From owner-freebsd-current  Sat Jan 30 22:04:32 1999
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id WAA15478
          for freebsd-current-outgoing; Sat, 30 Jan 1999 22:04:32 -0800 (PST)
          (envelope-from owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG)
Received: from zippy.cdrom.com (zippy.cdrom.com [204.216.27.228])
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id WAA15469
          for <current@FreeBSD.ORG>; Sat, 30 Jan 1999 22:04:27 -0800 (PST)
          (envelope-from jkh@zippy.cdrom.com)
Received: from zippy.cdrom.com (localhost.cdrom.com [127.0.0.1])
	by zippy.cdrom.com (8.9.2/8.9.1) with ESMTP id WAA10969;
	Sat, 30 Jan 1999 22:04:47 -0800 (PST)
To: obrien@NUXI.com
cc: current@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject: Re: Even more interesting NFS problems.. 
In-reply-to: Your message of "Sat, 30 Jan 1999 20:09:58 PST."
             <19990130200958.B66257@relay.nuxi.com> 
Date: Sat, 30 Jan 1999 22:04:46 -0800
Message-ID: <10965.917762686@zippy.cdrom.com>
From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@zippy.cdrom.com>
Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG

> Yes, to be consistent with the state of world WRT NFS.  Or at least with
> the leader -- Solaris.  This has been the default in 3.0-C since the
> am-utils import.

Yeah, well, amd is a whole other ball of wax.  That's clearly broken
in both 3.0-stable and 4.0-current and we're going to have to revert
the last set of changes fairly soon, it's on my TODO list of things to
deal with.

> You could easily still be using TCP rather than UDP.  Using "proto=X" and
> "vers=Y" you can specify the version and protocol used, independent of
> each other.  X={tcp,udp} and Y={2,3}
> "nfsv2" is an synonym for "proto=udp,vers=2".

Yeah, I think that was in fact the problem here.

- Jordan

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message