28B9D1FB-8B31-E711-AA4E-0025905B85B2.root . from inside the tsocks I can open the connection telnet stormgf1.pi.infn.it 1094 Trying 193.205.76.72... Connected to stormgf1.pi.infn.it. Escape character is '^]'. but xrdcp still says [2020-08-05 09:24:19.816284 +0200][Debug ][PostMaster ] [ stormgf1.pi.infn.it:1094] Found 1 address(es): [::ffff:193.205.76.72]:1094 [2020-08-05 09:24:19.816563 +0200][Debug ][AsyncSock ] [ stormgf1.pi.infn.it:1094 #0.0] Attempting connection to [::ffff:193.205.76.72]:1094 [2020-08-05 09:24:19.817298 +0200][Debug ][Poller ] Adding socket 0x15eac50 to the poller [2020-08-05 09:24:19.817925 +0200][Debug ][AsyncSock ] [ stormgf1.pi.infn.it:1094 #0.0] Async connection call returned [2020-08-05 09:24:19.818836 +0200][Debug ][XRootDTransport ] [ stormgf1.pi.infn.it:1094 #0.0] Sending out the initial hand shake + kXR_protocol [2020-08-05 09:24:19.819392 +0200][Dump ][AsyncSock ] [ stormgf1.pi.infn.it:1094 #0.0] Wrote a message: (0xcc000a00), 44 bytes [2020-08-05 09:24:19.820072 +0200][Error ][AsyncSock ] [ stormgf1.pi.infn.it:1094 #0.0] Socket error while handshaking: [ERROR] Socket error [2020-08-05 09:24:19.820170 +0200][Debug ][AsyncSock ] [ stormgf1.pi.infn.it:1094 #0.0] Closing the socket On Tue, Aug 4, 2020 at 4:47 PM Tommaso Boccali <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > > Ciao. > > In order to try and find a (user allowed) way to overcome network > limitations in HPC sites, we were trying to use tsocks. In this way, we can > ~ establish a VPN without the need to be root or such. > > The system used "ssh -D" (today) or "openconnect" (tomorrow) to > establish the connection, and it seems transparent to most (!) of the user > commands we tried. > > For example, the machine we are on has no connectivity to PISA, but a > "tsocks ssh [log in to unmask]" (or the bare command with a > proper LD_PRELOAD) works just fine. > > So, we are confident the basic routing table works (wget is ok, scp is ok, > etc etc etc). > > BUT: xrdcp does not like it, and a command like > > xrdcp -d 3 root:// > stormfe1.pi.infn.it//store/mc/SAM/GenericTTbar/AODSIM/CMSSW_9_0_0_90X_mcRun1_realistic_v4-v1/10000/28B9D1FB-8B31-E711-AA4E-0025905B85B2.root > . > > stops with > > [2020-08-04 16:19:56.308921 +0200][Error ][AsyncSock ] [ > stormfe1.pi.infn.it:1094 #0.0] Socket error while handshaking: [ERROR] > Socket error > [2020-08-04 16:19:56.309017 +0200][Debug ][AsyncSock ] [ > stormfe1.pi.infn.it:1094 #0.0] Closing the socket > [2020-08-04 16:19:56.309228 +0200][Debug ][Poller ] > <[::ffff:127.0.0.1]:30547><--><[::ffff:127.0.0.1]:5555> Removing socket > from the poller > > > So question is: is there any trivial reason why XrootD protocol should not > be able to route via a tsocks? > > thanks a lot > > mirko, daniele, tom > > -- > Tommaso Boccali > INFN Pisa > > ------------------------------ > > Use REPLY-ALL to reply to list > > To unsubscribe from the XROOTD-L list, click the following link: > https://listserv.slac.stanford.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=XROOTD-L&A=1 > -- Tommaso Boccali INFN Pisa ######################################################################## Use REPLY-ALL to reply to list To unsubscribe from the XROOTD-L list, click the following link: https://listserv.slac.stanford.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=XROOTD-L&A=1