> On Thu, 23 Apr 2009 07:46:06 +0200, Frank Batschulat
> 3) on the solaris client side, comment out the 'none'
> entry from the list of supported security flavours in
> /etc/nfssec.conf
I just discovered this problem at work. Since we're running a lot of NFS/NIS
and autofs, my only reasonable s
>
>
>
> Running pfexec mount -F nfs -o vers=3,sec=sys butler:/data /mnt/
> still gives nfs mount: security mode does not match the server
> exporting butler:/data and the following snoop
>
> 192.168.0.10 -> butler DNS C butler. Internet Addr ?
> butler -> 192.168.0.10 DNS R butler.
On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 2:24 PM, Vallish Vaidyeshwara <
Vallish.Vaidyeshwara at sun.com> wrote:
>
>
>>
>>
>> Running pfexec mount -F nfs -o vers=3,sec=sys butler:/data /mnt/ still
>> gives nfs mount: security mode does not match the server exporting
>> butler:/data and the following snoop
>>
>> 1
Andreas Nilsson wrote:
> I have a share exported on GNU/Linux-box (Gentoo) and as described mounting
> that share on my OSOL snv_111a fails.
>
> It fails even if I specify -o vers=3,sec=sys. If i however specify -o vers=2
> it works.
>
> If i edit the export to include sec=sys on the server it wo
On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 9:06 AM, Vallish Vaidyeshwara <
Vallish.Vaidyeshwara at sun.com> wrote:
> Andreas Nilsson wrote:
>
>> I have a share exported on GNU/Linux-box (Gentoo) and as described
>> mounting that share on my OSOL snv_111a fails.
>>
>> It fails even if I specify -o vers=3,sec=sys. If
I have a share exported on GNU/Linux-box (Gentoo) and as described mounting
that share on my OSOL snv_111a fails.
It fails even if I specify -o vers=3,sec=sys. If i however specify -o vers=2 it
works.
If i edit the export to include sec=sys on the server it works perfectly.
For my setup i can
On Thu, 23 Apr 2009 15:50:48 +0200, Andrew Gallatin
wrote:
>> though I'd be really interested to know more about how it comes that a share
>> by
>> default is done with AUTH_NONE included, any backround infos somewhere
>> available ?
>>
>> the Solaris server, by default, shares with sec=AUTH_S
On Thu, 23 Apr 2009 14:52:51 +0200, Andrew Gallatin
wrote:
> Frank Batschulat (Home) wrote:
>
>> yes, in build 108 we integrated real kernel RPC support for AUTH_NONE,
>> previously it was silently matched and handled as AUTH_SYS
>>
>> 6790413 AUTH_NONE implementation in kernel RPC
>> http://bug
Frank Batschulat (Home) wrote:
> On Thu, 23 Apr 2009 14:52:51 +0200, Andrew Gallatin
> wrote:
>
>> Frank Batschulat (Home) wrote:
>>
>>> yes, in build 108 we integrated real kernel RPC support for AUTH_NONE,
>>> previously it was silently matched and handled as AUTH_SYS
>>>
>>> 6790413 AUTH_NONE
On Thu, 23 Apr 2009 07:46:06 +0200, Frank Batschulat (Home) wrote:
> On Thu, 23 Apr 2009 07:34:45 +0200, Tom Haynes
> wrote:
>
>> The credentials problem is a known bug.
>>
>> I just can't find the bug number right now.
>>
>> I *think* if you say:
>>
>> mount -o sec=sys ..
>>
>> it will sta
Andrew Gallatin wrote:
>
> ENOCLUE. My Linux server's exports list looks like:
>
> /home
> 172.31.193.0/255.255.255.0(rw,async,no_subtree_check,insecure,no_root_squash)
>
>
Frank's point is that by default, you will get this with sec=none.
I *think* if you instead have:
/home
172.31.193.0/2
Frank Batschulat (Home) wrote:
> yes, in build 108 we integrated real kernel RPC support for AUTH_NONE,
> previously it was silently matched and handled as AUTH_SYS
>
> 6790413 AUTH_NONE implementation in kernel RPC
> http://bugs.opensolaris.org/view_bug.do?bug_id=6790413
>
> it appears that the
On Thu, 23 Apr 2009 07:34:45 +0200, Tom Haynes wrote:
> The credentials problem is a known bug.
>
> I just can't find the bug number right now.
>
> I *think* if you say:
>
> mount -o sec=sys ..
>
> it will start working as expected.
>
> There was a recent change to add server support for sec=
Some administrivia:
So there appears to be a bug in the mailing list software where not everything
is being sent out.
The jive archives are working, but I'm not getting any email on this thread.
Also, I don't see anything cached in the mailman archives.
I'm working this issue with the admins..
Hi,
I recently BFU'd a system in my home lab from snv_106 to
snv_111, and now I cannot access things as a user from my
Linux NFS server using NFSv3 because Solaris NFS is sending my
uid as 65534. The only workaround I've been able to find is to use
an NFSv2 mount. The same machine worked fine for
15 matches
Mail list logo
