From: "J. Bruce Fields" Subject: Re: [patch] fix statd -n Date: Mon, 21 Apr 2008 12:59:03 -0400 Message-ID: <20080421165903.GB4379@fieldses.org> References: <24c1515f0804170938s23fe3ea3pfe77355ed01d8bbf@mail.gmail.com> <20080418173646.GC19038@fieldses.org> <480902CA.1070805@redhat.com> <48090356.9020703@redhat.com> <20080418203225.GD28277@fieldses.org> <24c1515f0804181346g5867fa1fqfbbcd13af25027cb@mail.gmail.com> <20080421000214.GA5453@fieldses.org> <24c1515f0804210746t2d392b8ct6575f09dc7254b07@mail.gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Peter Staubach , linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org To: Janne Karhunen Return-path: Received: from mail.fieldses.org ([66.93.2.214]:44261 "EHLO fieldses.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754537AbYDUQ7S (ORCPT ); Mon, 21 Apr 2008 12:59:18 -0400 In-Reply-To: <24c1515f0804210746t2d392b8ct6575f09dc7254b07-JsoAwUIsXosN+BqQ9rBEUg@public.gmane.org> Sender: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Mon, Apr 21, 2008 at 10:46:00AM -0400, Janne Karhunen wrote: > On Sun, Apr 20, 2008 at 8:02 PM, J. Bruce Fields wrote: > > > > > > Sorry, not very clear. Perhaps statd should bind to the loopback > > > > > interface in addition to any other interfaces if it doesn't bind > > > > > to INADDR_ANY. > > > > > > > > Right, that's what would make the most sense to me. Janne, is there any > > > > reason that wouldn't solve your problem? > > > > > > I didn't get the idea. So the idea is to use multiple sockets, > > > one bound to LOOPBACK and one to external interface? > > > > I suppose so. One socket would be for communication for the local > > kernel nfsd, one for communication with statd peers. > > So shall we add yet another port option for statd or talk > to portmap about the port assignment? It's ugly any way > you put it. I'm confused--why is either needed? --b.