Cy Schubert wrote:
>Rick Macklem wrote:
>> Hi,
>> The attached one line patch to /etc/rc.d/nfsd modifies the script so that i=
>> t
>> does not force the nfsuserd to be run when nfsv4_server_enable is set.
>> (nfsuserd can still be enabled via nfsuserd_enable=3D"YES" is /etc/rc.conf.=
>> )
>> Here's why I think this patch might be appropriate...
>> (a) - The original RFC for NFSv4 (RFC3530) essentially required Owners and
>>    Owner_groups to be specified as <user>@<domain> and this required
>>    the nfsuserd daemon to be running.
>> (b) - RFC7530, which replace RFC3530, allows a Owner/Owner_group string to =
>> be
>>   the uid/gid number in a string when using AUTH_SYS. This simplifies confi=
>> guration
>>   for an all AUTH_SYS/POSIX environment (most NFS uses, I suspect?).
>> To make the server do (b), two things need to be done:
>> 1 - set vfs.nfsd.enable_stringtouid=3D1
>> 2 - set vfs.nfsd.enable_uidtostring=3D1 (for head, I don't know if it will =
>> be MFC'd?)
>> OR
>>   - never run nfsuserd after booting (killing it off after it has been runn=
>> ing is not
>>     sufficient)
>>  =20
>> Given the above, it would seem that /etc/rc.d/nfsd should not force running=
>>  of
>> the nfsuserd daemon, due to changes in the protocol.
>> However, this will result in a POLA violation, in that after the patch, nfs=
>> userd won't
>> start when booting, unless nfsuserd_enable=3D"YES" is added to /etc/rc.conf=
>> .
>> So, what do people think about this patch? rick=
>How about a warning message + an UPDATING entry + no MFC? And, relnotes =
>yes to say we now support RFC7530 in 12.0?
Sounds fine to me. I'll wait to see if there are more comments.

Thanks, rick

_______________________________________________ mailing list
To unsubscribe, send any mail to ""

Reply via email to