Hi,
I've just noticed that (on STABLE, at least) it doesn't seem possible
to run an NFS server on a machine, and have it service requests from
clients talking to anything other than the base address.
For example, if I
ifconfig fxp0 inet 192.168.0.11
ifconfig fxp0 inet 192.168.0.16 alias
and then have clients attempt to mount 192.168.0.16:/foo, the clients
will not successfully mount the shared volume; this is (according to
some posts on the subject I found in the -questions archive) because
the client is expecting replies from 192.168.0.16, but the server
is sending them from 192.168.0.16.
This is correct behaviour by the client, since trusting NFS replies
from any old address would be silly.
It seems to me that _my_ requirements would be satisfied if an NFS
request from a client could have its destination address recorded, so
that any replies to that specific request could be sourced from the
address expected by the client.
Would this obviously break anything else?
Would this be a security-conscious modification?
Does -current already do this?
If "no, yes, no" I'll have a look myself. Just keen not to overlap with
anybody else's effort.
--
Ua lawa k�pono ka hakahaka p� o k�ia p� malule
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
