> On Nov 10, 2023, at 2:54 AM, Martin Wege <martin.l.wege@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Wed, Nov 1, 2023 at 3:42 PM Benjamin Coddington <bcodding@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> On 1 Nov 2023, at 5:06, Martin Wege wrote: >> >>> Good morning! >>> >>> We have questions about NFSv4 referrals: >>> 1. Is there a way to test them in Debian Linux? >>> >>> 2. How does a fs_locations attribute look like when a nonstandard port >>> like 6666 is used? >>> RFC5661 says this: >>> >>> * http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5661#section-11.9 >>> * 11.9. The Attribute fs_locations >>> * An entry in the server array is a UTF-8 string and represents one of a >>> * traditional DNS host name, IPv4 address, IPv6 address, or a zero-length >>> * string. An IPv4 or IPv6 address is represented as a universal address >>> * (see Section 3.3.9 and [15]), minus the netid, and either with or without >>> * the trailing ".p1.p2" suffix that represents the port number. If the >>> * suffix is omitted, then the default port, 2049, SHOULD be assumed. A >>> * zero-length string SHOULD be used to indicate the current address being >>> * used for the RPC call. >>> >>> Does anyone have an example of how the content of fs_locations should >>> look like with a custom port number? >> >> If you keep following the references, you end up with the example in >> rfc5665, which gives an example for IPv4: >> >> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc5665#section-5.2.3.3 > > So just <address>.<upper-byte-of-port-number>.<lower-byte-of-port-number>? > How can I test that with the refer= option in /etc/exports? nfsref > does not seem to have a ports option... Neither refer= nor nfsref support alternate ports for exactly the same reason: The mountd upcall/downcall, which is how the kernel learns of referral target locations, needs to be fixed first. Then support for alternate ports can be implemented in both refer= and nfsref. -- Chuck Lever
