On Tue, Feb 04, 2014 at 09:34:52AM +1100, NeilBrown wrote: > On Mon, 03 Feb 2014 16:01:21 -0500 Steve Dickson <SteveD@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Also how does gss-proxy come to play in all this? Maybe we > > just use gss-proxy by default and retire rpc.svcgssd. > > I haven't really be following and so am only dimly aware of gss-proxy. > It's a replacement for rpc.svcgssd - right? > So we should get it to start in the same circumstances as rpc.svcgssd? > > Is there some easy test - eg something existing in the filesystem - that we > could use to see if the kernel supports gss-proxy ? There's a /proc/net/rpc/use-gss-proxy file. (But doesn't gss-proxy have users other than nfsd?) > Also, I've been wondering if we could avoid the need to explicitly enable > the gss stuff by gating it on the existence of /etc/krb5.keytab. > Do you think that would be reasonable? That would be great. I hate that people have to care about these support daemons, they should just be started automatically when they're needed. Is /etc/krb5.keytab the best indicator? Simplest might be to start unconditionally and just not care if it fails. Or is there a problem cluttering up logs with unimportant failures? --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
