It was my understanding that the NFSv4 working group believed that the requirement for the NFSv4 client to use a priviledged port# (< 1024) should not exist. As such, I coded the server to ignore the vfs.nfsd.nfs_privport sysctl and allow the mount for NFSv4.
PR#234106 has reported this as a compatibility issue w.r.t. the Linux NFS server. The change to make the FreeBSD NFSv4 server use vfs.nfsd.nfs_privport is trivial and I think being compatible with Linux is important (I see it as the defacto standard NFS implementation these days). However, I am concerned that this change will result in a slight POLA violation for sites with vfs.nfsd.nfs_privport set, but doing NFSv4 mounts that might now fail. What do others think I should do? rick _______________________________________________ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
