On Tue, 2009-09-01 at 14:07 -0400, Chuck Lever wrote: > On Sep 1, 2009, at 12:38 PM, J. Bruce Fields wrote: > > > On Tue, Sep 01, 2009 at 12:29:30PM -0400, Chuck Lever wrote: > >> On Sep 1, 2009, at 12:09 PM, J. Bruce Fields wrote: > >>> And, sure, that'd be OK with me, and would probably be better than > >>> adding another exception, so I'm OK with skipping #3. (We > >>> definitely > >>> shouldn't omit #2, though.) > >> > >> Seems straightforward enough, but... Why are we doing this again? > >> It > >> still seems like non-standard behavior. Are we simply attempting to > >> avoid the case where folks would get the "nobody" behavior > >> unexpectedly > >> because of a mountd bug, or is there more to it? > > > > That's all there is to it. As I said: > > > >>>>>>> 2. In the absence of sec=, we should probably *not* choose > >>>>>>> AUTH_NULL. (All mountd's before 1.1.3 list AUTH_NULL first on > >>>>>>> the returned list, so users with older servers may wonder why a > >>>>>>> client upgrade is making files they create suddenly be owned by > >>>>>>> nobody.) http://marc.info/?l=linux-nfs&m=125089022306281&w=2 > > > >> I'm just thinking of what the documenting comment might say, and > >> perhaps > >> some explanation added to nfs(5). > > > > "As a special case, to work around bugs in some older servers, the > > client will never automatically negotiate auth_null; if auth_null is > > desired, an explicit "sec=null" on the commandline is required." > > > > Or something like that. > > OK, one more corner case. > > What if the mount doesn't specify "sec=" and the only flavor in the > server's auth list is AUTH_NULL? Seems like we should allow that one. Amend the above statement to "the only flavour in the server's auth list that is supported by the client", and I'll agree. If a server advertises auth_dh, auth_krb4 and auth_null, then we should definitely try auth_null rather than failing. Trond -- 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
