On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 02:06:45PM -0400, Steve Dickson wrote: > On 10/26/2009 01:34 PM, Frank Ch. Eigler wrote: > > Steve Dickson <SteveD@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > > >> On 10/26/2009 12:06 PM, Frank Ch. Eigler wrote: > > > > Unfortunately, this sounds like "only". Is it out of the question to > > make the client look for this case (an upgraded client in an existing > > unupgraded, unchanged network) and handle it? > We talked about it... See http://linux-nfs.org/pipermail/nfsv4/2009-October/011471.html > > But in the end, I decided not to do this since its not clear how the change > would interact with other NFS servers... > It's not clear to me how falling back to NFSv3 if v4 fails (and the version wasn't explicitly set to v4) could ever cause a problem - it might not help, but under what circumstances could it possibly be harmful? I had a look at the linked thread from linux-nfs and no-one there seemed to come up with anything concrete. Ewan
Attachment:
pgpf9NmFrBpAk.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
