From: "Heflin, Roger A." Subject: RE: NFS digest, Vol 1 #1212 - 9 msgs Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2002 08:47:30 -0600 Sender: nfs-admin@lists.sourceforge.net Message-ID: <5CA6F03EF05E0046AC5594562398B9160C7760@poexmb3.conoco.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Cc: Return-path: Received: from usamail1.conoco.com ([12.31.208.226]) by usw-sf-list1.sourceforge.net with esmtp (Exim 3.31-VA-mm2 #1 (Debian)) id 187d66-0000Kg-00 for ; Fri, 01 Nov 2002 06:48:31 -0800 To: Errors-To: nfs-admin@lists.sourceforge.net List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Discussion of NFS under Linux development, interoperability, and testing. List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: > Message: 8 > From: "Igor Rychkov" > To: > Subject: RE: [NFS] re-exporting: exportfs gives Invalid argument > Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2002 13:13:03 +0900 >=20 >=20 >=20 > Yes, it appears so. But then, what is that "nohide" option about? I = suspect > now that nohide is for _local_ filesystems. > So, how do people solve problems like mine? > Igor >=20 nohide is a local option to make file systems mounted under things seeable, if the file system mounted under the local file systems is not compatible or because of where it exists in the kernel does not exist at the level of the NFS server (a NFS client mount is not=20 compatible or does not exist to the NFS server) it cannot be seen on the remote machine at all. Option 1: is don't setup the network in such a way that you need to reexport file systems to make things work. Unless the machine=20 that is reexporting is a firewall protecting something, you probably don't want to have a set of machine not accessable on your internal network that could or will need access to the internal network. And=20 if the machine is a firewall protecting things, I would suggest you carefully evaluate allowing the resource to be seen outside its protected area with a service such as NFS. Option 2: (again depends on exactly why you have the machine with the disk hidden from the other network), put the disks on the machine that is doing the reexporting and call it the disk server, or put two cards in the disk server so it is on both networks. Why is the disk machine in question not on the network that needs the data at least part of the time? Is this a cluster with the = standard (bad) head node setup? Roger ------------------------------------------------------- This sf.net email is sponsored by: See the NEW Palm Tungsten T handheld. Power & Color in a compact size! http://ads.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/redirect.pl?palm0001en _______________________________________________ NFS maillist - NFS@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nfs