Re: NFSv2 boot & OLD_NFSV2

[Toomas Soome]

> On 26. märts 2017, at 23:00, Rick Macklem  wrote:
> 
> Just in case it wasn't clear, I think this is a good idea and I think
> you have a handle on any potential problems.
> 
> Good luck with it, rick

aye, thanks, just wanted to give people some time to react. And got some stupid 
cold meanwhile:D

rgds,
toomas

> 
> From: Toomas Soome mailto:tso...@me.com>>
> Sent: Tuesday, March 21, 2017 5:04:59 AM
> To: Daniel Braniss
> Cc: Baptiste Daroussin; Rick Macklem; FreeBSD Current
> Subject: Re: NFSv2 boot & OLD_NFSV2
> 
> On 21. märts 2017, at 10:50, Daniel Braniss  <mailto:da...@cs.huji.ac.il><mailto:da...@cs.huji.ac.il 
> <mailto:da...@cs.huji.ac.il>>> wrote:
> 
> 
> On 21 Mar 2017, at 10:13, Baptiste Daroussin  <mailto:b...@freebsd.org><mailto:b...@freebsd.org <mailto:b...@freebsd.org>>> 
> wrote:
> 
> On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 09:58:21AM +0200, Daniel Braniss wrote:
> 
> On 20 Mar 2017, at 23:55, Toomas Soome  <mailto:tso...@me.com><mailto:tso...@me.com <mailto:tso...@me.com>>> wrote:
> 
> 
> On 20. märts 2017, at 23:53, Rick Macklem  <mailto:rmack...@uoguelph.ca><mailto:rmack...@uoguelph.ca 
> <mailto:rmack...@uoguelph.ca>>> wrote:
> 
> Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 08:22:12PM +0200, Toomas Soome wrote:
> Hi!
> 
> The current boot code is building NFSv3, with preprocessor conditional 
> OLD_NFSV2. Should NFSv2 code still be kept around or can we burn it?
> 
> rgds,
> toomas
> 
> I vote burn
> 
> Bapt
> I would be happy to see NFSv2 go away. However, depending on how people 
> configure
> their diskless root fs, they do end up using NFSv2 for their root fs.
> 
> Does booting over NFSv3 affect this?
> 
> I think the answer is no for a FreeBSD server (since the NFSv2 File Handle is 
> the same as
> the NFSv3 one, except padded with 0 bytes to 32bytes long).
> However, there might be non-FreeBSD NFS servers where the NFSv2 file handle 
> is different
> than the NFSv3 one and for that case, the user would need NFSv2 boot code (or
> reconfigure their root fs to use NFSv3).
> 
> To be honest, I suspect few realize that they are using NFSv2 for their root 
> fs.
> (They'd see it in a packet trace or via "nfsstat -m", but otherwise they 
> probably
> think they are using NFSv3 for their root fs.)
> 
> rick
> 
> if they do not suspect, they most likely use v3 - due to simple fact that you 
> have to rebuild loader to use NFSv2 - it is compile time option.
> 
> 
> old systems, 8.x, still use/boot v2, and so do old linux.
> NetApp has discontinued support for v2, so we had to move this machines to 
> use FreeBSD server and the day was
> saved. So, till these machines get upgraded/discontinued we have a problem. 
> There are several solutions
> to this issue, but as long as it's a matter of getting rid for the sake of 
> it, I would vote to keep it a while longer.
> 
> danny
> 
> 
> Given you are speaking of 8.x I suppose you are using the loader that comes 
> with
> it, meaning you are safe if we remove it from the loader in 12.0 (note as said
> by Toomas that is it is already off by default in the 12.0 loader) am I 
> missing
> something?
> 
> 
> as usual, did not read the whole thread, I assumed - wrongly - that support 
> for v2 would be discontinued.
> removing v2 support from the boot process is fine! great, go for it. It will 
> only involve newer
> hosts, and simplifying the boot process is always a good idea.
> 
> sorry for the noise.
> danny
> 
> 
> 
> yes, just to clarify,  the current loader code (in current), is having NFS 
> code implemented as:
> 
> #ifdef OLD_NFSV2
> 
> v2 implementation is here
> 
> #else
> 
> v3 implementation is here
> 
> #endif
> 
> Which does mean that pxeboot/loader.efi is built by default to use v3 only, 
> but we do have 2 parallel implementations of the NFS readers. And yes, the 
> question is just about boot loader reader code (we do not implement NFS 
> writes) - and we are *not* talking about server side there.
> 
> Indeed it also is possible to merge those 2 version implementations, but to 
> be honest, I see very little point of doing that either, even if there is 
> some setup still with v2 only server, there is still an option just to use 
> TFTP based boot - especially given that current boot loader does provide 
> parallel option to use either NFS or TFTP (via dhcp option 150), with 
> existing binaries - that is, without having to re-compile.
> 
> rgds,
> toomas
> 
> ___

Re: NFSv2 boot & OLD_NFSV2

[Rick Macklem]

Just in case it wasn't clear, I think this is a good idea and I think
you have a handle on any potential problems.

Good luck with it, rick

From: Toomas Soome 
Sent: Tuesday, March 21, 2017 5:04:59 AM
To: Daniel Braniss
Cc: Baptiste Daroussin; Rick Macklem; FreeBSD Current
Subject: Re: NFSv2 boot & OLD_NFSV2

On 21. märts 2017, at 10:50, Daniel Braniss 
mailto:da...@cs.huji.ac.il>> wrote:


On 21 Mar 2017, at 10:13, Baptiste Daroussin 
mailto:b...@freebsd.org>> wrote:

On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 09:58:21AM +0200, Daniel Braniss wrote:

On 20 Mar 2017, at 23:55, Toomas Soome mailto:tso...@me.com>> 
wrote:


On 20. märts 2017, at 23:53, Rick Macklem 
mailto:rmack...@uoguelph.ca>> wrote:

Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 08:22:12PM +0200, Toomas Soome wrote:
Hi!

The current boot code is building NFSv3, with preprocessor conditional 
OLD_NFSV2. Should NFSv2 code still be kept around or can we burn it?

rgds,
toomas

I vote burn

Bapt
I would be happy to see NFSv2 go away. However, depending on how people 
configure
their diskless root fs, they do end up using NFSv2 for their root fs.

Does booting over NFSv3 affect this?

I think the answer is no for a FreeBSD server (since the NFSv2 File Handle is 
the same as
the NFSv3 one, except padded with 0 bytes to 32bytes long).
However, there might be non-FreeBSD NFS servers where the NFSv2 file handle is 
different
than the NFSv3 one and for that case, the user would need NFSv2 boot code (or
reconfigure their root fs to use NFSv3).

To be honest, I suspect few realize that they are using NFSv2 for their root fs.
(They'd see it in a packet trace or via "nfsstat -m", but otherwise they 
probably
think they are using NFSv3 for their root fs.)

rick

if they do not suspect, they most likely use v3 - due to simple fact that you 
have to rebuild loader to use NFSv2 - it is compile time option.


old systems, 8.x, still use/boot v2, and so do old linux.
NetApp has discontinued support for v2, so we had to move this machines to use 
FreeBSD server and the day was
saved. So, till these machines get upgraded/discontinued we have a problem. 
There are several solutions
to this issue, but as long as it's a matter of getting rid for the sake of it, 
I would vote to keep it a while longer.

danny


Given you are speaking of 8.x I suppose you are using the loader that comes with
it, meaning you are safe if we remove it from the loader in 12.0 (note as said
by Toomas that is it is already off by default in the 12.0 loader) am I missing
something?


as usual, did not read the whole thread, I assumed - wrongly - that support for 
v2 would be discontinued.
removing v2 support from the boot process is fine! great, go for it. It will 
only involve newer
hosts, and simplifying the boot process is always a good idea.

sorry for the noise.
danny



yes, just to clarify,  the current loader code (in current), is having NFS code 
implemented as:

#ifdef OLD_NFSV2

v2 implementation is here

#else

v3 implementation is here

#endif

Which does mean that pxeboot/loader.efi is built by default to use v3 only, but 
we do have 2 parallel implementations of the NFS readers. And yes, the question 
is just about boot loader reader code (we do not implement NFS writes) - and we 
are *not* talking about server side there.

Indeed it also is possible to merge those 2 version implementations, but to be 
honest, I see very little point of doing that either, even if there is some 
setup still with v2 only server, there is still an option just to use TFTP 
based boot - especially given that current boot loader does provide parallel 
option to use either NFS or TFTP (via dhcp option 150), with existing binaries 
- that is, without having to re-compile.

rgds,
toomas

___
freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"

Re: NFSv2 boot & OLD_NFSV2

[Toomas Soome]

> On 21. märts 2017, at 10:50, Daniel Braniss  wrote:
> 
> 
>> On 21 Mar 2017, at 10:13, Baptiste Daroussin > > wrote:
>> 
>> On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 09:58:21AM +0200, Daniel Braniss wrote:
>>> 
 On 20 Mar 2017, at 23:55, Toomas Soome >>> > wrote:
 
> 
> On 20. märts 2017, at 23:53, Rick Macklem  > wrote:
> 
> Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
>> On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 08:22:12PM +0200, Toomas Soome wrote:
>>> Hi!
>>> 
>>> The current boot code is building NFSv3, with preprocessor conditional 
>>> OLD_NFSV2. Should NFSv2 code still be kept around or can we burn it?
>>> 
>>> rgds,
>>> toomas
>> 
>> I vote burn
>> 
>> Bapt
> I would be happy to see NFSv2 go away. However, depending on how people 
> configure
> their diskless root fs, they do end up using NFSv2 for their root fs.
> 
> Does booting over NFSv3 affect this?
> 
> I think the answer is no for a FreeBSD server (since the NFSv2 File 
> Handle is the same as
> the NFSv3 one, except padded with 0 bytes to 32bytes long).
> However, there might be non-FreeBSD NFS servers where the NFSv2 file 
> handle is different
> than the NFSv3 one and for that case, the user would need NFSv2 boot code 
> (or
> reconfigure their root fs to use NFSv3).
> 
> To be honest, I suspect few realize that they are using NFSv2 for their 
> root fs.
> (They'd see it in a packet trace or via "nfsstat -m", but otherwise they 
> probably
> think they are using NFSv3 for their root fs.)
> 
> rick
 
 if they do not suspect, they most likely use v3 - due to simple fact that 
 you have to rebuild loader to use NFSv2 - it is compile time option.
 
>>> 
>>> old systems, 8.x, still use/boot v2, and so do old linux.
>>> NetApp has discontinued support for v2, so we had to move this machines to 
>>> use FreeBSD server and the day was
>>> saved. So, till these machines get upgraded/discontinued we have a problem. 
>>> There are several solutions
>>> to this issue, but as long as it's a matter of getting rid for the sake of 
>>> it, I would vote to keep it a while longer.
>>> 
>>> danny
>>> 
>>> 
>> Given you are speaking of 8.x I suppose you are using the loader that comes 
>> with
>> it, meaning you are safe if we remove it from the loader in 12.0 (note as 
>> said
>> by Toomas that is it is already off by default in the 12.0 loader) am I 
>> missing
>> something?
>> 
> 
> as usual, did not read the whole thread, I assumed - wrongly - that support 
> for v2 would be discontinued.
> removing v2 support from the boot process is fine! great, go for it. It will 
> only involve newer
> hosts, and simplifying the boot process is always a good idea.
> 
> sorry for the noise.
>   danny
> 


yes, just to clarify,  the current loader code (in current), is having NFS code 
implemented as:

#ifdef OLD_NFSV2

v2 implementation is here

#else

v3 implementation is here

#endif

Which does mean that pxeboot/loader.efi is built by default to use v3 only, but 
we do have 2 parallel implementations of the NFS readers. And yes, the question 
is just about boot loader reader code (we do not implement NFS writes) - and we 
are *not* talking about server side there.

Indeed it also is possible to merge those 2 version implementations, but to be 
honest, I see very little point of doing that either, even if there is some 
setup still with v2 only server, there is still an option just to use TFTP 
based boot - especially given that current boot loader does provide parallel 
option to use either NFS or TFTP (via dhcp option 150), with existing binaries 
- that is, without having to re-compile.

rgds,
toomas

___
freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"

Re: NFSv2 boot & OLD_NFSV2

[Daniel Braniss]

> On 21 Mar 2017, at 10:13, Baptiste Daroussin  wrote:
> 
> On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 09:58:21AM +0200, Daniel Braniss wrote:
>> 
>>> On 20 Mar 2017, at 23:55, Toomas Soome  wrote:
>>> 
 
 On 20. märts 2017, at 23:53, Rick Macklem  wrote:
 
 Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 08:22:12PM +0200, Toomas Soome wrote:
>> Hi!
>> 
>> The current boot code is building NFSv3, with preprocessor conditional 
>> OLD_NFSV2. Should NFSv2 code still be kept around or can we burn it?
>> 
>> rgds,
>> toomas
> 
> I vote burn
> 
> Bapt
 I would be happy to see NFSv2 go away. However, depending on how people 
 configure
 their diskless root fs, they do end up using NFSv2 for their root fs.
 
 Does booting over NFSv3 affect this?
 
 I think the answer is no for a FreeBSD server (since the NFSv2 File Handle 
 is the same as
 the NFSv3 one, except padded with 0 bytes to 32bytes long).
 However, there might be non-FreeBSD NFS servers where the NFSv2 file 
 handle is different
 than the NFSv3 one and for that case, the user would need NFSv2 boot code 
 (or
 reconfigure their root fs to use NFSv3).
 
 To be honest, I suspect few realize that they are using NFSv2 for their 
 root fs.
 (They'd see it in a packet trace or via "nfsstat -m", but otherwise they 
 probably
 think they are using NFSv3 for their root fs.)
 
 rick
>>> 
>>> if they do not suspect, they most likely use v3 - due to simple fact that 
>>> you have to rebuild loader to use NFSv2 - it is compile time option.
>>> 
>> 
>> old systems, 8.x, still use/boot v2, and so do old linux.
>> NetApp has discontinued support for v2, so we had to move this machines to 
>> use FreeBSD server and the day was
>> saved. So, till these machines get upgraded/discontinued we have a problem. 
>> There are several solutions
>> to this issue, but as long as it's a matter of getting rid for the sake of 
>> it, I would vote to keep it a while longer.
>> 
>> danny
>> 
>> 
> Given you are speaking of 8.x I suppose you are using the loader that comes 
> with
> it, meaning you are safe if we remove it from the loader in 12.0 (note as said
> by Toomas that is it is already off by default in the 12.0 loader) am I 
> missing
> something?
> 

as usual, did not read the whole thread, I assumed - wrongly - that support for 
v2 would be discontinued.
removing v2 support from the boot process is fine! great, go for it. It will 
only involve newer
hosts, and simplifying the boot process is always a good idea.

sorry for the noise.
danny


> Best regards,
> Bapt

___
freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"

Re: NFSv2 boot & OLD_NFSV2

[Toomas Soome]

> On 21. märts 2017, at 10:13, Baptiste Daroussin  wrote:
> 
> On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 09:58:21AM +0200, Daniel Braniss wrote:
>> 
>>> On 20 Mar 2017, at 23:55, Toomas Soome  wrote:
>>> 
 
 On 20. märts 2017, at 23:53, Rick Macklem  wrote:
 
 Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 08:22:12PM +0200, Toomas Soome wrote:
>> Hi!
>> 
>> The current boot code is building NFSv3, with preprocessor conditional 
>> OLD_NFSV2. Should NFSv2 code still be kept around or can we burn it?
>> 
>> rgds,
>> toomas
> 
> I vote burn
> 
> Bapt
 I would be happy to see NFSv2 go away. However, depending on how people 
 configure
 their diskless root fs, they do end up using NFSv2 for their root fs.
 
 Does booting over NFSv3 affect this?
 
 I think the answer is no for a FreeBSD server (since the NFSv2 File Handle 
 is the same as
 the NFSv3 one, except padded with 0 bytes to 32bytes long).
 However, there might be non-FreeBSD NFS servers where the NFSv2 file 
 handle is different
 than the NFSv3 one and for that case, the user would need NFSv2 boot code 
 (or
 reconfigure their root fs to use NFSv3).
 
 To be honest, I suspect few realize that they are using NFSv2 for their 
 root fs.
 (They'd see it in a packet trace or via "nfsstat -m", but otherwise they 
 probably
 think they are using NFSv3 for their root fs.)
 
 rick
>>> 
>>> if they do not suspect, they most likely use v3 - due to simple fact that 
>>> you have to rebuild loader to use NFSv2 - it is compile time option.
>>> 
>> 
>> old systems, 8.x, still use/boot v2, and so do old linux.
>> NetApp has discontinued support for v2, so we had to move this machines to 
>> use FreeBSD server and the day was
>> saved. So, till these machines get upgraded/discontinued we have a problem. 
>> There are several solutions
>> to this issue, but as long as it's a matter of getting rid for the sake of 
>> it, I would vote to keep it a while longer.
>> 
>> danny
>> 
>> 
> Given you are speaking of 8.x I suppose you are using the loader that comes 
> with
> it, meaning you are safe if we remove it from the loader in 12.0 (note as said
> by Toomas that is it is already off by default in the 12.0 loader) am I 
> missing
> something?
> 
> 


Indeed, we definitely are *not* talking about back porting the removal, there 
is no reason for that whatsoever. In fact at least 11 is distributing loader 
based on NFSv3, likely even 10 (I havent checked that). So yes, just talking 
about possible removal in current only.

rgds,
toomas



___
freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"

Re: NFSv2 boot & OLD_NFSV2

[Baptiste Daroussin]

On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 09:58:21AM +0200, Daniel Braniss wrote:
> 
> > On 20 Mar 2017, at 23:55, Toomas Soome  wrote:
> > 
> >> 
> >> On 20. märts 2017, at 23:53, Rick Macklem  wrote:
> >> 
> >> Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
> >>> On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 08:22:12PM +0200, Toomas Soome wrote:
>  Hi!
>  
>  The current boot code is building NFSv3, with preprocessor conditional 
>  OLD_NFSV2. Should NFSv2 code still be kept around or can we burn it?
>  
>  rgds,
>  toomas
> >>> 
> >>> I vote burn
> >>> 
> >>> Bapt
> >> I would be happy to see NFSv2 go away. However, depending on how people 
> >> configure
> >> their diskless root fs, they do end up using NFSv2 for their root fs.
> >> 
> >> Does booting over NFSv3 affect this?
> >> 
> >> I think the answer is no for a FreeBSD server (since the NFSv2 File Handle 
> >> is the same as
> >> the NFSv3 one, except padded with 0 bytes to 32bytes long).
> >> However, there might be non-FreeBSD NFS servers where the NFSv2 file 
> >> handle is different
> >> than the NFSv3 one and for that case, the user would need NFSv2 boot code 
> >> (or
> >> reconfigure their root fs to use NFSv3).
> >> 
> >> To be honest, I suspect few realize that they are using NFSv2 for their 
> >> root fs.
> >> (They'd see it in a packet trace or via "nfsstat -m", but otherwise they 
> >> probably
> >> think they are using NFSv3 for their root fs.)
> >> 
> >> rick
> > 
> > if they do not suspect, they most likely use v3 - due to simple fact that 
> > you have to rebuild loader to use NFSv2 - it is compile time option.
> > 
> 
> old systems, 8.x, still use/boot v2, and so do old linux.
> NetApp has discontinued support for v2, so we had to move this machines to 
> use FreeBSD server and the day was
> saved. So, till these machines get upgraded/discontinued we have a problem. 
> There are several solutions
> to this issue, but as long as it's a matter of getting rid for the sake of 
> it, I would vote to keep it a while longer.
> 
> danny
> 
> 
Given you are speaking of 8.x I suppose you are using the loader that comes with
it, meaning you are safe if we remove it from the loader in 12.0 (note as said
by Toomas that is it is already off by default in the 12.0 loader) am I missing
something?

Best regards,
Bapt


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: NFSv2 boot & OLD_NFSV2

[Daniel Braniss]

> On 20 Mar 2017, at 23:55, Toomas Soome  wrote:
> 
>> 
>> On 20. märts 2017, at 23:53, Rick Macklem  wrote:
>> 
>> Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
>>> On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 08:22:12PM +0200, Toomas Soome wrote:
 Hi!
 
 The current boot code is building NFSv3, with preprocessor conditional 
 OLD_NFSV2. Should NFSv2 code still be kept around or can we burn it?
 
 rgds,
 toomas
>>> 
>>> I vote burn
>>> 
>>> Bapt
>> I would be happy to see NFSv2 go away. However, depending on how people 
>> configure
>> their diskless root fs, they do end up using NFSv2 for their root fs.
>> 
>> Does booting over NFSv3 affect this?
>> 
>> I think the answer is no for a FreeBSD server (since the NFSv2 File Handle 
>> is the same as
>> the NFSv3 one, except padded with 0 bytes to 32bytes long).
>> However, there might be non-FreeBSD NFS servers where the NFSv2 file handle 
>> is different
>> than the NFSv3 one and for that case, the user would need NFSv2 boot code (or
>> reconfigure their root fs to use NFSv3).
>> 
>> To be honest, I suspect few realize that they are using NFSv2 for their root 
>> fs.
>> (They'd see it in a packet trace or via "nfsstat -m", but otherwise they 
>> probably
>> think they are using NFSv3 for their root fs.)
>> 
>> rick
> 
> if they do not suspect, they most likely use v3 - due to simple fact that you 
> have to rebuild loader to use NFSv2 - it is compile time option.
> 

old systems, 8.x, still use/boot v2, and so do old linux.
NetApp has discontinued support for v2, so we had to move this machines to use 
FreeBSD server and the day was
saved. So, till these machines get upgraded/discontinued we have a problem. 
There are several solutions
to this issue, but as long as it's a matter of getting rid for the sake of it, 
I would vote to keep it a while longer.

danny


___
freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"

Re: NFSv2 boot & OLD_NFSV2

[Daniel Braniss]

> On 20 Mar 2017, at 23:53, Rick Macklem  wrote:
> 
> Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
>> On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 08:22:12PM +0200, Toomas Soome wrote:
>>> Hi!
>>> 
>>> The current boot code is building NFSv3, with preprocessor conditional 
>>> OLD_NFSV2. Should NFSv2 code still be kept around or can we burn it?
>>> 
>>> rgds,
>>> toomas
>> 
>> I vote burn
>> 
>> Bapt
> I would be happy to see NFSv2 go away. However, depending on how people 
> configure
> their diskless root fs, they do end up using NFSv2 for their root fs.
> 
> Does booting over NFSv3 affect this?
> 
> I think the answer is no for a FreeBSD server (since the NFSv2 File Handle is 
> the same as
> the NFSv3 one, except padded with 0 bytes to 32bytes long).
> However, there might be non-FreeBSD NFS servers where the NFSv2 file handle 
> is different
> than the NFSv3 one and for that case, the user would need NFSv2 boot code (or
> reconfigure their root fs to use NFSv3).
> 
> To be honest, I suspect few realize that they are using NFSv2 for their root 
> fs.
> (They'd see it in a packet trace or via "nfsstat -m", but otherwise they 
> probably
>  think they are using NFSv3 for their root fs.)

this just what happened here, we upgraded our main NetApp, and few machines 
started working funny,
so we moved them to use FreeBSD instead and all was ok again. 

danny


> 
> rick
> ___
> freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list
> https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"

___
freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"

Re: NFSv2 boot & OLD_NFSV2

[Toomas Soome]

> On 20. märts 2017, at 23:53, Rick Macklem  wrote:
> 
> Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
>> On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 08:22:12PM +0200, Toomas Soome wrote:
>>> Hi!
>>> 
>>> The current boot code is building NFSv3, with preprocessor conditional 
>>> OLD_NFSV2. Should NFSv2 code still be kept around or can we burn it?
>>> 
>>> rgds,
>>> toomas
>> 
>> I vote burn
>> 
>> Bapt
> I would be happy to see NFSv2 go away. However, depending on how people 
> configure
> their diskless root fs, they do end up using NFSv2 for their root fs.
> 
> Does booting over NFSv3 affect this?
> 
> I think the answer is no for a FreeBSD server (since the NFSv2 File Handle is 
> the same as
> the NFSv3 one, except padded with 0 bytes to 32bytes long).
> However, there might be non-FreeBSD NFS servers where the NFSv2 file handle 
> is different
> than the NFSv3 one and for that case, the user would need NFSv2 boot code (or
> reconfigure their root fs to use NFSv3).
> 
> To be honest, I suspect few realize that they are using NFSv2 for their root 
> fs.
> (They'd see it in a packet trace or via "nfsstat -m", but otherwise they 
> probably
>  think they are using NFSv3 for their root fs.)
> 
> rick

if they do not suspect, they most likely use v3 - due to simple fact that you 
have to rebuild loader to use NFSv2 - it is compile time option.

rgds,
toomas
___
freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"

Re: NFSv2 boot & OLD_NFSV2

[Rick Macklem]

Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 08:22:12PM +0200, Toomas Soome wrote:
> > Hi!
> >
> > The current boot code is building NFSv3, with preprocessor conditional 
> > OLD_NFSV2. Should NFSv2 code still be kept around or can we burn it?
> >
> > rgds,
> > toomas
>
> I vote burn
>
> Bapt
I would be happy to see NFSv2 go away. However, depending on how people 
configure
their diskless root fs, they do end up using NFSv2 for their root fs.

Does booting over NFSv3 affect this?

I think the answer is no for a FreeBSD server (since the NFSv2 File Handle is 
the same as
the NFSv3 one, except padded with 0 bytes to 32bytes long).
However, there might be non-FreeBSD NFS servers where the NFSv2 file handle is 
different
than the NFSv3 one and for that case, the user would need NFSv2 boot code (or
reconfigure their root fs to use NFSv3).

To be honest, I suspect few realize that they are using NFSv2 for their root fs.
(They'd see it in a packet trace or via "nfsstat -m", but otherwise they 
probably
  think they are using NFSv3 for their root fs.)

rick
___
freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"

Re: NFSv2 boot & OLD_NFSV2

[Baptiste Daroussin]

On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 08:22:12PM +0200, Toomas Soome wrote:
> Hi!
> 
> The current boot code is building NFSv3, with preprocessor conditional 
> OLD_NFSV2. Should NFSv2 code still be kept around or can we burn it?
> 
> rgds,
> toomas

I vote burn

Bapt


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

NFSv2 boot & OLD_NFSV2

[Toomas Soome]

Hi!

The current boot code is building NFSv3, with preprocessor conditional 
OLD_NFSV2. Should NFSv2 code still be kept around or can we burn it?

rgds,
toomas
___
freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"