Test if a port on a remote system is reachable (without telnet)












302















In the old days, we used telnet to see if a port on a remote host was open: telnet hostname port would attempt to connect to any port on any host and give you access to the raw TCP stream.



These days, the systems I work on do not have telnet installed (for security reasons), and all outbound connections to all hosts are blocked by default. Over time, it's easy to lose track of which ports are open to which hosts.



Is there another way to test if a port on a remote system is open – using a Linux system with a limited number of packages installed, and telnet is not available?










share|improve this question

























  • Related: check status of one port on remote host at SO

    – kenorb
    Dec 30 '15 at 14:50
















302















In the old days, we used telnet to see if a port on a remote host was open: telnet hostname port would attempt to connect to any port on any host and give you access to the raw TCP stream.



These days, the systems I work on do not have telnet installed (for security reasons), and all outbound connections to all hosts are blocked by default. Over time, it's easy to lose track of which ports are open to which hosts.



Is there another way to test if a port on a remote system is open – using a Linux system with a limited number of packages installed, and telnet is not available?










share|improve this question

























  • Related: check status of one port on remote host at SO

    – kenorb
    Dec 30 '15 at 14:50














302












302








302


154






In the old days, we used telnet to see if a port on a remote host was open: telnet hostname port would attempt to connect to any port on any host and give you access to the raw TCP stream.



These days, the systems I work on do not have telnet installed (for security reasons), and all outbound connections to all hosts are blocked by default. Over time, it's easy to lose track of which ports are open to which hosts.



Is there another way to test if a port on a remote system is open – using a Linux system with a limited number of packages installed, and telnet is not available?










share|improve this question
















In the old days, we used telnet to see if a port on a remote host was open: telnet hostname port would attempt to connect to any port on any host and give you access to the raw TCP stream.



These days, the systems I work on do not have telnet installed (for security reasons), and all outbound connections to all hosts are blocked by default. Over time, it's easy to lose track of which ports are open to which hosts.



Is there another way to test if a port on a remote system is open – using a Linux system with a limited number of packages installed, and telnet is not available?







linux networking port






share|improve this question















share|improve this question













share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited Jul 19 '13 at 21:17







Steve HHH

















asked Jul 19 '13 at 16:54









Steve HHHSteve HHH

2,99062133




2,99062133













  • Related: check status of one port on remote host at SO

    – kenorb
    Dec 30 '15 at 14:50



















  • Related: check status of one port on remote host at SO

    – kenorb
    Dec 30 '15 at 14:50

















Related: check status of one port on remote host at SO

– kenorb
Dec 30 '15 at 14:50





Related: check status of one port on remote host at SO

– kenorb
Dec 30 '15 at 14:50










12 Answers
12






active

oldest

votes


















255














Bash has been able to access TCP and UDP ports for a while. From the man page:



/dev/tcp/host/port
If host is a valid hostname or Internet address, and port is an integer port number
or service name, bash attempts to open a TCP connection to the corresponding socket.
/dev/udp/host/port
If host is a valid hostname or Internet address, and port is an integer port number
or service name, bash attempts to open a UDP connection to the corresponding socket.


So you could use something like this:



xenon-lornix:~> cat < /dev/tcp/127.0.0.1/22
SSH-2.0-OpenSSH_6.2p2 Debian-6
^C pressed here


Taa Daa!






share|improve this answer


























  • This also seems to work in MinGW. For instance, a remote VNC server on 192.168.2.100 responds with "RFB 003.008" by using "cat < /dev/tcp/192.168.2.100/5900".

    – Peter Mortensen
    Jul 21 '15 at 11:26








  • 1





    @lornix, ok, but in this case I have to get the same result with use nc without -z option, but it still does not work: # nc -v -w5 127.0.0.1 18080 Connection to 127.0.0.1 18080 port [tcp/*] succeeded! # cat < /dev/tcp/127.0.0.1/18080 Just hangs without any result. Just want to understand when I can use "/dev/tcp/host/port" option

    – Alexandr
    Jun 14 '16 at 7:09






  • 5





    @Alexandr... actually, "hangs without any result" is pretty much expected behavior. cat is waiting for input. nc has extra smarts to enable it to sense no-data pending and stops trying. cat isn't quite as smart. Try cat < /dev/tcp/localhost/22, you should get your sshd header. Evidently, your process on port 18080 waits for something to come in, before sending anything. Port 22 (ssh) greets you with it's version and whatnot. Try it out!

    – lornix
    Jun 14 '16 at 8:44






  • 1





    @lornix, thank you very much for explanation! Now the restriction is clear. I think using nc should be a preferred way to check ports.

    – Alexandr
    Jun 14 '16 at 14:29






  • 2





    This was incredibly helpful when working with a docker container that had nothing installed. Was able to quickly verify that the container had access to non-containerized DB via DNS. Example: cat < /dev/tcp/hostname/5432

    – Michael Hobbs
    Oct 24 '18 at 14:09



















358














Nice and verbose! From the man pages.

Single port:



nc -zv 127.0.0.1 80


Multiple ports:



nc -zv 127.0.0.1 22 80 8080


Range of ports:



nc -zv 127.0.0.1 20-30





share|improve this answer



















  • 4





    Seems to be far the bestest answer, thanks. ;-)

    – lpapp
    Nov 26 '14 at 15:42






  • 5





    This hanged when tried on Ubuntu 14.04 (Trusty Tahr) for a remote server (same LAN) for closed ports (it timed out after 127 seconds) - thus not very suitable in scripts. It did work though for a service that had a port open. Using option "-w2" could be the solution.

    – Peter Mortensen
    Jul 21 '15 at 12:36








  • 4





    Use -u option for UDP ports.

    – Efren
    Sep 21 '16 at 0:10






  • 7





    On version 6.4 of ncat -z is not recognized. I was able to do without z

    – smishra
    Apr 6 '17 at 17:18






  • 4





    You can check multiple ranges with: nc -zv 127.0.0.1 22,80,8080,20-30,443-446 (nc Version: 1.107-4).

    – bobbel
    Jul 6 '17 at 16:55



















99














Netcat is a useful tool:



nc 127.0.0.1 123 &> /dev/null; echo $?



Will output 0 if port 123 is open, and 1 if it's closed.






share|improve this answer


























  • This is a far more elegant and scriptable answer than my own. It is unfortunate for me that the security-conscious sysadmins who withheld telnet also withheld nc (though – strangely – not curl or wget).

    – Steve HHH
    Jul 19 '13 at 19:51











  • Yes that is completely arbitrary and silly.

    – thnee
    Jul 19 '13 at 20:10






  • 3





    Let the FOR statements begin!

    – Chad Harrison
    Jul 19 '13 at 21:37






  • 1





    This hanged when tried on Ubuntu 14.04 (Trusty Tahr) for a remote server (same LAN) for closed ports (it timed out after about 127 seconds) - thus not very suitable in scripts. It did work though for a service that had a port open, returning 0. Using option "-w2" could be the solution.

    – Peter Mortensen
    Jul 21 '15 at 13:06













  • I think -G 2 would be more appropriate for TCP timeout

    – A B
    Aug 24 '15 at 21:45



















56














The simplest method, without making use of another tool, such as socat, is as described in @lornix's answer above. This is just to add an actual example of how one would make use of the psuedo-device /dev/tcp/... within Bash if you wanted to, say, test if another server had a given port accessible via the command line.



Examples



Say I have a host on my network named skinner.



$ (echo > /dev/tcp/skinner/22) >/dev/null 2>&1 
&& echo "It's up" || echo "It's down"
It's up

$ (echo > /dev/tcp/skinner/222) >/dev/null 2>&1 &&
echo "It's up" || echo "It's down"
It's down


The reason you want to wrap the echo > /dev/... in parentheses like this, (echo > /dev/...) is because if you don't, then with tests of connections that are down, you'll get these types of messages showing up.



$ (echo > /dev/tcp/skinner/223) && echo hi
bash: connect: Connection refused
bash: /dev/tcp/skinner/223: Connection refused


These can't simply be redirected to /dev/null since they're coming from the attempt to write out data to the device /dev/tcp. So we capture all that output within a sub-command, i.e. (...cmds...) and redirect the output of the sub-command.






share|improve this answer


























  • This is excellent. Wish it would get voted up to the top. I only read this far down the page because I accidentally scrolled before closing it.

    – Still.Tony
    Feb 12 '15 at 13:44











  • @Okuma.Tony - yes that's always an issue with Q's that have many answers 8-). Thanks for the feedback though, it's appreciated.

    – slm
    Feb 12 '15 at 14:26



















41














I found that curl may get the job done in a similar way to telnet, and curl will even tell you which protocol the listener expects.



Construct an HTTP URI from the hostname and port as the first argument to curl. If curl can connect, it will report a protocol mismatch and exit (if the listener isn't a web service). If curl cannot connect, it will time out.



For example, port 5672 on host 10.0.0.99 is either closed or blocked by a firewall:



$ curl http://10.0.0.99:5672
curl: (7) couldn't connect to host


However, from a different system, port 5672 on host 10.0.0.99 can be reached, and appears to be running an AMQP listener.



$ curl http://10.0.0.99:5672
curl: (56) Failure when receiving data from the peer
AMQP


It's important to distinguish between the different messages: the first failure was because curl could not connect to the port. The second failure is a success test, though curl expected an HTTP listener instead of an AMQP listener.






share|improve this answer





















  • 5





    If curl isn't available, wget might be. wget -qS -O- http://ip.add.re.ss:port should effectively do the same thing.

    – a CVn
    Jul 19 '13 at 17:52








  • 2





    This even works with a hostname, ex. curl myhost:22.

    – 에이바
    Feb 25 '14 at 16:17













  • This may be incorrect. I am havng a tomcat service running, but getting 404 error. # curl -k 192.168.194.4:6443 <html><head><title>Apache Tomcat/7.0.34 - Error report</title><style><!--H1 --- HR {color : #525D76;}--></style> </head><body><h1>HTTP Status 404 - /</h1><HR size="1" noshade="noshade"><p><b>type</b> Status report</p><p><b>message</b> <u>/</u></p><p><b>description</b> <u>The requested resource is not available.</u></p><HR size="1" noshade="noshade"><h3>Apache Tomcat/7.0.34</h3></body></html>

    – Mohammad Shahid Siddiqui
    Jun 2 '15 at 6:30











  • See my post with similar approach.

    – kenorb
    Dec 30 '15 at 14:49



















9














[admin@automation-server 1.2.2]# nc -v -z -w2 192.168.193.173 6443
nc: connect to 192.168.193.173 port 6443 (tcp) failed: Connection refused

[admin@automation-server 1.2.2]# nc -v -z -w2 192.168.194.4 6443
Connection to 192.168.194.4 6443 port [tcp/sun-sr-https] succeeded!


Hope it solves your problem :)






share|improve this answer



















  • 1





    Yes, this is better - timing out almost immediately for closed ports.

    – Peter Mortensen
    Jul 21 '15 at 12:38






  • 1





    Does this always use TCP or is there a way to get it to check UDP?

    – kmoe
    Jan 2 '16 at 17:09



















9














Here is one-liner:



</dev/tcp/localhost/11211 && echo Port is open || echo Port is closed


using Bash syntax explained in @lornix answer.



For more info, check: Advanced Bash-Scripting Guide: Chapter 29. /dev and /proc.






share|improve this answer


























  • what is the timeout for closed ports?

    – Tilo
    Dec 12 '18 at 17:42



















6














I was struggling for a whole day because none of these answers seemed to work for me. The problem is that the most recent version of nc no longer has the -z flag, whereas direct access via TCP (as according to @lornix and @slm) fails when the host is not reachable. I eventually found this page, where I finally found not one but two working examples:





  1. nc -w1 127.0.0.1 22 </dev/null



    (the -w flag takes care of the timeout, and the </dev/null replaces the -z flag)




  2. timeout 1 bash -c '(echo > /dev/tcp/127.0.0.1/22) >/dev/null 2>&1'



    (the timeout command takes care of the timeout, and the rest is from @slm)




Then, simply use && and/or || (or even $?) to extract the result. Hopefully, somebody will find this information useful.






share|improve this answer































    2














    It shouldn't be available on your box, but try with nmap.






    share|improve this answer





















    • 4





      nmap is a good tool, but not available on these systems. Rather than download nmap, compile it, install it to my home directory, then copy it to all the other systems, I was hoping to find a way using existing tools available in most Linux installations.

      – Steve HHH
      Jul 19 '13 at 17:16



















    1














    Here's a function that will pick one of the methods depending on what's installed on your system:



    # Check_port <address> <port> 
    check_port() {
    if [ "$(which nc)" != "" ]; then
    tool=nc
    elif [ "$(which curl)" != "" ]; then
    tool=curl
    elif [ "$(which telnet)" != "" ]; then
    tool=telnet
    elif [ -e /dev/tcp ]; then
    if [ "$(which gtimeout)" != "" ]; then
    tool=gtimeout
    elif [ "$(which timeout)" != "" ]; then
    tool=timeout
    else
    tool=devtcp
    fi
    fi
    echo "Using $tool to test access to $1:$2"
    case $tool in
    nc) nc -v -G 5 -z -w2 $1 $2 ;;
    curl) curl --connect-timeout 10 http://$1:$2 ;;
    telnet) telnet $1 $2 ;;
    gtimeout) gtimeout 1 bash -c "</dev/tcp/${1}/${2} && echo Port is open || echo Port is closed" || echo Connection timeout ;;
    timeout) timeout 1 bash -c "</dev/tcp/${1}/${2} && echo Port is open || echo Port is closed" || echo Connection timeout ;;
    devtcp) </dev/tcp/${1}/${2} && echo Port is open || echo Port is closed ;;
    *) echo "no tools available to test $1 port $2";;
    esac

    }
    export check_port





    share|improve this answer































      0














      Combining the answers from @kenorb and @Azukikuru you could test port open/closed/firewalled.



      timeout 1 bash -c '</dev/tcp/127.0.0.1/22 && echo Port is open || echo Port is closed' || echo Connection timeout


      Another approach with curl for reaching any port



      curl telnet://127.0.0.1:22





      share|improve this answer

































        0














        If you've to test more than on system you may use our test tool dda-serverspec (https://github.com/DomainDrivenArchitecture/dda-serverspec-crate) for such tasks. You may define your expectation



        {:netcat [{:host "mywebserver.com" :port "443"}
        {:host "telnet mywebserver.com" :port "80"}
        {:host "telnet mywebserver.com" :port "8443"}]}


        and test these expectation either against localhost or against remote hosts (connect by ssh). For remote tests you've to define a targets:



        {:existing [{:node-name "test-vm1"
        :node-ip "35.157.19.218"}
        {:node-name "test-vm2"
        :node-ip "18.194.113.138"}]
        :provisioning-user {:login "ubuntu"}}


        You may run the test with java -jar dda-serverspec.jar --targets targets.edn serverspec.edn



        Under the hood we're using netcat as proprosed above ...






        share|improve this answer
























          Your Answer








          StackExchange.ready(function() {
          var channelOptions = {
          tags: "".split(" "),
          id: "3"
          };
          initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

          StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
          // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
          if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
          StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
          createEditor();
          });
          }
          else {
          createEditor();
          }
          });

          function createEditor() {
          StackExchange.prepareEditor({
          heartbeatType: 'answer',
          autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
          convertImagesToLinks: true,
          noModals: true,
          showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
          reputationToPostImages: 10,
          bindNavPrevention: true,
          postfix: "",
          imageUploader: {
          brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
          contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
          allowUrls: true
          },
          onDemand: true,
          discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
          ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
          });


          }
          });














          draft saved

          draft discarded


















          StackExchange.ready(
          function () {
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fsuperuser.com%2fquestions%2f621870%2ftest-if-a-port-on-a-remote-system-is-reachable-without-telnet%23new-answer', 'question_page');
          }
          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown

























          12 Answers
          12






          active

          oldest

          votes








          12 Answers
          12






          active

          oldest

          votes









          active

          oldest

          votes






          active

          oldest

          votes









          255














          Bash has been able to access TCP and UDP ports for a while. From the man page:



          /dev/tcp/host/port
          If host is a valid hostname or Internet address, and port is an integer port number
          or service name, bash attempts to open a TCP connection to the corresponding socket.
          /dev/udp/host/port
          If host is a valid hostname or Internet address, and port is an integer port number
          or service name, bash attempts to open a UDP connection to the corresponding socket.


          So you could use something like this:



          xenon-lornix:~> cat < /dev/tcp/127.0.0.1/22
          SSH-2.0-OpenSSH_6.2p2 Debian-6
          ^C pressed here


          Taa Daa!






          share|improve this answer


























          • This also seems to work in MinGW. For instance, a remote VNC server on 192.168.2.100 responds with "RFB 003.008" by using "cat < /dev/tcp/192.168.2.100/5900".

            – Peter Mortensen
            Jul 21 '15 at 11:26








          • 1





            @lornix, ok, but in this case I have to get the same result with use nc without -z option, but it still does not work: # nc -v -w5 127.0.0.1 18080 Connection to 127.0.0.1 18080 port [tcp/*] succeeded! # cat < /dev/tcp/127.0.0.1/18080 Just hangs without any result. Just want to understand when I can use "/dev/tcp/host/port" option

            – Alexandr
            Jun 14 '16 at 7:09






          • 5





            @Alexandr... actually, "hangs without any result" is pretty much expected behavior. cat is waiting for input. nc has extra smarts to enable it to sense no-data pending and stops trying. cat isn't quite as smart. Try cat < /dev/tcp/localhost/22, you should get your sshd header. Evidently, your process on port 18080 waits for something to come in, before sending anything. Port 22 (ssh) greets you with it's version and whatnot. Try it out!

            – lornix
            Jun 14 '16 at 8:44






          • 1





            @lornix, thank you very much for explanation! Now the restriction is clear. I think using nc should be a preferred way to check ports.

            – Alexandr
            Jun 14 '16 at 14:29






          • 2





            This was incredibly helpful when working with a docker container that had nothing installed. Was able to quickly verify that the container had access to non-containerized DB via DNS. Example: cat < /dev/tcp/hostname/5432

            – Michael Hobbs
            Oct 24 '18 at 14:09
















          255














          Bash has been able to access TCP and UDP ports for a while. From the man page:



          /dev/tcp/host/port
          If host is a valid hostname or Internet address, and port is an integer port number
          or service name, bash attempts to open a TCP connection to the corresponding socket.
          /dev/udp/host/port
          If host is a valid hostname or Internet address, and port is an integer port number
          or service name, bash attempts to open a UDP connection to the corresponding socket.


          So you could use something like this:



          xenon-lornix:~> cat < /dev/tcp/127.0.0.1/22
          SSH-2.0-OpenSSH_6.2p2 Debian-6
          ^C pressed here


          Taa Daa!






          share|improve this answer


























          • This also seems to work in MinGW. For instance, a remote VNC server on 192.168.2.100 responds with "RFB 003.008" by using "cat < /dev/tcp/192.168.2.100/5900".

            – Peter Mortensen
            Jul 21 '15 at 11:26








          • 1





            @lornix, ok, but in this case I have to get the same result with use nc without -z option, but it still does not work: # nc -v -w5 127.0.0.1 18080 Connection to 127.0.0.1 18080 port [tcp/*] succeeded! # cat < /dev/tcp/127.0.0.1/18080 Just hangs without any result. Just want to understand when I can use "/dev/tcp/host/port" option

            – Alexandr
            Jun 14 '16 at 7:09






          • 5





            @Alexandr... actually, "hangs without any result" is pretty much expected behavior. cat is waiting for input. nc has extra smarts to enable it to sense no-data pending and stops trying. cat isn't quite as smart. Try cat < /dev/tcp/localhost/22, you should get your sshd header. Evidently, your process on port 18080 waits for something to come in, before sending anything. Port 22 (ssh) greets you with it's version and whatnot. Try it out!

            – lornix
            Jun 14 '16 at 8:44






          • 1





            @lornix, thank you very much for explanation! Now the restriction is clear. I think using nc should be a preferred way to check ports.

            – Alexandr
            Jun 14 '16 at 14:29






          • 2





            This was incredibly helpful when working with a docker container that had nothing installed. Was able to quickly verify that the container had access to non-containerized DB via DNS. Example: cat < /dev/tcp/hostname/5432

            – Michael Hobbs
            Oct 24 '18 at 14:09














          255












          255








          255







          Bash has been able to access TCP and UDP ports for a while. From the man page:



          /dev/tcp/host/port
          If host is a valid hostname or Internet address, and port is an integer port number
          or service name, bash attempts to open a TCP connection to the corresponding socket.
          /dev/udp/host/port
          If host is a valid hostname or Internet address, and port is an integer port number
          or service name, bash attempts to open a UDP connection to the corresponding socket.


          So you could use something like this:



          xenon-lornix:~> cat < /dev/tcp/127.0.0.1/22
          SSH-2.0-OpenSSH_6.2p2 Debian-6
          ^C pressed here


          Taa Daa!






          share|improve this answer















          Bash has been able to access TCP and UDP ports for a while. From the man page:



          /dev/tcp/host/port
          If host is a valid hostname or Internet address, and port is an integer port number
          or service name, bash attempts to open a TCP connection to the corresponding socket.
          /dev/udp/host/port
          If host is a valid hostname or Internet address, and port is an integer port number
          or service name, bash attempts to open a UDP connection to the corresponding socket.


          So you could use something like this:



          xenon-lornix:~> cat < /dev/tcp/127.0.0.1/22
          SSH-2.0-OpenSSH_6.2p2 Debian-6
          ^C pressed here


          Taa Daa!







          share|improve this answer














          share|improve this answer



          share|improve this answer








          edited Jul 31 '15 at 22:04









          Peter Mortensen

          8,376166185




          8,376166185










          answered Jul 22 '13 at 10:37









          lornixlornix

          8,91812433




          8,91812433













          • This also seems to work in MinGW. For instance, a remote VNC server on 192.168.2.100 responds with "RFB 003.008" by using "cat < /dev/tcp/192.168.2.100/5900".

            – Peter Mortensen
            Jul 21 '15 at 11:26








          • 1





            @lornix, ok, but in this case I have to get the same result with use nc without -z option, but it still does not work: # nc -v -w5 127.0.0.1 18080 Connection to 127.0.0.1 18080 port [tcp/*] succeeded! # cat < /dev/tcp/127.0.0.1/18080 Just hangs without any result. Just want to understand when I can use "/dev/tcp/host/port" option

            – Alexandr
            Jun 14 '16 at 7:09






          • 5





            @Alexandr... actually, "hangs without any result" is pretty much expected behavior. cat is waiting for input. nc has extra smarts to enable it to sense no-data pending and stops trying. cat isn't quite as smart. Try cat < /dev/tcp/localhost/22, you should get your sshd header. Evidently, your process on port 18080 waits for something to come in, before sending anything. Port 22 (ssh) greets you with it's version and whatnot. Try it out!

            – lornix
            Jun 14 '16 at 8:44






          • 1





            @lornix, thank you very much for explanation! Now the restriction is clear. I think using nc should be a preferred way to check ports.

            – Alexandr
            Jun 14 '16 at 14:29






          • 2





            This was incredibly helpful when working with a docker container that had nothing installed. Was able to quickly verify that the container had access to non-containerized DB via DNS. Example: cat < /dev/tcp/hostname/5432

            – Michael Hobbs
            Oct 24 '18 at 14:09



















          • This also seems to work in MinGW. For instance, a remote VNC server on 192.168.2.100 responds with "RFB 003.008" by using "cat < /dev/tcp/192.168.2.100/5900".

            – Peter Mortensen
            Jul 21 '15 at 11:26








          • 1





            @lornix, ok, but in this case I have to get the same result with use nc without -z option, but it still does not work: # nc -v -w5 127.0.0.1 18080 Connection to 127.0.0.1 18080 port [tcp/*] succeeded! # cat < /dev/tcp/127.0.0.1/18080 Just hangs without any result. Just want to understand when I can use "/dev/tcp/host/port" option

            – Alexandr
            Jun 14 '16 at 7:09






          • 5





            @Alexandr... actually, "hangs without any result" is pretty much expected behavior. cat is waiting for input. nc has extra smarts to enable it to sense no-data pending and stops trying. cat isn't quite as smart. Try cat < /dev/tcp/localhost/22, you should get your sshd header. Evidently, your process on port 18080 waits for something to come in, before sending anything. Port 22 (ssh) greets you with it's version and whatnot. Try it out!

            – lornix
            Jun 14 '16 at 8:44






          • 1





            @lornix, thank you very much for explanation! Now the restriction is clear. I think using nc should be a preferred way to check ports.

            – Alexandr
            Jun 14 '16 at 14:29






          • 2





            This was incredibly helpful when working with a docker container that had nothing installed. Was able to quickly verify that the container had access to non-containerized DB via DNS. Example: cat < /dev/tcp/hostname/5432

            – Michael Hobbs
            Oct 24 '18 at 14:09

















          This also seems to work in MinGW. For instance, a remote VNC server on 192.168.2.100 responds with "RFB 003.008" by using "cat < /dev/tcp/192.168.2.100/5900".

          – Peter Mortensen
          Jul 21 '15 at 11:26







          This also seems to work in MinGW. For instance, a remote VNC server on 192.168.2.100 responds with "RFB 003.008" by using "cat < /dev/tcp/192.168.2.100/5900".

          – Peter Mortensen
          Jul 21 '15 at 11:26






          1




          1





          @lornix, ok, but in this case I have to get the same result with use nc without -z option, but it still does not work: # nc -v -w5 127.0.0.1 18080 Connection to 127.0.0.1 18080 port [tcp/*] succeeded! # cat < /dev/tcp/127.0.0.1/18080 Just hangs without any result. Just want to understand when I can use "/dev/tcp/host/port" option

          – Alexandr
          Jun 14 '16 at 7:09





          @lornix, ok, but in this case I have to get the same result with use nc without -z option, but it still does not work: # nc -v -w5 127.0.0.1 18080 Connection to 127.0.0.1 18080 port [tcp/*] succeeded! # cat < /dev/tcp/127.0.0.1/18080 Just hangs without any result. Just want to understand when I can use "/dev/tcp/host/port" option

          – Alexandr
          Jun 14 '16 at 7:09




          5




          5





          @Alexandr... actually, "hangs without any result" is pretty much expected behavior. cat is waiting for input. nc has extra smarts to enable it to sense no-data pending and stops trying. cat isn't quite as smart. Try cat < /dev/tcp/localhost/22, you should get your sshd header. Evidently, your process on port 18080 waits for something to come in, before sending anything. Port 22 (ssh) greets you with it's version and whatnot. Try it out!

          – lornix
          Jun 14 '16 at 8:44





          @Alexandr... actually, "hangs without any result" is pretty much expected behavior. cat is waiting for input. nc has extra smarts to enable it to sense no-data pending and stops trying. cat isn't quite as smart. Try cat < /dev/tcp/localhost/22, you should get your sshd header. Evidently, your process on port 18080 waits for something to come in, before sending anything. Port 22 (ssh) greets you with it's version and whatnot. Try it out!

          – lornix
          Jun 14 '16 at 8:44




          1




          1





          @lornix, thank you very much for explanation! Now the restriction is clear. I think using nc should be a preferred way to check ports.

          – Alexandr
          Jun 14 '16 at 14:29





          @lornix, thank you very much for explanation! Now the restriction is clear. I think using nc should be a preferred way to check ports.

          – Alexandr
          Jun 14 '16 at 14:29




          2




          2





          This was incredibly helpful when working with a docker container that had nothing installed. Was able to quickly verify that the container had access to non-containerized DB via DNS. Example: cat < /dev/tcp/hostname/5432

          – Michael Hobbs
          Oct 24 '18 at 14:09





          This was incredibly helpful when working with a docker container that had nothing installed. Was able to quickly verify that the container had access to non-containerized DB via DNS. Example: cat < /dev/tcp/hostname/5432

          – Michael Hobbs
          Oct 24 '18 at 14:09













          358














          Nice and verbose! From the man pages.

          Single port:



          nc -zv 127.0.0.1 80


          Multiple ports:



          nc -zv 127.0.0.1 22 80 8080


          Range of ports:



          nc -zv 127.0.0.1 20-30





          share|improve this answer



















          • 4





            Seems to be far the bestest answer, thanks. ;-)

            – lpapp
            Nov 26 '14 at 15:42






          • 5





            This hanged when tried on Ubuntu 14.04 (Trusty Tahr) for a remote server (same LAN) for closed ports (it timed out after 127 seconds) - thus not very suitable in scripts. It did work though for a service that had a port open. Using option "-w2" could be the solution.

            – Peter Mortensen
            Jul 21 '15 at 12:36








          • 4





            Use -u option for UDP ports.

            – Efren
            Sep 21 '16 at 0:10






          • 7





            On version 6.4 of ncat -z is not recognized. I was able to do without z

            – smishra
            Apr 6 '17 at 17:18






          • 4





            You can check multiple ranges with: nc -zv 127.0.0.1 22,80,8080,20-30,443-446 (nc Version: 1.107-4).

            – bobbel
            Jul 6 '17 at 16:55
















          358














          Nice and verbose! From the man pages.

          Single port:



          nc -zv 127.0.0.1 80


          Multiple ports:



          nc -zv 127.0.0.1 22 80 8080


          Range of ports:



          nc -zv 127.0.0.1 20-30





          share|improve this answer



















          • 4





            Seems to be far the bestest answer, thanks. ;-)

            – lpapp
            Nov 26 '14 at 15:42






          • 5





            This hanged when tried on Ubuntu 14.04 (Trusty Tahr) for a remote server (same LAN) for closed ports (it timed out after 127 seconds) - thus not very suitable in scripts. It did work though for a service that had a port open. Using option "-w2" could be the solution.

            – Peter Mortensen
            Jul 21 '15 at 12:36








          • 4





            Use -u option for UDP ports.

            – Efren
            Sep 21 '16 at 0:10






          • 7





            On version 6.4 of ncat -z is not recognized. I was able to do without z

            – smishra
            Apr 6 '17 at 17:18






          • 4





            You can check multiple ranges with: nc -zv 127.0.0.1 22,80,8080,20-30,443-446 (nc Version: 1.107-4).

            – bobbel
            Jul 6 '17 at 16:55














          358












          358








          358







          Nice and verbose! From the man pages.

          Single port:



          nc -zv 127.0.0.1 80


          Multiple ports:



          nc -zv 127.0.0.1 22 80 8080


          Range of ports:



          nc -zv 127.0.0.1 20-30





          share|improve this answer













          Nice and verbose! From the man pages.

          Single port:



          nc -zv 127.0.0.1 80


          Multiple ports:



          nc -zv 127.0.0.1 22 80 8080


          Range of ports:



          nc -zv 127.0.0.1 20-30






          share|improve this answer












          share|improve this answer



          share|improve this answer










          answered Dec 3 '13 at 21:34









          Subhranath ChunderSubhranath Chunder

          3,681172




          3,681172








          • 4





            Seems to be far the bestest answer, thanks. ;-)

            – lpapp
            Nov 26 '14 at 15:42






          • 5





            This hanged when tried on Ubuntu 14.04 (Trusty Tahr) for a remote server (same LAN) for closed ports (it timed out after 127 seconds) - thus not very suitable in scripts. It did work though for a service that had a port open. Using option "-w2" could be the solution.

            – Peter Mortensen
            Jul 21 '15 at 12:36








          • 4





            Use -u option for UDP ports.

            – Efren
            Sep 21 '16 at 0:10






          • 7





            On version 6.4 of ncat -z is not recognized. I was able to do without z

            – smishra
            Apr 6 '17 at 17:18






          • 4





            You can check multiple ranges with: nc -zv 127.0.0.1 22,80,8080,20-30,443-446 (nc Version: 1.107-4).

            – bobbel
            Jul 6 '17 at 16:55














          • 4





            Seems to be far the bestest answer, thanks. ;-)

            – lpapp
            Nov 26 '14 at 15:42






          • 5





            This hanged when tried on Ubuntu 14.04 (Trusty Tahr) for a remote server (same LAN) for closed ports (it timed out after 127 seconds) - thus not very suitable in scripts. It did work though for a service that had a port open. Using option "-w2" could be the solution.

            – Peter Mortensen
            Jul 21 '15 at 12:36








          • 4





            Use -u option for UDP ports.

            – Efren
            Sep 21 '16 at 0:10






          • 7





            On version 6.4 of ncat -z is not recognized. I was able to do without z

            – smishra
            Apr 6 '17 at 17:18






          • 4





            You can check multiple ranges with: nc -zv 127.0.0.1 22,80,8080,20-30,443-446 (nc Version: 1.107-4).

            – bobbel
            Jul 6 '17 at 16:55








          4




          4





          Seems to be far the bestest answer, thanks. ;-)

          – lpapp
          Nov 26 '14 at 15:42





          Seems to be far the bestest answer, thanks. ;-)

          – lpapp
          Nov 26 '14 at 15:42




          5




          5





          This hanged when tried on Ubuntu 14.04 (Trusty Tahr) for a remote server (same LAN) for closed ports (it timed out after 127 seconds) - thus not very suitable in scripts. It did work though for a service that had a port open. Using option "-w2" could be the solution.

          – Peter Mortensen
          Jul 21 '15 at 12:36







          This hanged when tried on Ubuntu 14.04 (Trusty Tahr) for a remote server (same LAN) for closed ports (it timed out after 127 seconds) - thus not very suitable in scripts. It did work though for a service that had a port open. Using option "-w2" could be the solution.

          – Peter Mortensen
          Jul 21 '15 at 12:36






          4




          4





          Use -u option for UDP ports.

          – Efren
          Sep 21 '16 at 0:10





          Use -u option for UDP ports.

          – Efren
          Sep 21 '16 at 0:10




          7




          7





          On version 6.4 of ncat -z is not recognized. I was able to do without z

          – smishra
          Apr 6 '17 at 17:18





          On version 6.4 of ncat -z is not recognized. I was able to do without z

          – smishra
          Apr 6 '17 at 17:18




          4




          4





          You can check multiple ranges with: nc -zv 127.0.0.1 22,80,8080,20-30,443-446 (nc Version: 1.107-4).

          – bobbel
          Jul 6 '17 at 16:55





          You can check multiple ranges with: nc -zv 127.0.0.1 22,80,8080,20-30,443-446 (nc Version: 1.107-4).

          – bobbel
          Jul 6 '17 at 16:55











          99














          Netcat is a useful tool:



          nc 127.0.0.1 123 &> /dev/null; echo $?



          Will output 0 if port 123 is open, and 1 if it's closed.






          share|improve this answer


























          • This is a far more elegant and scriptable answer than my own. It is unfortunate for me that the security-conscious sysadmins who withheld telnet also withheld nc (though – strangely – not curl or wget).

            – Steve HHH
            Jul 19 '13 at 19:51











          • Yes that is completely arbitrary and silly.

            – thnee
            Jul 19 '13 at 20:10






          • 3





            Let the FOR statements begin!

            – Chad Harrison
            Jul 19 '13 at 21:37






          • 1





            This hanged when tried on Ubuntu 14.04 (Trusty Tahr) for a remote server (same LAN) for closed ports (it timed out after about 127 seconds) - thus not very suitable in scripts. It did work though for a service that had a port open, returning 0. Using option "-w2" could be the solution.

            – Peter Mortensen
            Jul 21 '15 at 13:06













          • I think -G 2 would be more appropriate for TCP timeout

            – A B
            Aug 24 '15 at 21:45
















          99














          Netcat is a useful tool:



          nc 127.0.0.1 123 &> /dev/null; echo $?



          Will output 0 if port 123 is open, and 1 if it's closed.






          share|improve this answer


























          • This is a far more elegant and scriptable answer than my own. It is unfortunate for me that the security-conscious sysadmins who withheld telnet also withheld nc (though – strangely – not curl or wget).

            – Steve HHH
            Jul 19 '13 at 19:51











          • Yes that is completely arbitrary and silly.

            – thnee
            Jul 19 '13 at 20:10






          • 3





            Let the FOR statements begin!

            – Chad Harrison
            Jul 19 '13 at 21:37






          • 1





            This hanged when tried on Ubuntu 14.04 (Trusty Tahr) for a remote server (same LAN) for closed ports (it timed out after about 127 seconds) - thus not very suitable in scripts. It did work though for a service that had a port open, returning 0. Using option "-w2" could be the solution.

            – Peter Mortensen
            Jul 21 '15 at 13:06













          • I think -G 2 would be more appropriate for TCP timeout

            – A B
            Aug 24 '15 at 21:45














          99












          99








          99







          Netcat is a useful tool:



          nc 127.0.0.1 123 &> /dev/null; echo $?



          Will output 0 if port 123 is open, and 1 if it's closed.






          share|improve this answer















          Netcat is a useful tool:



          nc 127.0.0.1 123 &> /dev/null; echo $?



          Will output 0 if port 123 is open, and 1 if it's closed.







          share|improve this answer














          share|improve this answer



          share|improve this answer








          edited Oct 20 '15 at 18:28

























          answered Jul 19 '13 at 18:07









          thneethnee

          1,491108




          1,491108













          • This is a far more elegant and scriptable answer than my own. It is unfortunate for me that the security-conscious sysadmins who withheld telnet also withheld nc (though – strangely – not curl or wget).

            – Steve HHH
            Jul 19 '13 at 19:51











          • Yes that is completely arbitrary and silly.

            – thnee
            Jul 19 '13 at 20:10






          • 3





            Let the FOR statements begin!

            – Chad Harrison
            Jul 19 '13 at 21:37






          • 1





            This hanged when tried on Ubuntu 14.04 (Trusty Tahr) for a remote server (same LAN) for closed ports (it timed out after about 127 seconds) - thus not very suitable in scripts. It did work though for a service that had a port open, returning 0. Using option "-w2" could be the solution.

            – Peter Mortensen
            Jul 21 '15 at 13:06













          • I think -G 2 would be more appropriate for TCP timeout

            – A B
            Aug 24 '15 at 21:45



















          • This is a far more elegant and scriptable answer than my own. It is unfortunate for me that the security-conscious sysadmins who withheld telnet also withheld nc (though – strangely – not curl or wget).

            – Steve HHH
            Jul 19 '13 at 19:51











          • Yes that is completely arbitrary and silly.

            – thnee
            Jul 19 '13 at 20:10






          • 3





            Let the FOR statements begin!

            – Chad Harrison
            Jul 19 '13 at 21:37






          • 1





            This hanged when tried on Ubuntu 14.04 (Trusty Tahr) for a remote server (same LAN) for closed ports (it timed out after about 127 seconds) - thus not very suitable in scripts. It did work though for a service that had a port open, returning 0. Using option "-w2" could be the solution.

            – Peter Mortensen
            Jul 21 '15 at 13:06













          • I think -G 2 would be more appropriate for TCP timeout

            – A B
            Aug 24 '15 at 21:45

















          This is a far more elegant and scriptable answer than my own. It is unfortunate for me that the security-conscious sysadmins who withheld telnet also withheld nc (though – strangely – not curl or wget).

          – Steve HHH
          Jul 19 '13 at 19:51





          This is a far more elegant and scriptable answer than my own. It is unfortunate for me that the security-conscious sysadmins who withheld telnet also withheld nc (though – strangely – not curl or wget).

          – Steve HHH
          Jul 19 '13 at 19:51













          Yes that is completely arbitrary and silly.

          – thnee
          Jul 19 '13 at 20:10





          Yes that is completely arbitrary and silly.

          – thnee
          Jul 19 '13 at 20:10




          3




          3





          Let the FOR statements begin!

          – Chad Harrison
          Jul 19 '13 at 21:37





          Let the FOR statements begin!

          – Chad Harrison
          Jul 19 '13 at 21:37




          1




          1





          This hanged when tried on Ubuntu 14.04 (Trusty Tahr) for a remote server (same LAN) for closed ports (it timed out after about 127 seconds) - thus not very suitable in scripts. It did work though for a service that had a port open, returning 0. Using option "-w2" could be the solution.

          – Peter Mortensen
          Jul 21 '15 at 13:06







          This hanged when tried on Ubuntu 14.04 (Trusty Tahr) for a remote server (same LAN) for closed ports (it timed out after about 127 seconds) - thus not very suitable in scripts. It did work though for a service that had a port open, returning 0. Using option "-w2" could be the solution.

          – Peter Mortensen
          Jul 21 '15 at 13:06















          I think -G 2 would be more appropriate for TCP timeout

          – A B
          Aug 24 '15 at 21:45





          I think -G 2 would be more appropriate for TCP timeout

          – A B
          Aug 24 '15 at 21:45











          56














          The simplest method, without making use of another tool, such as socat, is as described in @lornix's answer above. This is just to add an actual example of how one would make use of the psuedo-device /dev/tcp/... within Bash if you wanted to, say, test if another server had a given port accessible via the command line.



          Examples



          Say I have a host on my network named skinner.



          $ (echo > /dev/tcp/skinner/22) >/dev/null 2>&1 
          && echo "It's up" || echo "It's down"
          It's up

          $ (echo > /dev/tcp/skinner/222) >/dev/null 2>&1 &&
          echo "It's up" || echo "It's down"
          It's down


          The reason you want to wrap the echo > /dev/... in parentheses like this, (echo > /dev/...) is because if you don't, then with tests of connections that are down, you'll get these types of messages showing up.



          $ (echo > /dev/tcp/skinner/223) && echo hi
          bash: connect: Connection refused
          bash: /dev/tcp/skinner/223: Connection refused


          These can't simply be redirected to /dev/null since they're coming from the attempt to write out data to the device /dev/tcp. So we capture all that output within a sub-command, i.e. (...cmds...) and redirect the output of the sub-command.






          share|improve this answer


























          • This is excellent. Wish it would get voted up to the top. I only read this far down the page because I accidentally scrolled before closing it.

            – Still.Tony
            Feb 12 '15 at 13:44











          • @Okuma.Tony - yes that's always an issue with Q's that have many answers 8-). Thanks for the feedback though, it's appreciated.

            – slm
            Feb 12 '15 at 14:26
















          56














          The simplest method, without making use of another tool, such as socat, is as described in @lornix's answer above. This is just to add an actual example of how one would make use of the psuedo-device /dev/tcp/... within Bash if you wanted to, say, test if another server had a given port accessible via the command line.



          Examples



          Say I have a host on my network named skinner.



          $ (echo > /dev/tcp/skinner/22) >/dev/null 2>&1 
          && echo "It's up" || echo "It's down"
          It's up

          $ (echo > /dev/tcp/skinner/222) >/dev/null 2>&1 &&
          echo "It's up" || echo "It's down"
          It's down


          The reason you want to wrap the echo > /dev/... in parentheses like this, (echo > /dev/...) is because if you don't, then with tests of connections that are down, you'll get these types of messages showing up.



          $ (echo > /dev/tcp/skinner/223) && echo hi
          bash: connect: Connection refused
          bash: /dev/tcp/skinner/223: Connection refused


          These can't simply be redirected to /dev/null since they're coming from the attempt to write out data to the device /dev/tcp. So we capture all that output within a sub-command, i.e. (...cmds...) and redirect the output of the sub-command.






          share|improve this answer


























          • This is excellent. Wish it would get voted up to the top. I only read this far down the page because I accidentally scrolled before closing it.

            – Still.Tony
            Feb 12 '15 at 13:44











          • @Okuma.Tony - yes that's always an issue with Q's that have many answers 8-). Thanks for the feedback though, it's appreciated.

            – slm
            Feb 12 '15 at 14:26














          56












          56








          56







          The simplest method, without making use of another tool, such as socat, is as described in @lornix's answer above. This is just to add an actual example of how one would make use of the psuedo-device /dev/tcp/... within Bash if you wanted to, say, test if another server had a given port accessible via the command line.



          Examples



          Say I have a host on my network named skinner.



          $ (echo > /dev/tcp/skinner/22) >/dev/null 2>&1 
          && echo "It's up" || echo "It's down"
          It's up

          $ (echo > /dev/tcp/skinner/222) >/dev/null 2>&1 &&
          echo "It's up" || echo "It's down"
          It's down


          The reason you want to wrap the echo > /dev/... in parentheses like this, (echo > /dev/...) is because if you don't, then with tests of connections that are down, you'll get these types of messages showing up.



          $ (echo > /dev/tcp/skinner/223) && echo hi
          bash: connect: Connection refused
          bash: /dev/tcp/skinner/223: Connection refused


          These can't simply be redirected to /dev/null since they're coming from the attempt to write out data to the device /dev/tcp. So we capture all that output within a sub-command, i.e. (...cmds...) and redirect the output of the sub-command.






          share|improve this answer















          The simplest method, without making use of another tool, such as socat, is as described in @lornix's answer above. This is just to add an actual example of how one would make use of the psuedo-device /dev/tcp/... within Bash if you wanted to, say, test if another server had a given port accessible via the command line.



          Examples



          Say I have a host on my network named skinner.



          $ (echo > /dev/tcp/skinner/22) >/dev/null 2>&1 
          && echo "It's up" || echo "It's down"
          It's up

          $ (echo > /dev/tcp/skinner/222) >/dev/null 2>&1 &&
          echo "It's up" || echo "It's down"
          It's down


          The reason you want to wrap the echo > /dev/... in parentheses like this, (echo > /dev/...) is because if you don't, then with tests of connections that are down, you'll get these types of messages showing up.



          $ (echo > /dev/tcp/skinner/223) && echo hi
          bash: connect: Connection refused
          bash: /dev/tcp/skinner/223: Connection refused


          These can't simply be redirected to /dev/null since they're coming from the attempt to write out data to the device /dev/tcp. So we capture all that output within a sub-command, i.e. (...cmds...) and redirect the output of the sub-command.







          share|improve this answer














          share|improve this answer



          share|improve this answer








          edited Jul 31 '15 at 22:09









          Peter Mortensen

          8,376166185




          8,376166185










          answered Sep 2 '14 at 17:59









          slmslm

          6,46563847




          6,46563847













          • This is excellent. Wish it would get voted up to the top. I only read this far down the page because I accidentally scrolled before closing it.

            – Still.Tony
            Feb 12 '15 at 13:44











          • @Okuma.Tony - yes that's always an issue with Q's that have many answers 8-). Thanks for the feedback though, it's appreciated.

            – slm
            Feb 12 '15 at 14:26



















          • This is excellent. Wish it would get voted up to the top. I only read this far down the page because I accidentally scrolled before closing it.

            – Still.Tony
            Feb 12 '15 at 13:44











          • @Okuma.Tony - yes that's always an issue with Q's that have many answers 8-). Thanks for the feedback though, it's appreciated.

            – slm
            Feb 12 '15 at 14:26

















          This is excellent. Wish it would get voted up to the top. I only read this far down the page because I accidentally scrolled before closing it.

          – Still.Tony
          Feb 12 '15 at 13:44





          This is excellent. Wish it would get voted up to the top. I only read this far down the page because I accidentally scrolled before closing it.

          – Still.Tony
          Feb 12 '15 at 13:44













          @Okuma.Tony - yes that's always an issue with Q's that have many answers 8-). Thanks for the feedback though, it's appreciated.

          – slm
          Feb 12 '15 at 14:26





          @Okuma.Tony - yes that's always an issue with Q's that have many answers 8-). Thanks for the feedback though, it's appreciated.

          – slm
          Feb 12 '15 at 14:26











          41














          I found that curl may get the job done in a similar way to telnet, and curl will even tell you which protocol the listener expects.



          Construct an HTTP URI from the hostname and port as the first argument to curl. If curl can connect, it will report a protocol mismatch and exit (if the listener isn't a web service). If curl cannot connect, it will time out.



          For example, port 5672 on host 10.0.0.99 is either closed or blocked by a firewall:



          $ curl http://10.0.0.99:5672
          curl: (7) couldn't connect to host


          However, from a different system, port 5672 on host 10.0.0.99 can be reached, and appears to be running an AMQP listener.



          $ curl http://10.0.0.99:5672
          curl: (56) Failure when receiving data from the peer
          AMQP


          It's important to distinguish between the different messages: the first failure was because curl could not connect to the port. The second failure is a success test, though curl expected an HTTP listener instead of an AMQP listener.






          share|improve this answer





















          • 5





            If curl isn't available, wget might be. wget -qS -O- http://ip.add.re.ss:port should effectively do the same thing.

            – a CVn
            Jul 19 '13 at 17:52








          • 2





            This even works with a hostname, ex. curl myhost:22.

            – 에이바
            Feb 25 '14 at 16:17













          • This may be incorrect. I am havng a tomcat service running, but getting 404 error. # curl -k 192.168.194.4:6443 <html><head><title>Apache Tomcat/7.0.34 - Error report</title><style><!--H1 --- HR {color : #525D76;}--></style> </head><body><h1>HTTP Status 404 - /</h1><HR size="1" noshade="noshade"><p><b>type</b> Status report</p><p><b>message</b> <u>/</u></p><p><b>description</b> <u>The requested resource is not available.</u></p><HR size="1" noshade="noshade"><h3>Apache Tomcat/7.0.34</h3></body></html>

            – Mohammad Shahid Siddiqui
            Jun 2 '15 at 6:30











          • See my post with similar approach.

            – kenorb
            Dec 30 '15 at 14:49
















          41














          I found that curl may get the job done in a similar way to telnet, and curl will even tell you which protocol the listener expects.



          Construct an HTTP URI from the hostname and port as the first argument to curl. If curl can connect, it will report a protocol mismatch and exit (if the listener isn't a web service). If curl cannot connect, it will time out.



          For example, port 5672 on host 10.0.0.99 is either closed or blocked by a firewall:



          $ curl http://10.0.0.99:5672
          curl: (7) couldn't connect to host


          However, from a different system, port 5672 on host 10.0.0.99 can be reached, and appears to be running an AMQP listener.



          $ curl http://10.0.0.99:5672
          curl: (56) Failure when receiving data from the peer
          AMQP


          It's important to distinguish between the different messages: the first failure was because curl could not connect to the port. The second failure is a success test, though curl expected an HTTP listener instead of an AMQP listener.






          share|improve this answer





















          • 5





            If curl isn't available, wget might be. wget -qS -O- http://ip.add.re.ss:port should effectively do the same thing.

            – a CVn
            Jul 19 '13 at 17:52








          • 2





            This even works with a hostname, ex. curl myhost:22.

            – 에이바
            Feb 25 '14 at 16:17













          • This may be incorrect. I am havng a tomcat service running, but getting 404 error. # curl -k 192.168.194.4:6443 <html><head><title>Apache Tomcat/7.0.34 - Error report</title><style><!--H1 --- HR {color : #525D76;}--></style> </head><body><h1>HTTP Status 404 - /</h1><HR size="1" noshade="noshade"><p><b>type</b> Status report</p><p><b>message</b> <u>/</u></p><p><b>description</b> <u>The requested resource is not available.</u></p><HR size="1" noshade="noshade"><h3>Apache Tomcat/7.0.34</h3></body></html>

            – Mohammad Shahid Siddiqui
            Jun 2 '15 at 6:30











          • See my post with similar approach.

            – kenorb
            Dec 30 '15 at 14:49














          41












          41








          41







          I found that curl may get the job done in a similar way to telnet, and curl will even tell you which protocol the listener expects.



          Construct an HTTP URI from the hostname and port as the first argument to curl. If curl can connect, it will report a protocol mismatch and exit (if the listener isn't a web service). If curl cannot connect, it will time out.



          For example, port 5672 on host 10.0.0.99 is either closed or blocked by a firewall:



          $ curl http://10.0.0.99:5672
          curl: (7) couldn't connect to host


          However, from a different system, port 5672 on host 10.0.0.99 can be reached, and appears to be running an AMQP listener.



          $ curl http://10.0.0.99:5672
          curl: (56) Failure when receiving data from the peer
          AMQP


          It's important to distinguish between the different messages: the first failure was because curl could not connect to the port. The second failure is a success test, though curl expected an HTTP listener instead of an AMQP listener.






          share|improve this answer















          I found that curl may get the job done in a similar way to telnet, and curl will even tell you which protocol the listener expects.



          Construct an HTTP URI from the hostname and port as the first argument to curl. If curl can connect, it will report a protocol mismatch and exit (if the listener isn't a web service). If curl cannot connect, it will time out.



          For example, port 5672 on host 10.0.0.99 is either closed or blocked by a firewall:



          $ curl http://10.0.0.99:5672
          curl: (7) couldn't connect to host


          However, from a different system, port 5672 on host 10.0.0.99 can be reached, and appears to be running an AMQP listener.



          $ curl http://10.0.0.99:5672
          curl: (56) Failure when receiving data from the peer
          AMQP


          It's important to distinguish between the different messages: the first failure was because curl could not connect to the port. The second failure is a success test, though curl expected an HTTP listener instead of an AMQP listener.







          share|improve this answer














          share|improve this answer



          share|improve this answer








          edited Jul 19 '13 at 17:41

























          answered Jul 19 '13 at 17:05









          Steve HHHSteve HHH

          2,99062133




          2,99062133








          • 5





            If curl isn't available, wget might be. wget -qS -O- http://ip.add.re.ss:port should effectively do the same thing.

            – a CVn
            Jul 19 '13 at 17:52








          • 2





            This even works with a hostname, ex. curl myhost:22.

            – 에이바
            Feb 25 '14 at 16:17













          • This may be incorrect. I am havng a tomcat service running, but getting 404 error. # curl -k 192.168.194.4:6443 <html><head><title>Apache Tomcat/7.0.34 - Error report</title><style><!--H1 --- HR {color : #525D76;}--></style> </head><body><h1>HTTP Status 404 - /</h1><HR size="1" noshade="noshade"><p><b>type</b> Status report</p><p><b>message</b> <u>/</u></p><p><b>description</b> <u>The requested resource is not available.</u></p><HR size="1" noshade="noshade"><h3>Apache Tomcat/7.0.34</h3></body></html>

            – Mohammad Shahid Siddiqui
            Jun 2 '15 at 6:30











          • See my post with similar approach.

            – kenorb
            Dec 30 '15 at 14:49














          • 5





            If curl isn't available, wget might be. wget -qS -O- http://ip.add.re.ss:port should effectively do the same thing.

            – a CVn
            Jul 19 '13 at 17:52








          • 2





            This even works with a hostname, ex. curl myhost:22.

            – 에이바
            Feb 25 '14 at 16:17













          • This may be incorrect. I am havng a tomcat service running, but getting 404 error. # curl -k 192.168.194.4:6443 <html><head><title>Apache Tomcat/7.0.34 - Error report</title><style><!--H1 --- HR {color : #525D76;}--></style> </head><body><h1>HTTP Status 404 - /</h1><HR size="1" noshade="noshade"><p><b>type</b> Status report</p><p><b>message</b> <u>/</u></p><p><b>description</b> <u>The requested resource is not available.</u></p><HR size="1" noshade="noshade"><h3>Apache Tomcat/7.0.34</h3></body></html>

            – Mohammad Shahid Siddiqui
            Jun 2 '15 at 6:30











          • See my post with similar approach.

            – kenorb
            Dec 30 '15 at 14:49








          5




          5





          If curl isn't available, wget might be. wget -qS -O- http://ip.add.re.ss:port should effectively do the same thing.

          – a CVn
          Jul 19 '13 at 17:52







          If curl isn't available, wget might be. wget -qS -O- http://ip.add.re.ss:port should effectively do the same thing.

          – a CVn
          Jul 19 '13 at 17:52






          2




          2





          This even works with a hostname, ex. curl myhost:22.

          – 에이바
          Feb 25 '14 at 16:17







          This even works with a hostname, ex. curl myhost:22.

          – 에이바
          Feb 25 '14 at 16:17















          This may be incorrect. I am havng a tomcat service running, but getting 404 error. # curl -k 192.168.194.4:6443 <html><head><title>Apache Tomcat/7.0.34 - Error report</title><style><!--H1 --- HR {color : #525D76;}--></style> </head><body><h1>HTTP Status 404 - /</h1><HR size="1" noshade="noshade"><p><b>type</b> Status report</p><p><b>message</b> <u>/</u></p><p><b>description</b> <u>The requested resource is not available.</u></p><HR size="1" noshade="noshade"><h3>Apache Tomcat/7.0.34</h3></body></html>

          – Mohammad Shahid Siddiqui
          Jun 2 '15 at 6:30





          This may be incorrect. I am havng a tomcat service running, but getting 404 error. # curl -k 192.168.194.4:6443 <html><head><title>Apache Tomcat/7.0.34 - Error report</title><style><!--H1 --- HR {color : #525D76;}--></style> </head><body><h1>HTTP Status 404 - /</h1><HR size="1" noshade="noshade"><p><b>type</b> Status report</p><p><b>message</b> <u>/</u></p><p><b>description</b> <u>The requested resource is not available.</u></p><HR size="1" noshade="noshade"><h3>Apache Tomcat/7.0.34</h3></body></html>

          – Mohammad Shahid Siddiqui
          Jun 2 '15 at 6:30













          See my post with similar approach.

          – kenorb
          Dec 30 '15 at 14:49





          See my post with similar approach.

          – kenorb
          Dec 30 '15 at 14:49











          9














          [admin@automation-server 1.2.2]# nc -v -z -w2 192.168.193.173 6443
          nc: connect to 192.168.193.173 port 6443 (tcp) failed: Connection refused

          [admin@automation-server 1.2.2]# nc -v -z -w2 192.168.194.4 6443
          Connection to 192.168.194.4 6443 port [tcp/sun-sr-https] succeeded!


          Hope it solves your problem :)






          share|improve this answer



















          • 1





            Yes, this is better - timing out almost immediately for closed ports.

            – Peter Mortensen
            Jul 21 '15 at 12:38






          • 1





            Does this always use TCP or is there a way to get it to check UDP?

            – kmoe
            Jan 2 '16 at 17:09
















          9














          [admin@automation-server 1.2.2]# nc -v -z -w2 192.168.193.173 6443
          nc: connect to 192.168.193.173 port 6443 (tcp) failed: Connection refused

          [admin@automation-server 1.2.2]# nc -v -z -w2 192.168.194.4 6443
          Connection to 192.168.194.4 6443 port [tcp/sun-sr-https] succeeded!


          Hope it solves your problem :)






          share|improve this answer



















          • 1





            Yes, this is better - timing out almost immediately for closed ports.

            – Peter Mortensen
            Jul 21 '15 at 12:38






          • 1





            Does this always use TCP or is there a way to get it to check UDP?

            – kmoe
            Jan 2 '16 at 17:09














          9












          9








          9







          [admin@automation-server 1.2.2]# nc -v -z -w2 192.168.193.173 6443
          nc: connect to 192.168.193.173 port 6443 (tcp) failed: Connection refused

          [admin@automation-server 1.2.2]# nc -v -z -w2 192.168.194.4 6443
          Connection to 192.168.194.4 6443 port [tcp/sun-sr-https] succeeded!


          Hope it solves your problem :)






          share|improve this answer













          [admin@automation-server 1.2.2]# nc -v -z -w2 192.168.193.173 6443
          nc: connect to 192.168.193.173 port 6443 (tcp) failed: Connection refused

          [admin@automation-server 1.2.2]# nc -v -z -w2 192.168.194.4 6443
          Connection to 192.168.194.4 6443 port [tcp/sun-sr-https] succeeded!


          Hope it solves your problem :)







          share|improve this answer












          share|improve this answer



          share|improve this answer










          answered Jun 2 '15 at 6:27









          Mohammad Shahid SiddiquiMohammad Shahid Siddiqui

          22122




          22122








          • 1





            Yes, this is better - timing out almost immediately for closed ports.

            – Peter Mortensen
            Jul 21 '15 at 12:38






          • 1





            Does this always use TCP or is there a way to get it to check UDP?

            – kmoe
            Jan 2 '16 at 17:09














          • 1





            Yes, this is better - timing out almost immediately for closed ports.

            – Peter Mortensen
            Jul 21 '15 at 12:38






          • 1





            Does this always use TCP or is there a way to get it to check UDP?

            – kmoe
            Jan 2 '16 at 17:09








          1




          1





          Yes, this is better - timing out almost immediately for closed ports.

          – Peter Mortensen
          Jul 21 '15 at 12:38





          Yes, this is better - timing out almost immediately for closed ports.

          – Peter Mortensen
          Jul 21 '15 at 12:38




          1




          1





          Does this always use TCP or is there a way to get it to check UDP?

          – kmoe
          Jan 2 '16 at 17:09





          Does this always use TCP or is there a way to get it to check UDP?

          – kmoe
          Jan 2 '16 at 17:09











          9














          Here is one-liner:



          </dev/tcp/localhost/11211 && echo Port is open || echo Port is closed


          using Bash syntax explained in @lornix answer.



          For more info, check: Advanced Bash-Scripting Guide: Chapter 29. /dev and /proc.






          share|improve this answer


























          • what is the timeout for closed ports?

            – Tilo
            Dec 12 '18 at 17:42
















          9














          Here is one-liner:



          </dev/tcp/localhost/11211 && echo Port is open || echo Port is closed


          using Bash syntax explained in @lornix answer.



          For more info, check: Advanced Bash-Scripting Guide: Chapter 29. /dev and /proc.






          share|improve this answer


























          • what is the timeout for closed ports?

            – Tilo
            Dec 12 '18 at 17:42














          9












          9








          9







          Here is one-liner:



          </dev/tcp/localhost/11211 && echo Port is open || echo Port is closed


          using Bash syntax explained in @lornix answer.



          For more info, check: Advanced Bash-Scripting Guide: Chapter 29. /dev and /proc.






          share|improve this answer















          Here is one-liner:



          </dev/tcp/localhost/11211 && echo Port is open || echo Port is closed


          using Bash syntax explained in @lornix answer.



          For more info, check: Advanced Bash-Scripting Guide: Chapter 29. /dev and /proc.







          share|improve this answer














          share|improve this answer



          share|improve this answer








          edited Jul 30 '18 at 10:37

























          answered Mar 16 '16 at 11:21









          kenorbkenorb

          11.5k1580116




          11.5k1580116













          • what is the timeout for closed ports?

            – Tilo
            Dec 12 '18 at 17:42



















          • what is the timeout for closed ports?

            – Tilo
            Dec 12 '18 at 17:42

















          what is the timeout for closed ports?

          – Tilo
          Dec 12 '18 at 17:42





          what is the timeout for closed ports?

          – Tilo
          Dec 12 '18 at 17:42











          6














          I was struggling for a whole day because none of these answers seemed to work for me. The problem is that the most recent version of nc no longer has the -z flag, whereas direct access via TCP (as according to @lornix and @slm) fails when the host is not reachable. I eventually found this page, where I finally found not one but two working examples:





          1. nc -w1 127.0.0.1 22 </dev/null



            (the -w flag takes care of the timeout, and the </dev/null replaces the -z flag)




          2. timeout 1 bash -c '(echo > /dev/tcp/127.0.0.1/22) >/dev/null 2>&1'



            (the timeout command takes care of the timeout, and the rest is from @slm)




          Then, simply use && and/or || (or even $?) to extract the result. Hopefully, somebody will find this information useful.






          share|improve this answer




























            6














            I was struggling for a whole day because none of these answers seemed to work for me. The problem is that the most recent version of nc no longer has the -z flag, whereas direct access via TCP (as according to @lornix and @slm) fails when the host is not reachable. I eventually found this page, where I finally found not one but two working examples:





            1. nc -w1 127.0.0.1 22 </dev/null



              (the -w flag takes care of the timeout, and the </dev/null replaces the -z flag)




            2. timeout 1 bash -c '(echo > /dev/tcp/127.0.0.1/22) >/dev/null 2>&1'



              (the timeout command takes care of the timeout, and the rest is from @slm)




            Then, simply use && and/or || (or even $?) to extract the result. Hopefully, somebody will find this information useful.






            share|improve this answer


























              6












              6








              6







              I was struggling for a whole day because none of these answers seemed to work for me. The problem is that the most recent version of nc no longer has the -z flag, whereas direct access via TCP (as according to @lornix and @slm) fails when the host is not reachable. I eventually found this page, where I finally found not one but two working examples:





              1. nc -w1 127.0.0.1 22 </dev/null



                (the -w flag takes care of the timeout, and the </dev/null replaces the -z flag)




              2. timeout 1 bash -c '(echo > /dev/tcp/127.0.0.1/22) >/dev/null 2>&1'



                (the timeout command takes care of the timeout, and the rest is from @slm)




              Then, simply use && and/or || (or even $?) to extract the result. Hopefully, somebody will find this information useful.






              share|improve this answer













              I was struggling for a whole day because none of these answers seemed to work for me. The problem is that the most recent version of nc no longer has the -z flag, whereas direct access via TCP (as according to @lornix and @slm) fails when the host is not reachable. I eventually found this page, where I finally found not one but two working examples:





              1. nc -w1 127.0.0.1 22 </dev/null



                (the -w flag takes care of the timeout, and the </dev/null replaces the -z flag)




              2. timeout 1 bash -c '(echo > /dev/tcp/127.0.0.1/22) >/dev/null 2>&1'



                (the timeout command takes care of the timeout, and the rest is from @slm)




              Then, simply use && and/or || (or even $?) to extract the result. Hopefully, somebody will find this information useful.







              share|improve this answer












              share|improve this answer



              share|improve this answer










              answered May 31 '17 at 8:45









              AzukikuruAzukikuru

              6111




              6111























                  2














                  It shouldn't be available on your box, but try with nmap.






                  share|improve this answer





















                  • 4





                    nmap is a good tool, but not available on these systems. Rather than download nmap, compile it, install it to my home directory, then copy it to all the other systems, I was hoping to find a way using existing tools available in most Linux installations.

                    – Steve HHH
                    Jul 19 '13 at 17:16
















                  2














                  It shouldn't be available on your box, but try with nmap.






                  share|improve this answer





















                  • 4





                    nmap is a good tool, but not available on these systems. Rather than download nmap, compile it, install it to my home directory, then copy it to all the other systems, I was hoping to find a way using existing tools available in most Linux installations.

                    – Steve HHH
                    Jul 19 '13 at 17:16














                  2












                  2








                  2







                  It shouldn't be available on your box, but try with nmap.






                  share|improve this answer















                  It shouldn't be available on your box, but try with nmap.







                  share|improve this answer














                  share|improve this answer



                  share|improve this answer








                  edited Jul 21 '15 at 11:28









                  Peter Mortensen

                  8,376166185




                  8,376166185










                  answered Jul 19 '13 at 17:01









                  peperunaspeperunas

                  4462815




                  4462815








                  • 4





                    nmap is a good tool, but not available on these systems. Rather than download nmap, compile it, install it to my home directory, then copy it to all the other systems, I was hoping to find a way using existing tools available in most Linux installations.

                    – Steve HHH
                    Jul 19 '13 at 17:16














                  • 4





                    nmap is a good tool, but not available on these systems. Rather than download nmap, compile it, install it to my home directory, then copy it to all the other systems, I was hoping to find a way using existing tools available in most Linux installations.

                    – Steve HHH
                    Jul 19 '13 at 17:16








                  4




                  4





                  nmap is a good tool, but not available on these systems. Rather than download nmap, compile it, install it to my home directory, then copy it to all the other systems, I was hoping to find a way using existing tools available in most Linux installations.

                  – Steve HHH
                  Jul 19 '13 at 17:16





                  nmap is a good tool, but not available on these systems. Rather than download nmap, compile it, install it to my home directory, then copy it to all the other systems, I was hoping to find a way using existing tools available in most Linux installations.

                  – Steve HHH
                  Jul 19 '13 at 17:16











                  1














                  Here's a function that will pick one of the methods depending on what's installed on your system:



                  # Check_port <address> <port> 
                  check_port() {
                  if [ "$(which nc)" != "" ]; then
                  tool=nc
                  elif [ "$(which curl)" != "" ]; then
                  tool=curl
                  elif [ "$(which telnet)" != "" ]; then
                  tool=telnet
                  elif [ -e /dev/tcp ]; then
                  if [ "$(which gtimeout)" != "" ]; then
                  tool=gtimeout
                  elif [ "$(which timeout)" != "" ]; then
                  tool=timeout
                  else
                  tool=devtcp
                  fi
                  fi
                  echo "Using $tool to test access to $1:$2"
                  case $tool in
                  nc) nc -v -G 5 -z -w2 $1 $2 ;;
                  curl) curl --connect-timeout 10 http://$1:$2 ;;
                  telnet) telnet $1 $2 ;;
                  gtimeout) gtimeout 1 bash -c "</dev/tcp/${1}/${2} && echo Port is open || echo Port is closed" || echo Connection timeout ;;
                  timeout) timeout 1 bash -c "</dev/tcp/${1}/${2} && echo Port is open || echo Port is closed" || echo Connection timeout ;;
                  devtcp) </dev/tcp/${1}/${2} && echo Port is open || echo Port is closed ;;
                  *) echo "no tools available to test $1 port $2";;
                  esac

                  }
                  export check_port





                  share|improve this answer




























                    1














                    Here's a function that will pick one of the methods depending on what's installed on your system:



                    # Check_port <address> <port> 
                    check_port() {
                    if [ "$(which nc)" != "" ]; then
                    tool=nc
                    elif [ "$(which curl)" != "" ]; then
                    tool=curl
                    elif [ "$(which telnet)" != "" ]; then
                    tool=telnet
                    elif [ -e /dev/tcp ]; then
                    if [ "$(which gtimeout)" != "" ]; then
                    tool=gtimeout
                    elif [ "$(which timeout)" != "" ]; then
                    tool=timeout
                    else
                    tool=devtcp
                    fi
                    fi
                    echo "Using $tool to test access to $1:$2"
                    case $tool in
                    nc) nc -v -G 5 -z -w2 $1 $2 ;;
                    curl) curl --connect-timeout 10 http://$1:$2 ;;
                    telnet) telnet $1 $2 ;;
                    gtimeout) gtimeout 1 bash -c "</dev/tcp/${1}/${2} && echo Port is open || echo Port is closed" || echo Connection timeout ;;
                    timeout) timeout 1 bash -c "</dev/tcp/${1}/${2} && echo Port is open || echo Port is closed" || echo Connection timeout ;;
                    devtcp) </dev/tcp/${1}/${2} && echo Port is open || echo Port is closed ;;
                    *) echo "no tools available to test $1 port $2";;
                    esac

                    }
                    export check_port





                    share|improve this answer


























                      1












                      1








                      1







                      Here's a function that will pick one of the methods depending on what's installed on your system:



                      # Check_port <address> <port> 
                      check_port() {
                      if [ "$(which nc)" != "" ]; then
                      tool=nc
                      elif [ "$(which curl)" != "" ]; then
                      tool=curl
                      elif [ "$(which telnet)" != "" ]; then
                      tool=telnet
                      elif [ -e /dev/tcp ]; then
                      if [ "$(which gtimeout)" != "" ]; then
                      tool=gtimeout
                      elif [ "$(which timeout)" != "" ]; then
                      tool=timeout
                      else
                      tool=devtcp
                      fi
                      fi
                      echo "Using $tool to test access to $1:$2"
                      case $tool in
                      nc) nc -v -G 5 -z -w2 $1 $2 ;;
                      curl) curl --connect-timeout 10 http://$1:$2 ;;
                      telnet) telnet $1 $2 ;;
                      gtimeout) gtimeout 1 bash -c "</dev/tcp/${1}/${2} && echo Port is open || echo Port is closed" || echo Connection timeout ;;
                      timeout) timeout 1 bash -c "</dev/tcp/${1}/${2} && echo Port is open || echo Port is closed" || echo Connection timeout ;;
                      devtcp) </dev/tcp/${1}/${2} && echo Port is open || echo Port is closed ;;
                      *) echo "no tools available to test $1 port $2";;
                      esac

                      }
                      export check_port





                      share|improve this answer













                      Here's a function that will pick one of the methods depending on what's installed on your system:



                      # Check_port <address> <port> 
                      check_port() {
                      if [ "$(which nc)" != "" ]; then
                      tool=nc
                      elif [ "$(which curl)" != "" ]; then
                      tool=curl
                      elif [ "$(which telnet)" != "" ]; then
                      tool=telnet
                      elif [ -e /dev/tcp ]; then
                      if [ "$(which gtimeout)" != "" ]; then
                      tool=gtimeout
                      elif [ "$(which timeout)" != "" ]; then
                      tool=timeout
                      else
                      tool=devtcp
                      fi
                      fi
                      echo "Using $tool to test access to $1:$2"
                      case $tool in
                      nc) nc -v -G 5 -z -w2 $1 $2 ;;
                      curl) curl --connect-timeout 10 http://$1:$2 ;;
                      telnet) telnet $1 $2 ;;
                      gtimeout) gtimeout 1 bash -c "</dev/tcp/${1}/${2} && echo Port is open || echo Port is closed" || echo Connection timeout ;;
                      timeout) timeout 1 bash -c "</dev/tcp/${1}/${2} && echo Port is open || echo Port is closed" || echo Connection timeout ;;
                      devtcp) </dev/tcp/${1}/${2} && echo Port is open || echo Port is closed ;;
                      *) echo "no tools available to test $1 port $2";;
                      esac

                      }
                      export check_port






                      share|improve this answer












                      share|improve this answer



                      share|improve this answer










                      answered Feb 12 at 20:21









                      Robert BoydRobert Boyd

                      111




                      111























                          0














                          Combining the answers from @kenorb and @Azukikuru you could test port open/closed/firewalled.



                          timeout 1 bash -c '</dev/tcp/127.0.0.1/22 && echo Port is open || echo Port is closed' || echo Connection timeout


                          Another approach with curl for reaching any port



                          curl telnet://127.0.0.1:22





                          share|improve this answer






























                            0














                            Combining the answers from @kenorb and @Azukikuru you could test port open/closed/firewalled.



                            timeout 1 bash -c '</dev/tcp/127.0.0.1/22 && echo Port is open || echo Port is closed' || echo Connection timeout


                            Another approach with curl for reaching any port



                            curl telnet://127.0.0.1:22





                            share|improve this answer




























                              0












                              0








                              0







                              Combining the answers from @kenorb and @Azukikuru you could test port open/closed/firewalled.



                              timeout 1 bash -c '</dev/tcp/127.0.0.1/22 && echo Port is open || echo Port is closed' || echo Connection timeout


                              Another approach with curl for reaching any port



                              curl telnet://127.0.0.1:22





                              share|improve this answer















                              Combining the answers from @kenorb and @Azukikuru you could test port open/closed/firewalled.



                              timeout 1 bash -c '</dev/tcp/127.0.0.1/22 && echo Port is open || echo Port is closed' || echo Connection timeout


                              Another approach with curl for reaching any port



                              curl telnet://127.0.0.1:22






                              share|improve this answer














                              share|improve this answer



                              share|improve this answer








                              edited Aug 12 '18 at 16:54

























                              answered Aug 10 '18 at 12:20









                              Miguel FerreiraMiguel Ferreira

                              1012




                              1012























                                  0














                                  If you've to test more than on system you may use our test tool dda-serverspec (https://github.com/DomainDrivenArchitecture/dda-serverspec-crate) for such tasks. You may define your expectation



                                  {:netcat [{:host "mywebserver.com" :port "443"}
                                  {:host "telnet mywebserver.com" :port "80"}
                                  {:host "telnet mywebserver.com" :port "8443"}]}


                                  and test these expectation either against localhost or against remote hosts (connect by ssh). For remote tests you've to define a targets:



                                  {:existing [{:node-name "test-vm1"
                                  :node-ip "35.157.19.218"}
                                  {:node-name "test-vm2"
                                  :node-ip "18.194.113.138"}]
                                  :provisioning-user {:login "ubuntu"}}


                                  You may run the test with java -jar dda-serverspec.jar --targets targets.edn serverspec.edn



                                  Under the hood we're using netcat as proprosed above ...






                                  share|improve this answer




























                                    0














                                    If you've to test more than on system you may use our test tool dda-serverspec (https://github.com/DomainDrivenArchitecture/dda-serverspec-crate) for such tasks. You may define your expectation



                                    {:netcat [{:host "mywebserver.com" :port "443"}
                                    {:host "telnet mywebserver.com" :port "80"}
                                    {:host "telnet mywebserver.com" :port "8443"}]}


                                    and test these expectation either against localhost or against remote hosts (connect by ssh). For remote tests you've to define a targets:



                                    {:existing [{:node-name "test-vm1"
                                    :node-ip "35.157.19.218"}
                                    {:node-name "test-vm2"
                                    :node-ip "18.194.113.138"}]
                                    :provisioning-user {:login "ubuntu"}}


                                    You may run the test with java -jar dda-serverspec.jar --targets targets.edn serverspec.edn



                                    Under the hood we're using netcat as proprosed above ...






                                    share|improve this answer


























                                      0












                                      0








                                      0







                                      If you've to test more than on system you may use our test tool dda-serverspec (https://github.com/DomainDrivenArchitecture/dda-serverspec-crate) for such tasks. You may define your expectation



                                      {:netcat [{:host "mywebserver.com" :port "443"}
                                      {:host "telnet mywebserver.com" :port "80"}
                                      {:host "telnet mywebserver.com" :port "8443"}]}


                                      and test these expectation either against localhost or against remote hosts (connect by ssh). For remote tests you've to define a targets:



                                      {:existing [{:node-name "test-vm1"
                                      :node-ip "35.157.19.218"}
                                      {:node-name "test-vm2"
                                      :node-ip "18.194.113.138"}]
                                      :provisioning-user {:login "ubuntu"}}


                                      You may run the test with java -jar dda-serverspec.jar --targets targets.edn serverspec.edn



                                      Under the hood we're using netcat as proprosed above ...






                                      share|improve this answer













                                      If you've to test more than on system you may use our test tool dda-serverspec (https://github.com/DomainDrivenArchitecture/dda-serverspec-crate) for such tasks. You may define your expectation



                                      {:netcat [{:host "mywebserver.com" :port "443"}
                                      {:host "telnet mywebserver.com" :port "80"}
                                      {:host "telnet mywebserver.com" :port "8443"}]}


                                      and test these expectation either against localhost or against remote hosts (connect by ssh). For remote tests you've to define a targets:



                                      {:existing [{:node-name "test-vm1"
                                      :node-ip "35.157.19.218"}
                                      {:node-name "test-vm2"
                                      :node-ip "18.194.113.138"}]
                                      :provisioning-user {:login "ubuntu"}}


                                      You may run the test with java -jar dda-serverspec.jar --targets targets.edn serverspec.edn



                                      Under the hood we're using netcat as proprosed above ...







                                      share|improve this answer












                                      share|improve this answer



                                      share|improve this answer










                                      answered Oct 26 '18 at 13:49









                                      jergerjerger

                                      1




                                      1






























                                          draft saved

                                          draft discarded




















































                                          Thanks for contributing an answer to Super User!


                                          • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                                          But avoid



                                          • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                                          • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


                                          To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                                          draft saved


                                          draft discarded














                                          StackExchange.ready(
                                          function () {
                                          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fsuperuser.com%2fquestions%2f621870%2ftest-if-a-port-on-a-remote-system-is-reachable-without-telnet%23new-answer', 'question_page');
                                          }
                                          );

                                          Post as a guest















                                          Required, but never shown





















































                                          Required, but never shown














                                          Required, but never shown












                                          Required, but never shown







                                          Required, but never shown

































                                          Required, but never shown














                                          Required, but never shown












                                          Required, but never shown







                                          Required, but never shown







                                          Popular posts from this blog

                                          How to make a Squid Proxy server?

                                          Is this a new Fibonacci Identity?

                                          19世紀