| Author |
Message
|
| Gideon |
 Posted: Tue Jul 13, 2010 4:27 pm Post subject: Q Mgr Not Available, but no firewall |
 |
|
Chevalier
Joined: 18 Aug 2009
Posts: 403
|
I am using WMQ 7.1 on Linux
When I try to add a Qmgr on the Explorer or access the qmgr via JMS code, I get a 2059 (Qmgr not available)
So I try to Putty into 1414 on the host
I get an "Error, connection refused"
Good news I think, I will just take down the Firewall
However the Firewall was already disabled, so I try to connect with both the Firewall disabled, or enable with 1414 allowed, but neither option worked.
Any ideas on how I should track this error down ?
Thanks |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| bruce2359 |
| Posted: Tue Jul 13, 2010 4:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Poobah
Joined: 05 Jan 2008
Posts: 9469
Location: US: west coast, almost. Otherwise, enroute.
|
| Quote: |
| When I try to add a Qmgr on the Explorer or access the qmgr via JMS code, I get a 2059 (Qmgr not available) |
From where are you doing this? Same box as the qmgr?
Can you use the tcp/ip ping command successfully? If not, then there is something else blocking the connection.
_________________
I like deadlines. I like to wave as they pass by.
ב''ה
Lex Orandi, Lex Credendi, Lex Vivendi. As we Worship, So we Believe, So we Live. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Gideon |
| Posted: Tue Jul 13, 2010 4:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Chevalier
Joined: 18 Aug 2009
Posts: 403
|
I am trying to add the qmgr to the explorer on a WIndows client (from the Linux Server)
From the Windows client I can ping the ip of the Linux Server, so the connection is not blocked
any ideas ? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| bruce2359 |
| Posted: Tue Jul 13, 2010 4:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Poobah
Joined: 05 Jan 2008
Posts: 9469
Location: US: west coast, almost. Otherwise, enroute.
|
| Quote: |
So I try to Putty into 1414 on the host
I get an "Error, connection refused" |
This is a TCP/IP error, not an MQ error.
So, tcp ping is OK.
But Putty fails.
Can you telnet to the server?
Have you contacted your network support people?
Is there firewall software on your Windows box? Is there another router/firewall between Windows and Linux?
If you are on the Linux box, can you Putty?
_________________
I like deadlines. I like to wave as they pass by.
ב''ה
Lex Orandi, Lex Credendi, Lex Vivendi. As we Worship, So we Believe, So we Live. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Vitor |
| Posted: Tue Jul 13, 2010 6:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
| Gideon wrote: |
| From the Windows client I can ping the ip of the Linux Server, so the connection is not blocked |
No, that just means the ping port is not blocked. The port WMQ's trying to use might well be. Use telnet not ping, and telnet to the specific WMQ port not the telnet default one.
Connection refused is typically a firewall problem.
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| mqjeff |
| Posted: Wed Jul 14, 2010 5:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Master
Joined: 25 Jun 2008
Posts: 17447
|
| Vitor wrote: |
| Gideon wrote: |
| From the Windows client I can ping the ip of the Linux Server, so the connection is not blocked |
No, that just means the ping port is not blocked. The port WMQ's trying to use might well be. Use telnet not ping, and telnet to the specific WMQ port not the telnet default one.
Connection refused is typically a firewall problem. |
It seems he or she has already done that... ?
| Gideon wrote: |
So I try to Putty into 1414 on the host
I get an "Error, connection refused" |
There's probably a personal firewall on linux and potentially a second firewall in the network between the two machines that is blocking this port.
This is usually actually a good thing - you should take the time to map out all of the desktops that *really* *absolutely* will *require* access to the MQ listener port on this machine, and only configure the firewall to allow those in. It will save time later and is the best way to start planning MQ security - at the network level. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Vitor |
| Posted: Wed Jul 14, 2010 5:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
| mqjeff wrote: |
It seems he or she has already done that... ?
| Gideon wrote: |
So I try to Putty into 1414 on the host
I get an "Error, connection refused" |
|
My point was if you telnet (Putty) to the machine, it uses the default port. A better test is to telnet to the port WMQ is using.
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| mqjeff |
| Posted: Wed Jul 14, 2010 5:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Master
Joined: 25 Jun 2008
Posts: 17447
|
| Vitor wrote: |
| mqjeff wrote: |
It seems he or she has already done that... ?
| Gideon wrote: |
So I try to Putty into 1414 on the host
I get an "Error, connection refused" |
|
My point was if you telnet (Putty) to the machine, it uses the default port. A better test is to telnet to the port WMQ is using. |
My point is that I think you're still misreading what Gideon said. "Putty *into* 1414 on the host". How is that not an equivalent to "telnet <host> 1414"? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Vitor |
| Posted: Wed Jul 14, 2010 5:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
| mqjeff wrote: |
| Vitor wrote: |
| mqjeff wrote: |
It seems he or she has already done that... ?
| Gideon wrote: |
So I try to Putty into 1414 on the host
I get an "Error, connection refused" |
|
My point was if you telnet (Putty) to the machine, it uses the default port. A better test is to telnet to the port WMQ is using. |
My point is that I think you're still misreading what Gideon said. "Putty *into* 1414 on the host". How is that not an equivalent to "telnet <host> 1414"? |
Ah 
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| fjb_saper |
| Posted: Wed Jul 14, 2010 4:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 18 Nov 2003
Posts: 20756
Location: LI,NY
|
| mqjeff wrote: |
My point is that I think you're still misreading what Gideon said. "Putty *into* 1414 on the host". How is that not an equivalent to "telnet <host> 1414"? |
Because he did not specify whether on the putty screen he had the raw, telnet, rlogin or ssh protocol checked. I understand he switched the port on the putty screen to 1414.
By default I would assume he had telnet checked but it never hurts to have it confirmed. 
_________________
MQ & Broker admin |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
