Re: noresvport and port re-use

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Mon, Aug 6, 2018 at 10:46 AM, Chuck Lever <chuck.lever@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>
>> On Aug 2, 2018, at 12:42 PM, Olga Kornievskaia <aglo@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Aug 2, 2018 at 11:14 AM, Olga Kornievskaia <aglo@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> Hi folks,
>>>
>>> There is no documentation of this behavior but when "noresvport" is
>>> specified, the client will not try to re-use the port upon connection
>>> re-establishement. Is this an oversight or a desired behavior (ie.,
>>> client doesn't need to be conservative and re-use ports)?
>>>
>>> Thank you.
>>
>> I'm going to speculate on the reason myself and would like to hear
>> some folks thoughts.
>>
>> When we specify "noresvport" we use port=0 value that tells the kernel
>> - use any port. When connection is re-established port=0 so NFS has no
>> control over which port the kernel will choose.
>>
>> When client re-establishes the connection with a different port, that
>> has an effect on the server's replay cache. Any thoughts on that?
>>
>> Should the client remember which non-privileged port it used and then
>> the next time request a specific port?
>
> The basic constraint is that:
>
> If the client actively disconnects, or if the client is using an NFSv4
> session, then for a fresh connection the client is free to use any
> available source port in the range selected by the "resvport" mount
> option.
>
> If there is no NFSv4 session and the server or the network transport
> actively disconnects (say, due to a keep-alive timeout), the client
> should attempt to use the same source port as the previous connection
> in order to preserve DRC content on the server.

Hi Chuck,

Thanks for the reply. I'm considering your 2nd case where the server
reset the connection and client is re-establishing it and this is a v3
mount (this DRC is important). When "noresvport" is specified, then
the kernel makes no attempts at re-use the same non-reserved port.
However, I'm not sure it is possible to re-use a non-reserved port.
Given this behavior, shouldn't we be discouraging folks to mount with
v3 and "noresvport" option?

>
>
>> Is that possible?
>
>
> --
> Chuck Lever
>
>
>
--
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



[Index of Archives]     [Linux Filesystem Development]     [Linux USB Development]     [Linux Media Development]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux NILFS]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite Info]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux