Yes, I guess it should be removed. It's in there in an attempt to detect a client collision (case 3: same client owner, different ip, flag not set), but as you and Benny have pointed out, basing it on an ip check is flawed anyways... Mike -----Original Message----- From: J. Bruce Fields [mailto:bfields@xxxxxxxxxxxx] Sent: Wednesday, April 01, 2009 11:02 AM To: Sager, Mike Cc: Benny Halevy; linux-nfs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; pnfs@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: Re: [pnfs] [PATCH v2 15/47] nfsd41: exchange_id operation > > + if (ip_addr != conf->cl_addr && > > + !(exid->flags & EXCHGID4_FLAG_UPD_CONFIRMED_REC_A)) > { > > + /* Client collision. 18.35.4 case 3 */ > > + status = nfserr_clid_inuse; > > + goto out; > > + } > > + /* > > + * Set bit when the owner id and verifier map to an > already > > + * confirmed client id (18.35.3). > > + */ > > + exid->flags |= EXCHGID4_FLAG_CONFIRMED_R; > > + > > + /* > > + * Falling into 18.35.4 case 2, possible router replay. > I wrote: > Checking the spec: case 2 says: "If the server has the following > confirmed record, and the request does not have > EXCHGID4_FLAG_UPD_CONFIRMED_REC_A set,..." > > But that flag *is* set when we get to this code. > On Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 04:59:38PM -0400, Sager, Mike wrote: > Isn't this case 6? > > I don't think EXCHGID4_FLAG_UPD_CONFIRMED_REC_A is necessarily set > when we get here. If the verifier, credentials, and ip addresses > match, we can get here without the flag being set. The comment > should be updated, but I think it actually covers both cases 2 and 6 > here with the code snippet under out_copy. It doesn't seem to make > sense to essentially ignore the value of the flag, but I think the end > result is the same...at least based on my interpretation of the spec > :) OK, maybe--though in that case the ip_addr/exid->flags conditional should probably just be removed entirely? In any case someone needs to take a careful look at this function. --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
