Sam Lang wrote:

I agree with you that this stuff tends to be applied at different
places.  I'm not sure that we intended the existing security options to
be global -- we didn't really discuss it.  I think both of these things
are really intended to be per file system, even if we don't really
support that level of granularity yet.

Yup. I agree with you that they are meant to be per-file-system. I just
could not figure out a clean way to get to the f.s stuff from the BMI
layer. So it turned out to be a global option. :(

One way to do this might be to pass in the filesystem_config pointer cur_fs instead of the server_config pointer to the BMI_set_info(... BMI_TRUSTED_CONNECTION ...) call. That will at least let you call get_allowed_ports on the fs_config instead. To get the filesystem_config, you just need the fsid (PINT_config_find_fs_id), and you should have it at the level from which BMI_set_info is called. If you still need to go back and get global security config options

You guys kick this around a little and see what you think, but again I think we've got bigger fish to fry at the moment.

As a side note, if we're going to be changing that stuff anyway, does it make sense to move the trusted ports/networks stuff one layer up to the BMI layer? I feel like putting it just in bmi_tcp is wrong, esp. since there's nothing in the Security config options that specifies which bmi module to use. It seems like either we should add a required option to the Security context that specifies which bmi modules these apply to (and its always just tcp for now), other the bmi modules should support the trusted ports/networks stuff.

I agree that the current situation isn't quite right. However, so far we have had no requests for this sort of capability on the other BMI implementations. So until we decide that we really need client access control for IB or GM, I say we just keep doing what we're doing.

Rob
_______________________________________________
PVFS2-developers mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.beowulf-underground.org/mailman/listinfo/pvfs2-developers

Reply via email to