linux-nfs.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Trond Myklebust <Trond.Myklebust@netapp.com>
To: Thomas Haynes <thomas@netapp.com>
Cc: "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org>,
	Spelic <spelic@shiftmail.org>,
	linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: NFSv4 behaviour on unknown users
Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2010 18:18:05 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1291331885.2915.1.camel@heimdal.trondhjem.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <99BBEF51-7EB1-4BAA-9B12-F0F98A629C74@netapp.com>

On Thu, 2010-12-02 at 17:10 -0600, Thomas Haynes wrote:
> On Dec 1, 2010, at 10:29 AM, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
> 
> > On Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 10:10:02PM -0500, Trond Myklebust wrote:
> >> 
> >> I think you need to take beepy's words in context here: as I believe I
> >> mentioned previously, RFC3530 (and its predecessor RFC3010) assumed
> >> everyone would be using principals for authenticating, either through
> >> RPCSEC_GSS w/ krb5, or through the SPKM/Lipkey mechanism. So sure was
> >> everyone of this, that AUTH_SYS isn't even mentioned as a valid
> >> authentication mechanism, and so nobody had to worry about the
> >> consequences of using it.
> > 
> > I also wonder whether the value of a transparent upgrade from NFSv3 got
> > a little lost.
> > 
> > To me that seems like the first requirement for version n+1 of
> > anything--that we should be able to upgrade people to version n without
> > their noticing.
> > 
> > Maybe there are features that are necessarily incompatible, and that
> > merit the downside, but the downside--losing the chance to get new
> > features to every user automatically--seems significant to me.
> > 
> > 
> > And, perhaps it's a disease, but I have gotten into the habit of
> > thinking of the (krb5 principal)->(id, gid's) mapping as independent of
> > the (NFSv4 user name)<->(uid) and (NFSv4 group name)<->(gid) mappings.
> > 
> > Granted they have to be coordinated on any reasonably complicated setup.
> > But there are simple cases where they don't necessarily need to be.
> > 
> > E.g. on a dumb "cp -ax / /nfs" backup it doesn't really matter "who"
> > does the backup as long as they have sufficient permissions, since the
> > files will all be explicitly chown'd as they're created.  And with krb5
> > it's simple enough to make that work with a single static mapping from a
> > client-side principal to root on the server.
> > 
> > And, again, that's something that works now with NFSv3.
> > 
> > --b.
> > --
> > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in
> > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> > More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> 
> 
> Another question is whether or not such an approach would be appreciated
> as part of 3530bis?

You want to add a discussion about AUTH_SYS support for 3530bis? I'd be
OK with that...

-- 
Trond Myklebust
Linux NFS client maintainer

NetApp
Trond.Myklebust@netapp.com
www.netapp.com


  reply	other threads:[~2010-12-02 23:18 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 38+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-11-29 18:12 NFSv4 behaviour on unknown users Spelic
2010-11-29 18:22 ` Trond Myklebust
2010-11-29 18:38   ` Spelic
2010-11-29 19:01     ` J. Bruce Fields
2010-11-29 19:09       ` Trond Myklebust
2010-11-30 15:36         ` Steve Dickson
2010-11-30 22:19           ` Trond Myklebust
2010-11-30 22:26             ` J. Bruce Fields
2010-11-30 22:33               ` Trond Myklebust
2010-11-30 22:36                 ` J. Bruce Fields
2010-11-30 22:47                   ` Trond Myklebust
2010-12-01  2:57                   ` Neil Brown
2010-12-01  3:10                     ` Trond Myklebust
2010-12-01  3:23                       ` Neil Brown
2010-12-01 16:29                       ` J. Bruce Fields
2010-12-02 23:10                         ` Thomas Haynes
2010-12-02 23:18                           ` Trond Myklebust [this message]
2010-12-02 23:28                             ` Spencer Shepler
2010-12-08  0:15                               ` 'J. Bruce Fields'
2010-12-10 19:00                                 ` Thomas Haynes
2010-12-10 19:17                                   ` J. Bruce Fields
2010-11-29 22:09   ` Daniel.Muntz
2010-11-29 22:57     ` Spencer Shepler
2010-11-29 23:16       ` Trond Myklebust
2010-11-29 23:25         ` Spencer Shepler
2010-11-29 23:26         ` Trond Myklebust
2010-11-29 23:30           ` Spencer Shepler
2010-11-29 23:40             ` Trond Myklebust
2010-11-30  0:02               ` Spencer Shepler
2010-11-30 11:44                 ` Spelic
2010-11-30 13:04                   ` Trond Myklebust
2010-11-30 15:48                     ` Boaz Harrosh
2010-11-29 23:34       ` Daniel.Muntz
2010-11-29 23:36         ` Spencer Shepler
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2010-11-29 17:32 Spelic
2010-11-29 19:50 ` Simon Kirby
2010-11-29 22:47   ` Spelic
2010-11-30 15:20     ` Chuck Lever

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=1291331885.2915.1.camel@heimdal.trondhjem.org \
    --to=trond.myklebust@netapp.com \
    --cc=bfields@fieldses.org \
    --cc=linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=spelic@shiftmail.org \
    --cc=thomas@netapp.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).