From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Feb 19 21:16:19 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 30A1B1065675 for ; Sat, 19 Feb 2011 21:16:19 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from rmacklem@uoguelph.ca) Received: from esa-annu.mail.uoguelph.ca (esa-annu.mail.uoguelph.ca [131.104.91.36]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E1F8A8FC19 for ; Sat, 19 Feb 2011 21:16:18 +0000 (UTC) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: ApwEAN/BX02DaFvO/2dsb2JhbACEIKMMqWCPdYEng0F2BIUNhwY X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.62,192,1297054800"; d="scan'208";a="110434382" Received: from erie.cs.uoguelph.ca (HELO zcs3.mail.uoguelph.ca) ([131.104.91.206]) by esa-annu-pri.mail.uoguelph.ca with ESMTP; 19 Feb 2011 16:16:18 -0500 Received: from zcs3.mail.uoguelph.ca (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by zcs3.mail.uoguelph.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id F2ABEB3F52; Sat, 19 Feb 2011 16:16:17 -0500 (EST) Date: Sat, 19 Feb 2011 16:16:17 -0500 (EST) From: Rick Macklem To: Doug Barton Message-ID: <931979672.138955.1298150177898.JavaMail.root@erie.cs.uoguelph.ca> In-Reply-To: <4D5F0A3B.1060305@dougbarton.us> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Originating-IP: [172.17.91.203] X-Mailer: Zimbra 6.0.10_GA_2692 (ZimbraWebClient - IE8 (Win)/6.0.10_GA_2692) Cc: mike@jellydonut.org, george+freebsd@m5p.com, freebsd-stable@freebsd.org, Jeremy Chadwick Subject: Re: statd/lockd startup failure X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 19 Feb 2011 21:16:19 -0000 > On 02/18/2011 10:08, Rick Macklem wrote: > > The attached patches changes the behaviour so that it tries to > > get an unused port for each of the 4 cases. > > Am I correct in assuming that what you're proposing is to > (potentially) > have different ports for all 4 combinations? I would suggest that this > is not the right way to solve the problem. If I misunderstand, I > apologize. > Well, that was what I was proposing. I could be wrong, but as far as I know, this is allowed by Sun RPC. The port#s are assigned dynamically and registered with rpcbind. (I don't necessarily agree with the design, but this was/is how Sun RPC does it. The philosophy was/is that apps. don't know what port# is being used and shouldn't care. If sysadmins want to use a fixed port#, they can use command line options to override the default dynamic assignment. And, yes, this is one reason that Sun RPC is a pita w.r.t. firewalls. 1980s design...) I don't know an easy way to get a non-assugned port# that is available for all 4 combinations of udp,tcp X ip4,ip6. If others know how to get a port# that is available for all 4 cases, I could implement that. rick