On Thu, Aug 07, 2008 at 04:41:54PM -0400, J. Bruce Fields wrote: > On Thu, Aug 07, 2008 at 03:39:45PM -0400, Peter Staubach wrote: > > J. Bruce Fields wrote: > >> On Thu, Aug 07, 2008 at 02:23:40PM -0400, Peter Staubach wrote: > >>> I would think that you might want to have nfsd3_proc_getattr() > >>> in this list too. Some clients may need to generate a GETATTR > >>> if they need the attributes for the root node. > >>> > >> > >> Do you know of any? rfc 2623 makes it sound like those clients are out > >> of luck. And testing confirms that this patch is sufficient for the > >> linux client, at least. > > > > I believe that the Solaris client may. I think that it may > > use the attributes returned from the FSINFO call, if there > > are any, to prevent the additional GETATTR, but this should > > be tested. It might also be interesting to test out a > > readonly failover mount on the Solaris client to see what > > behavior that that exhibits. > > OK, could be. Volunteers to test that welcomed--for now I think I'll > stick to the list in the RFC. By the way, I don't mean to brush off the idea, it's just that this satisfies my immediate problem, and it would be extremely easy for someone else to test: - Apply this patch to a linux nfs server, export a filesystem with /export *(sec=krb5) - mount -osec=krb5 server:/export from a solaris client. - report whether it works, and get a packet capture if not. ... If someone gets a chance to figure out the Solaris client behavior, that'd be great. --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
