Date: Mon, 7 May 2012 20:35:25 -0500 (CDT) From: Bob Friesenhahn <bfriesen@simple.dallas.tx.us> To: Rick Macklem <rmacklem@uoguelph.ca> Cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: NFSv4 Questions Message-ID: <alpine.GSO.2.01.1205072034320.1678@freddy.simplesystems.org> In-Reply-To: <1357768784.50127.1336434018113.JavaMail.root@erie.cs.uoguelph.ca> References: <1357768784.50127.1336434018113.JavaMail.root@erie.cs.uoguelph.ca>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, 7 May 2012, Rick Macklem wrote: >> > It is my understanding that NFSv4 servers are not supposed to require > a "reserved" port#. However, at a quick glance, I can't find that stated > in RFC 3530. (It may be implied by the fact that NFSv4 uses a "user" based > security model and not a "host" based one.) > > As such, the client should never need to "waste" a reserved port# on a NFSv4 > connection. Firewalls might use the reserved port as part of a filtering algorithm. Bob -- Bob Friesenhahn bfriesen@simple.dallas.tx.us, http://www.simplesystems.org/users/bfriesen/ GraphicsMagick Maintainer, http://www.GraphicsMagick.org/
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?alpine.GSO.2.01.1205072034320.1678>