status of NFS4 acls and umask

status of NFS4 acls and umask

[Rik Theys]

Hi,

In https://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-nfs/msg27799.html from 2011, Jeff
Layton describes how/why an NFSv4 ACL does not override the umask like a
posix ACL does. It mentions that it did not work back then and that
something might be done about that.

What is the status now? When I look at the CentOS 7.6 client/server it
seems this is still not implemented. Is this fixed in newer upstream
versions? If not, are there any plans on finding a solution?

Regards,

Rik

-- 
Rik Theys
System Engineer
KU Leuven - Dept. Elektrotechniek (ESAT)
Kasteelpark Arenberg 10 bus 2440  - B-3001 Leuven-Heverlee
+32(0)16/32.11.07
----------------------------------------------------------------
<<Any errors in spelling, tact or fact are transmission errors>>

Re: status of NFS4 acls and umask

[J. Bruce Fields]

On Tue, Dec 11, 2018 at 02:11:59PM +0100, Rik Theys wrote:
> In https://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-nfs/msg27799.html from 2011, Jeff
> Layton describes how/why an NFSv4 ACL does not override the umask like a
> posix ACL does. It mentions that it did not work back then and that
> something might be done about that.
> 
> What is the status now? When I look at the CentOS 7.6 client/server it
> seems this is still not implemented. Is this fixed in newer upstream
> versions? If not, are there any plans on finding a solution?

I'ts fixed if your NFSv4.2 client and server implement
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc8275, which upstream linux client and
server now do.  For RHEL I believe that change went into 7.4.  If that's
not working for you, you may need to check that the protocol version is
4.2.

--b.