Return-Path: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: from minas.ics.muni.cz ([147.251.4.40]:56818 "EHLO minas.ics.muni.cz" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756080Ab2HIQ3e (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 Aug 2012 12:29:34 -0400 Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2012 18:28:01 +0200 From: Lukas Hejtmanek To: "Myklebust, Trond" Cc: "J. Bruce Fields" , Zdenek Salvet , "linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org" Subject: Re: NFSv4 backchannel authentication Message-ID: <20120809162801.GM11089@ics.muni.cz> References: <20120806135517.GS25979@ics.muni.cz> <20120807154114.GA21460@fieldses.org> <1344355148.5781.31.camel@lade.trondhjem.org> <20120808075813.GW604@horn.ics.muni.cz> <1344431887.3423.4.camel@lade.trondhjem.org> <20120809080642.GE604@horn.ics.muni.cz> <20120809144530.GB6592@fieldses.org> <1344527573.25447.17.camel@lade.trondhjem.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-2 In-Reply-To: <1344527573.25447.17.camel@lade.trondhjem.org> Sender: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Thu, Aug 09, 2012 at 03:53:01PM +0000, Myklebust, Trond wrote: > How is this any different to requiring that the user start rpc.statd > before launching an NFSv3 mount? Just document the requirement if it > isn't already clear enough, and we can move on. > > The other source of confusion here, was that the rpc.svcgssd was > delivered through a nfs-kernel-server package, which indicates that we > first and foremost need to educate the distro packagers. hmm, if both rpc.gssd and rpc.svcgssd are needed on clients and servers, isn't it worth of merging them into a single process? -- Luk?? Hejtm?nek