Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sat, 2 Jan 2010 10:36:17 +0100
From:      Jeremie Le Hen <jeremie@le-hen.org>
To:        Rick Macklem <rmacklem@uoguelph.ca>
Cc:        freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.org, Jeremie Le Hen <jeremie@le-hen.org>, Rick Macklem <rmacklem@FreeBSD.org>
Subject:   Re: Cannot list a particular directory through NFS with UDP
Message-ID:  <20100102093617.GP84457@felucia.tataz.chchile.org>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSO.4.63.0912311419170.22403@muncher.cs.uoguelph.ca>
References:  <20091213230650.GA45540@felucia.tataz.chchile.org> <Pine.GSO.4.63.0912181518280.9495@muncher.cs.uoguelph.ca> <20091229125603.GC84457@felucia.tataz.chchile.org> <Pine.GSO.4.63.0912311419170.22403@muncher.cs.uoguelph.ca>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Rick,

Thanks for your time on this.

On Thu, Dec 31, 2009 at 02:23:32PM -0500, Rick Macklem wrote:
> [stuff snipped]
> >> This appears to be the reply to the nfs readdir request, which is what
> >> would be expected. It could be a problem with the content or the reply
> >> or a NetBSD client issue.
> >>
> >> If you were to email me the raw tcpdump capture for the above, I could
> >> take a look at it in wireshark (which knows how to interpret nfs) and
> >> see if there is anything bogus looking in the reply.
> >> ("tcpdump -s 0 -w <file> host 192.168.1.1" and then email me <file> as an
> >> attachment, should do it)
> >
> > You will find the pcap file attached.
> >
> Well, I looked at it under wireshark and the readdir reply looks fine.
> (It is made up of two IP fragments, but wireshark reassembles them ok
> and says the checksums are ok. The contents look like a valid Readdir
> RPC reply.) Maybe NetBSD doesn't reassemble the IP fragments correctly
> or has an issue w.r.t. the checksum, but Wireshark thinks it's aok.

I will reduce the MTU and see if the problem arises with directories
that could be read correctly otherwise.  I will keep you informed.

Does NFS permit to fragment/reassemble at the application layer?

> ps: I vaguely recall that the problem went away when you used TCP
>      instead. Is that correct?

Yes this is correct.

Regards,
-- 
Jeremie Le Hen

Humans are born free and equal.  But some are more equal than the others.
					    Coluche



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20100102093617.GP84457>