On Tue, 2012-04-24 at 11:40 -0400, Chuck Lever wrote:
> On Apr 24, 2012, at 11:29 AM, Jim Rees wrote:
>
> > Niels de Vos wrote:
> >
> > On 04/23/2012 06:22 PM, Chuck Lever wrote:
> >>
> >> So you did check the mail archive? I seem to recall other patches like
> >> this in the past, and that there is a reason why rpcbind works this way.
> >> I simply don't remember the specifics right at the moment.
> >
> > I did, but no messages about this subject come up for me... Maybe I'm looking
> > in the wrong places :-/
> >
> > I asked about this last November, and at that time Chuck referred me to the
> > mail archive too. I couldn't find any discussion either. But the behavior
> > is intentional, so I don't think you'll get a patch accepted.
>
> Going back to the rpcbind(8) man page, the "-h" is meant to work around a brokenness of RPC over UDP. UDP replies can come from any server address, as I mentioned before, and most Linux clients, at least, don't like an RPC reply to come from a different address than the request was sent to.
See the IP_PKTINFO socket control message definition for the correct way
to do this ('man 7 ip'). That is how the kernel RPC server code
determines to which address the message was sent, and is how it sets the
reply's source address...
--
Trond Myklebust
Linux NFS client maintainer
NetApp
Trond.Myklebust@xxxxxxxxxx
www.netapp.com
��.n��������+%������w��{.n�����{��w��� jg��� �����ݢj����G���� ���j:+v���w�m������w�������h�����٥
