On 11/14/2012 09:24, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 09:04:18AM -0500, David Quigley wrote:
On 11/14/2012 08:59, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
>On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 08:50:17AM -0500, David Quigley wrote:
>>On 11/14/2012 08:45, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
>>>On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 11:32:53PM -0500, Dave Quigley wrote:
>>>>Ok so if you go to http://www.selinuxproject.org/git you will
>>see a
>>>>repo for lnfs and lnfs-patchset. The instructions at
>>>>http://www.selinuxproject.org/page/Labeled_NFS give you a better
>>>>indication on how to pull the trees. I've attached a patch for
NFS
>>>>utils which gives support for security_label/nosecurity_label in
>>>>your /etc/exports file.
>>>
>>>Do we need an export option? Is there any reason not to make the
>>>feature available whenever there's support available for it?
>>
>>I guess we could build it in but I figured an export option
allowed
>>someone to turn off security labeling support if they didn't want
it
>>on that export. What happens to clients when the server returns a
>>cap that they don't support? Do they mask the bits out?
>
>Yeah, they should just ignore it.
>
>While this is still experimental it's still nice to have a way to
>turn
>this on and off at runtime so people can experiment without having
to
>have it on for everyone all the time. But
>nfsd_supported_minorversion
>should be sufficient for that.
>
>(I don't think your patches actually dealt yet with the fact that
>this
>is part of minor version 2? Another for the todo list.)
>
>--b.
If we use nfsd_supported_minorversion which I'm guessing is an
export option
That's just a variable in the code. It's controlled by
/proc/fs/nfsd/versions.
what happens if someone wants to use other 4.2
features but not labeling?
We'll cross that bridge when we come to it, maybe by adding some new
global paramater.
There's no reason this really needs to be per-export, is there?
--b.
At the moment I can't really think of a reason to have it be
per-export. I think we need a new LSM patch though to determine if the
LSM supports labeling over NFS unless Steve can think of a better way to
tell if the LSM supports labeling.
I'll switch it over if you guys want it
done that way, I think though that this provides more flexibility.
Although anything that makes me carry around fewer patches is good
in my book.
Dave
--
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
