From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Erik Enge Subject: Multiple mounts to a rpc.mountd with port specified. Date: 25 Nov 2002 12:20:13 -0500 Sender: nfs-admin@lists.sourceforge.net Message-ID: <871y59efci.fsf@prium.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from main.gmane.org ([80.91.224.249]) by sc8-sf-list1.sourceforge.net with esmtp (Exim 3.31-VA-mm2 #1 (Debian)) id 18GN09-0003Tm-00 for ; Mon, 25 Nov 2002 09:26:30 -0800 Received: from root by main.gmane.org with local (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 18GMty-0002yw-00 for ; Mon, 25 Nov 2002 18:20:06 +0100 To: nfs@lists.sourceforge.net 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: Hi. I'm currently setting up NFS through a firewall and my current strategy (which seems to work fine) is to specify a port for the rpc.mountd so I can predict what to open on the firewall. Will this impede performance or functioning at all with multiple mounts (over the same port)? I have opened ports 111, 2049 and 32700 (port for mountd) on the firewall and from the logs I can see that I'm not dropping any packets. I am also running lockd, so does this mean that lockd uses 111, 2049 or 32700 or is it not running? Is there a specific port for lockd or do I specify the port on rpc.statd and then lockd will use that? Thanks for any answers, Erik Enge Software Engineer Professional Reviews Inc. ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Get the new Palm Tungsten T handheld. Power & Color in a compact size! http://ads.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/redirect.pl?palm0002en _______________________________________________ NFS maillist - NFS@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nfs