From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Jun 15 08:40:15 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3F8DD16A41F for ; Fri, 15 Jun 2007 08:40:15 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from eugen@www.svzserv.kemerovo.su) Received: from www.svzserv.kemerovo.su (www.svzserv.kemerovo.su [213.184.65.80]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9B75113C46E for ; Fri, 15 Jun 2007 08:40:14 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from eugen@www.svzserv.kemerovo.su) Received: from www.svzserv.kemerovo.su (eugen@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by www.svzserv.kemerovo.su (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l5F8PGB9096538; Fri, 15 Jun 2007 16:25:16 +0800 (KRAST) (envelope-from eugen@www.svzserv.kemerovo.su) Received: (from eugen@localhost) by www.svzserv.kemerovo.su (8.13.8/8.13.8/Submit) id l5F8PGbv096537; Fri, 15 Jun 2007 16:25:16 +0800 (KRAST) (envelope-from eugen) Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2007 16:25:16 +0800 From: Eugene Grosbein To: Jeremie Le Hen Message-ID: <20070615082516.GA96373@svzserv.kemerovo.su> References: <20070615072734.GC8093@obiwan.tataz.chchile.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20070615072734.GC8093@obiwan.tataz.chchile.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Firewalling NFS X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2007 08:40:15 -0000 On Fri, Jun 15, 2007 at 09:27:35AM +0200, Jeremie Le Hen wrote: > Hi, > > It appears nearly impossible to firewall a NFS server on FreeBSD. > The reason is that NFS related daemons use RPC, which means they > don't bind to a deterministic port. Only mountd(8) can be requested to > bind to a specific port or fail with the -p command-line switch. > Is there any reason other than "no one has needed this yet" why this > option is not available for nfsd(8), rpc.lockd(8) and rpc.statd(8)? Why do you need such option for nfsd(8) in first place? Eugene Grosbein