Re: Status of mount.nfs

[Steve Dickson <SteveD@redhat.com>]

Chuck Lever wrote:
> I'm not suggesting that we don't support mounting through a firewall. 
> I'm wondering, though, how people expect it to work.  Is it acceptable 
> to require a few extra mount options on clients to mount successfully 
> through a firewall, or should a mount with no options whatsoever always 
> work in this case?
I think I agree with Trond, although I I'm not sure what he means
by safe mount behavior...  but I am of the opinion that mounts
which need to go through a firewall will require extra options
will be needed...

> 
> And, does anyone have real and precise test cases to make sure we don't 
> break mounting through a firewall when changes are made to the mount 
> infrastructure?
We don't have explicit test for this... but I can guarantee if we
break it we'll hear about very quickly... ;-)

steved.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
Still grepping through log files to find problems?  Stop.
Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser.
Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >>  http://get.splunk.com/
_______________________________________________
NFS maillist  -  NFS@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nfs