From: Ian Kent <raven@themaw.net>
To: NeilBrown <neilb@suse.de>, Stanislav Levin <slev@altlinux.org>
Cc: autofs@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCE] autofs 5.1.8 release
Date: Fri, 18 Feb 2022 12:47:37 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <480248c2fdd2a098fd016aea832f297d711dfdff.camel@themaw.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <164506664650.10228.15450975168088794628@noble.neil.brown.name>
On Thu, 2022-02-17 at 13:57 +1100, NeilBrown wrote:
> On Tue, 15 Feb 2022, Stanislav Levin wrote:
> >
> >
> > This seems duplicate of
> > https://www.spinics.net/lists/autofs/msg02389.html
> >
>
> Yes it is - thanks for the link.
> I wonder why the proposed fix isn't in git ....
I think we are refering to commits:
fc4c067b53f7 autofs-5.1.7 - make NFS version check flags consistent
26fb6b5408be autofs-5.1.7 - refactor get_nfs_info()
606795ecfaa1 autofs-5.1.7 - also require TCP_REQUESTED when setting NFS
port
>
> Also, I cannot see that the new NS4_ONLY_REQUESTED is different from
> the
> existing NFS4_VERS_MASK.
> They are both set/cleared at exactly the same places.
Yes they are at the moment.
The aim there is, at some point, to have two seperate cases for NFSv4
mounts, one that may use rpcbind and one that does not such as when
traversing a firewall. Although I'm not clear on it myself the RFC
says, more or less, should (although that might have been must) not
need to use other than the NFS port, so no rpcbind should need to be
used.
Clearly the case seperation hasn't happened yet but I'm pretty sure
the current code did avoid the rpcbind usage for fstype=nfs4 which
is what was asked for at the time and what had been broken somewhere
along the line.
Ian
prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-02-18 4:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-10-19 6:07 [ANNOUNCE] autofs 5.1.8 release Ian Kent
2022-02-09 21:59 ` NeilBrown
2022-02-14 5:34 ` Ian Kent
2022-02-14 22:46 ` NeilBrown
2022-02-15 7:00 ` Ian Kent
2022-02-15 7:56 ` Stanislav Levin
2022-02-17 2:57 ` NeilBrown
2022-02-18 4:47 ` Ian Kent [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=480248c2fdd2a098fd016aea832f297d711dfdff.camel@themaw.net \
--to=raven@themaw.net \
--cc=autofs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=neilb@suse.de \
--cc=slev@altlinux.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).