From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Peter Staubach Subject: Re: [PATCH 06/11] nfs-utils: mount: AUTH_NONE mounts Date: Fri, 02 Mar 2007 10:27:54 -0500 Message-ID: <45E8427A.3030806@redhat.com> References: <45E2C1FD.7000506@RedHat.com> <17891.52293.103984.465480@notabene.brown> <45E43C92.6090805@redhat.com> <17894.2913.850879.838771@notabene.brown> <45E6FB0B.7000204@redhat.com> <17895.41362.382320.934994@notabene.brown> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Cc: nfs@lists.sourceforge.net, Steve Dickson To: Neil Brown Return-path: Received: from sc8-sf-mx1-b.sourceforge.net ([10.3.1.91] helo=mail.sourceforge.net) by sc8-sf-list2-new.sourceforge.net with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HN9fy-0002dd-6u for nfs@lists.sourceforge.net; Fri, 02 Mar 2007 07:28:06 -0800 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([66.187.233.31]) by mail.sourceforge.net with esmtp (Exim 4.44) id 1HN9fz-0004EB-2R for nfs@lists.sourceforge.net; Fri, 02 Mar 2007 07:28:08 -0800 In-Reply-To: <17895.41362.382320.934994@notabene.brown> List-Id: "Discussion of NFS under Linux development, interoperability, and testing." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: nfs-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net Errors-To: nfs-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net Neil Brown wrote: > On Thursday March 1, staubach@redhat.com wrote: > >> This was used to address RH bz187370. >> > > Thanks for the link. It provides good context. > > I would have thought the appropriate response would have been the > following patch, and a suggestion to use > mount -o sec=none ..... > to mount the filesystem. > Do you see a problem with that? Yes, that's not sufficient. The client should be able to automatically "do the right thing". The systems administrator shouldn't have to specify the authentication flavor to match the server flavor. That systems administrator should only have to specify when there are specific requirements for that client. With this change, autofs would not be able correctly handle mounting this server via /net. It should be able to, especially since the server will accept _any_ flavor coming from the client. And a question, I thought that I looked, and it did not appear that the kernel supported AUTH_NONE on the client side. Did I miss it? Thanx... ps ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys-and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV _______________________________________________ NFS maillist - NFS@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nfs