Return-Path: Received: from userp2130.oracle.com ([156.151.31.86]:44496 "EHLO userp2130.oracle.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752851AbeBFSrE (ORCPT ); Tue, 6 Feb 2018 13:47:04 -0500 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.2 \(3445.5.20\)) Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/1] Remote calls don't need to use privilege ports From: Chuck Lever In-Reply-To: <02863316-1c99-182c-b19e-cc1aff46c382@talpey.com> Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2018 13:36:56 -0500 Cc: Steve Dickson , Linux NFS Mailing List Message-Id: <144B9B35-E12F-43B3-8725-CEF670F4C334@oracle.com> References: <20180205163647.15822-1-steved@redhat.com> <16CF8126-7229-4963-B5D1-2AC16BFC000A@oracle.com> <6bd33601-2c59-3d19-ece2-878b885c2940@RedHat.com> <0f9b020a-4c65-4b3b-42b2-81f8f9ee0941@RedHat.com> <6EF07D03-7F1C-43D1-963B-ED28AD614BF4@oracle.com> <02863316-1c99-182c-b19e-cc1aff46c382@talpey.com> To: Tom Talpey Sender: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: > On Feb 6, 2018, at 1:22 PM, Tom Talpey wrote: >=20 > On 2/6/2018 12:34 PM, Chuck Lever wrote: >> mountd can and should use a dynamic port assignment, IMO. >> It doesn't have to use 20048. >=20 > Speaking of 20048, does anyone know why Nico made this assignment? > Apart from making it well-known for firewalls, what system(s) > actually required it? I don't recall it ever being discussed. > Using it is certainly not required, since portmap resolves it. >=20 > = https://www.iana.org/assignments/service-names-port-numbers/service-names-= port-numbers.txt >=20 > ++ mountd 20048 tcp NFS mount protocol = [Nicolas_Williams] [Nicolas_Williams] = 2010-08-09 > ++ mountd 20048 udp NFS mount protocol = [Nicolas_Williams] [Nicolas_Williams] = 2010-08-09 Actually my first active interaction with the nfsv4 WG was at the IETF meeting in Montreal in late July of 2010. So I can't say that I have any memory of why this was done. It might be a question that can be answered by someone on nfsv4@ietf.org. -- Chuck Lever