Am Mittwoch, 15. April 2009 schrieb Chuck Lever:
> On Apr 15, 2009, at 1:23 PM, Hans-Peter Jansen wrote:
> > Am Mittwoch, 15. April 2009 schrieb Chuck Lever:
> >> When using rpcbind instead of portmapper, what does the output of
> >> "rpcinfo" look like on the server?
> >
> > It's dumped in the mail starting this thread.
>
> I don't see why the client's rpcbind attempt for the server's mountd
> service should have failed.
For completeness, here's the current rpcinfo view with portmap:
# rpcinfo -p 172.16.23.110
Program Vers Proto Port
100000 2 tcp 111 portmapper
100000 2 udp 111 portmapper
100005 1 udp 54838 mountd
100005 1 tcp 32772 mountd
100005 2 udp 54838 mountd
100005 2 tcp 32772 mountd
100005 3 udp 54838 mountd
100005 3 tcp 32772 mountd
100003 2 udp 2049 nfs
100003 3 udp 2049 nfs
100003 4 udp 2049 nfs
100021 1 udp 35501 nlockmgr
100021 3 udp 35501 nlockmgr
100021 4 udp 35501 nlockmgr
100003 2 tcp 2049 nfs
100003 3 tcp 2049 nfs
100003 4 tcp 2049 nfs
100021 1 tcp 54766 nlockmgr
100021 3 tcp 54766 nlockmgr
100021 4 tcp 54766 nlockmgr
100024 1 udp 44650 status
100024 1 tcp 39765 status
> Would it be possible for you to capture a packet trace of the client's
> attempt to mount it's root file system? (You will likely need to do
> this for a bugzilla report, anyway).
Ähem, Chuck, may I ask you to look into the initial mail again. The failing
case is attached there. Here I've attached the good one. Since I couldn't
locate any mount attempt in the dump, I've left a few more nfs
transactions.
> Also let us know what's running on your clients (distribution, kernel
> version, etc).
Hmm, sure. The client setup is a legacy SuSE 9.3 diskless environment
(unfortunately Novell didn't manage to create a distribution with similar
stability since then..., being a rpm junke, I will soon check Cent-OS
(again)).
Client (relevant) versions:
Kernel: 2.6.11.4
Udev (nfsmount): 053
Let me know, what more I can provide, please.
THanks,
Pete
Attachment:
shark-nfs-mount-ok.dump
Description: Binary data
