Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sun, 10 Nov 1996 19:30:02 -0800 (PST)
From:      Adam David <adam@veda.is>
To:        freebsd-bugs
Subject:   Re: bin/1891: mountd fails to export
Message-ID:  <199611110330.TAA08399@freefall.freebsd.org>

next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
The following reply was made to PR bin/1891; it has been noted by GNATS.

From: Adam David <adam@veda.is>
To: J Wunsch <j@uriah.heep.sax.de>
Cc: FreeBSD-gnats-submit@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: bin/1891: mountd fails to export
Date: Mon, 11 Nov 1996 03:27:31 GMT

 > > >Fix:
 > > 	
 > > 	Skip the host instead of skipping immediately to the next line
 > > 	every time get_host() returns an error.
 > > 
 > > 	or:
 > > 
 > > 	Document that it is a requirement for all hosts in /etc/exports
 > > 	to be defined in /etc/hosts in order to prevent failed exports to
 > > 	reachable hosts.
 > > 
 > > 	or:
 > > 
 > > 	Document that it is advisable to separate host lists topologically
 > > 	into separate lines in /etc/exports
 > 
 > I vote for 2 (and 3).  (Except, no reference to /etc/hosts, the valid
 > hostname can also come from DNS.)
 > 
 > -- 
 > cheers, J"org
 > 
 > joerg_wunsch@uriah.heep.sax.de -- http://www.sax.de/~joerg/ -- NIC: JW11-RIPE
 
 Why is it such a good idea to discard the whole line (or netgroup) if only one
 host (of many) cannot be resolved? What is gained by preventing other valid
 hosts from being exported to?
 
 The single hostname may be invalid because of a removal of a single host from
 the network, or a rename of a single host. Why should all other hosts be denied
 service because hosts information changes in this limited way while the change
 has not been reflected in /etc/exports ?
 
 --
 Adam David <adam@veda.is>



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199611110330.TAA08399>