On Fri, Apr 18, 2008 at 04:23:50PM -0400, Peter Staubach wrote: > Peter Staubach wrote: >> J. Bruce Fields wrote: >>> On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 12:38:43PM -0400, Janne Karhunen wrote: >>> >>>> Apparently lockd does not expect statd to be used with -n >>>> switch: statd is expected to bind loopback, always. Attached >>>> patches show one (IPv4 specific) way of fixing it. Comments? >>>> >>> >>> Maybe statd really should always bind to the loopback interface? Is >>> there any reason not to? >>> >>> >> >> I think that statd needs to be reachable from clients >> and/or servers when the state changes on the other end. >> >> This "-n" option really assumes that the system is single-homed >> though, doesn't it? Binding to one particular interface will >> make it so that statd will not be reachable via any of the other >> interfaces on the system. >> >> Perhaps statd should always bind to the loopback interface >> if it doesn't bind to INADDR_ANY? >> > > Sorry, not very clear. Perhaps statd should bind to the loopback > interface in addition to any other interfaces if it doesn't bind > to INADDR_ANY. Right, that's what would make the most sense to me. Janne, is there any reason that wouldn't solve your problem? --b. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
