Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 08 Oct 1996 15:28:02 -0700
From:      Fred Gilham <gilham@csl.sri.com>
To:        freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
Subject:   NFS problems with dual-network-interface machines
Message-ID:  <199610082228.PAA05742@impulse.csl.sri.com>

next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help

Hello,

I've got a site where I'm using a bunch of FreeBSD boxes as file
servers and as routers to segment a class B network into class C
networks.  So each box has two interfaces.

I've noticed problems where putting the addresses of both interfaces
in DNS sometimes causes NFS clients to connect to the `wrong' address
and NFS hangs.  The tcpdump program shows that the client is getting
icmp port unreachable messages.

I.e. machine alpha might be a router/file server with two addresses:
130.107.4.200
130.107.15.200

and machine beta might be on a different subnet having address
130.107.17.234.

(both alpha and beta are freebsd boxes.)

Machine beta is connected through a router similar to alpha to the
130.107.4 network.

When machine beta tries to mount one of machine alpha's file systems,
and it gets 130.107.15.200 from DNS as the address of alpha, port
unreachable errors occur.

This seems wrong to me, since machine alpha should be able to route
from one of its addresses to the other.

I've verified that this is the problem by putting alpha's
130.107.4.200 address in the host table on machine beta.  Once I do
this, everything works smoothly.  However, this means putting all the
file servers in all the host tables of all the clients.  We're trying
to run minimal host tables on the clients and use DNS for host
lookups.

Am I doing something wrong?  Is there a canonical way to deal with
this that I don't know about?  Or is this a bug?

Thanks for any help,

-Fred Gilham   gilham@csl.sri.com



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199610082228.PAA05742>