At 12:47 PM 4/29/2009 -0400, [log in to unmask] wrote:
>Nathan wrote on 04/28/2009 04:23:09 PM:
>> Just a small point -- I would say that's not a sufficient test,
>> because LISTSERV itself does not listen on port 25.  So testing on
>> port 25 is a good thing, but not sufficient in and of itself, since
>> port 25 being responsive is not a guarantee that LISTSERV itself is
>running.
>
>Is this still needed if the monitoring is done from a different computer,
>and Listserve is running under Windows and is the SMTP listener?

LISTSERV (LSV.EXE) is entirely separate from the SMTP listener (SMTPL.EXE), so as I said, verifying that the SMTP port is responding does not guarantee that LISTSERV is running.  In point of fact, I can give you a scenario in which SMTPL.EXE would be running but LSV.EXE would not -- if the LAK has expired and LISTSERV can't start.  SMTPL doesn't use LAKs so it will continue running regardless of LAK expiration.

Nathan