On Tue, Aug 03, 2010 at 10:02:16PM -0400, Trond Myklebust wrote: > On Tue, 2010-08-03 at 18:42 -0400, J. Bruce Fields wrote: > > On Tue, Aug 03, 2010 at 06:31:15PM -0400, Trond Myklebust wrote: > > > We know it has a bunch of problems, > > > not least the one that limits ngroups <= 16, and the fact that it relies > > > on uids (as opposed to login names) being the same on client and server > > > so why not try to fix those limitations? > > > > Sure, that would be great. > > > > Again, that doesn't address the complaints above. > > Yes it does. See the stated scenario: http://marc.info/?l=linux-nfs&m=128080127215350&w=2 It's a dumb client making a copy of a filesystem over NFS for backup. It's not true that this case could be dealt with by an auth_sys replacement that uses names instead of id's. (You could argue that it's a hypothetical case, crazy, not important, or whatever--just not that it has much to do with the authentication flavor. Personally I think it *is* of at least some importance, since anyone depending on that sort of behavior will see their systems stop working if they switch from v2/v3 to v4. The v2/v3 install base being massive compared to v4's, the success of v4+ depends in part on reducing the chances of that kind of thing happening.) --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
