Date: Sun, 17 Feb 2013 15:02:44 -0800 From: "Ronald F. Guilmette" <rfg@tristatelogic.com> To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: WTF? RPCPROG_NFS: RPC: Program not registered Message-ID: <19262.1361142164@server1.tristatelogic.com> In-Reply-To: <670072237.3089090.1361139025074.JavaMail.root@erie.cs.uoguelph.ca>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
In message <670072237.3089090.1361139025074.JavaMail.root@erie.cs.uoguelph.ca>, Rick Macklem <rmacklem@uoguelph.ca> wrote: >Ronald F. Guilmette wrote: >> In message >> <689563329.3076797.1361028594307.JavaMail.root@erie.cs.uoguelph.ca>, >> Rick Macklem <rmacklem@uoguelph.ca> wrote: >> >> >Ronald F. Guilmette wrote: >> >> nfs_server_flags="-h 192.168.1.2" >> >Add -t to these flags. It appears that the default is UDP only. >> >> >> YESSSS! Thank you. That did the trick alright. >> >> I gather than in the 9.x series, there is a new nfs server thing, yes? >> >> And I further gather than this one needs to new -t flag, yes? >> >> (Sigh. My own feeling is that tcp support should have been enabled by >> default... as in the past.) >> >Nope. The old server used "-t" as well. The settings in >/etc/default/rc.conf for >nfs_server_flags="-t -u -n 4" > >You overrode those when you set nfs_server_flags. Doh! Yes, it appears you are 100% correct. In the past, I had never before had *any* kind of nfs_server_flags= line in my /etc/rc.conf file. After my recent upgrade, I put one in, just to limit the interfaces to which NFS service would be provided, and apparently, in so doing, I utterly hobbled NFS service generally. That outcome certainly did not follow the "principal of least surprise". Oh well. All's well that ends well. Regards, rfghelp
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19262.1361142164>