From owner-freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Aug 3 09:30:16 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-bugs@hub.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D854B1065674 for ; Fri, 3 Aug 2012 09:30:16 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gnats@FreeBSD.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::28]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C3A078FC14 for ; Fri, 3 Aug 2012 09:30:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id q739UGVa024859 for ; Fri, 3 Aug 2012 09:30:16 GMT (envelope-from gnats@freefall.freebsd.org) Received: (from gnats@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.14.5/8.14.5/Submit) id q739UGbU024856; Fri, 3 Aug 2012 09:30:16 GMT (envelope-from gnats) Date: Fri, 3 Aug 2012 09:30:16 GMT Message-Id: <201208030930.q739UGbU024856@freefall.freebsd.org> To: freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.org From: u-fbv9mc@aetey.se Cc: Subject: Re: kern/168335: nfsv4 server with krb5 sec limits group number per uid to 16 X-BeenThere: freebsd-bugs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: u-fbv9mc@aetey.se List-Id: Bug reports List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 03 Aug 2012 09:30:16 -0000 The following reply was made to PR kern/168335; it has been noted by GNATS. From: u-fbv9mc@aetey.se To: bug-followup@FreeBSD.org Cc: Subject: Re: kern/168335: nfsv4 server with krb5 sec limits group number per uid to 16 Date: Fri, 3 Aug 2012 11:27:38 +0200 Note that the lack of protection for the submitters addresses forces us to regularly disable/replace the addresses due to excessive spam. That's the reason why the original submitter mail address is no longer valid since today. This does not change the fact that we are interested in a fix and in the feedback. We are monitoring the issue web page. Note that we always post and repost from working addresses and that several months without a reply is a too long time to expect a single mail address to remain valid, given that _you_ publish it at once. The issue remains valid and crucial. Rune