Return-Path: Received: from esrismtp2.esri.com ([198.102.62.103]:10820 "EHLO esri3.esri.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751545Ab1GTTnY (ORCPT ); Wed, 20 Jul 2011 15:43:24 -0400 Received: from leoray.esri.com (leoray.esri.com [10.27.102.12]) by esri3.esri.com (8.11.7p3+Sun/8.11.7) with ESMTP id p6KJNgS00956 for ; Wed, 20 Jul 2011 12:23:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from leoray.esri.com (leoray.esri.com [127.0.0.1]) by leoray.esri.com (8.14.4/8.14.3) with ESMTP id p6KJNgqv018317 for ; Wed, 20 Jul 2011 12:23:42 -0700 Received: (from ray5147@localhost) by leoray.esri.com (8.14.4/8.14.3/Submit) id p6KJNgQR018315 for linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org; Wed, 20 Jul 2011 12:23:42 -0700 Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2011 12:23:42 -0700 From: Ray Van Dolson To: linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org Subject: NFS server responds to SYN with ACK only Message-ID: <20110720192341.GA18167@esri.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 We have a couple legacy CentOS (RHEL)-based appliances with slightly dated NFS implementations. Server (CentOS 4 based): nfs-utils-1.0.6-70.EL4 Kernel 2.6.9-42.0.10.plus.c4smp Client (CentOS 5 based): nfs-utils-1.0.9-42.el5.x86_64 Kernel 2.6.18-164.15.1.el5 The client has a long-lived NFSv3 mount to the server that sometimes stops responding (blocks). We can lazy unmount it, but subsequent mount requests hang and the following is observed via tcpdump: 1. Client GETPORT for NFS service succeeds. 2. Client GETPORT for MOUNT succeeds 3. Client MNT call succeeds (server gives valid response including file handle) 4. Client sends a SYN packet to NFS port on server 5. Server responds with ACK *only* When we bounce the NFS daemon on the server, everything starts working and in step 5 above, we get a SYN,ACK as expected in response to #4, and everything proceeds along nicely. Does this jog anybody on a long-ago fixed bug? I'm thinking updating the kernel and nfs-utils on the server will likely help, but would love to find where behavior like the above is referenced as a "bug". Thanks, Ray