From: Steve Dickson Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] mountd: fix crossmnt options in v2/v3 case Date: Mon, 08 Mar 2010 14:56:02 -0500 Message-ID: <4B955652.5020603@RedHat.com> References: <20100307200607.GA13006@fieldses.org> <1267992481-13332-1-git-send-email-bfields@citi.umich.edu> <1267992481-13332-2-git-send-email-bfields@citi.umich.edu> <1267992481-13332-3-git-send-email-bfields@citi.umich.edu> <20100308082516.260e5f70@notabene.brown> <20100307215826.GA14104@fieldses.org> <20100308101014.14e635b2@notabene.brown> <20100308182148.GB1675@fieldses.org> <4B95423F.6070805@oracle.com> <20100308184117.GE1675@fieldses.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Cc: Chuck Lever , Neil Brown , linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org To: "J. Bruce Fields" Return-path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:8666 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754515Ab0CHT4K (ORCPT ); Mon, 8 Mar 2010 14:56:10 -0500 In-Reply-To: <20100308184117.GE1675@fieldses.org> Sender: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 03/08/2010 01:41 PM, J. Bruce Fields wrote: > On Mon, Mar 08, 2010 at 01:30:23PM -0500, Chuck Lever wrote: >> On 03/08/2010 01:21 PM, J. Bruce Fields wrote: >>> Occasionally we seem to hear from a security-conscious administrator >>> who's running v4-only and is irritated that they have to firewall off >>> mountd instead of just being able to kill it entirely. The latter might >>> reassure them, I suppose. >> >> I think Jeff had the idea of having mountd simply not set up its RPC >> listeners in that case. That looks easy to do. > > Sure, makes sense. > > But we might decide we want separate processes for servicing MOUNT > requests and export upcalls anyway. Yes... separating the upcalls from the network call would make things much more similar... IMHO... > > In which case, call one rpc.mountd, the other nfsd-cache-helper, don't > bother running "rpc.mountd" in the v4-only case, and, yay, we never have > to answer the "why do I still have to run rpc.mountd?" question again. Who says mountd has to be a longed lived daemon 100% of the time... It could used a start point for both the nfsv4listner process and the RPC listener (i.e. mountd itself). Then mountd could realize its a nfsv4-only environment and simply die (once the nfsv4lister is started). Just a thought... steved.