On 09/04/13 14:54, J. Bruce Fields wrote: > On Tue, Apr 09, 2013 at 01:35:06PM -0400, Steve Dickson wrote: >> >> >> On 09/04/13 13:25, Simo Sorce wrote: >>> On Tue, 2013-04-09 at 13:15 -0400, Steve Dickson wrote: >>>> >>>> On 08/04/13 10:08, Simo Sorce wrote: >>>>> On Mon, 2013-04-08 at 09:39 -0400, Steve Dickson wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> On 02/04/13 15:32, Simo Sorce wrote: >>>>>>> A NFS client should be able to work properly even if the DNS Reverse record >>>>>>> for the server is not set. There is no excuse to forcefully prevent that >>>>>>> from working when it can. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> This patch adds a new pair of options (-z/-Z) that allow to turn on/off >>>>>>> DNS reverse resolution for determining the server name to use with GSSAPI. >>>>>> Again, please tell me why we need the -Z flag when that is the default? >>>>> >>>>> The idea is to switch the default in the code at some point, so then -Z >>>>> will be needed to get back to the original behavior. >>>> I'm thinking that's what major version number changes are for... not flags... >>>> >>>>> >>>>> The idea is that by having both flags a distribution may choose to >>>>> decide now what behavior they want and use the relative flag. Then even >>>>> if we change the default their configuration will not "break". >>>> I'll do the work to remove the option and repost the patches.. >>> >>> As you wish, I do not have hard preferences, should we take the bait and >>> also by default *not* do PTR lookups ? >> I was thinking no. Leaves the default as is and used the -z to avoid the >> lookup... >> >> I'm struggling with how big of a problem this really is, so why should be break >> existing environments? I'm no DNS expert but I thinking not have PTR is >> a DNS config issue... but again I'm no expert... > > Argh, no, one away or another the default needs to be to not do the PTR > lookup. Fine... > > The transition Simo's using was Jeff's suggestion. Let's just stick to > that if we don't have a good reason. Yeah... I would like to avoid adding to flags... I don't think both are needed. > > (But I don't have strong opinions about how to do it either. I'd > actually be OK with being harsh and just switching to the new behavior > without any option.) My crutch is I'm not a big DNS guy so I'm not sure how much breakage would occur... So I would rather be on the safe side and give people a way to go back... steved. -- 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
