Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2017 23:08:58 +0300 From: Toomas Soome <tsoome@me.com> To: Rick Macklem <rmacklem@uoguelph.ca> Cc: Daniel Braniss <danny@cs.huji.ac.il>, Baptiste Daroussin <bapt@FreeBSD.org>, FreeBSD Current <freebsd-current@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: NFSv2 boot & OLD_NFSV2 Message-ID: <D75DE5F6-A080-4DC3-B720-E9F0D6C95A97@me.com> In-Reply-To: <YTXPR01MB0189C2D8BBA6A8341F780E6DDD300@YTXPR01MB0189.CANPRD01.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM> References: <38DD1950-AD12-4A27-8335-54F997E408DF@me.com> <20170320192000.6hal22ibnr3ajog3@ivaldir.net> <YTXPR01MB0189B266270E22DADF9A48EADD3A0@YTXPR01MB0189.CANPRD01.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM> <1B7471CD-2F2D-4F22-9D25-E46580CF9E96@me.com> <84D239AB-AB57-4A50-9700-E42BBF9CBE5A@cs.huji.ac.il> <20170321081339.2wbx3rb32qdavvn3@ivaldir.net> <80C5425F-9A71-45D9-BA41-229E4E72EC36@cs.huji.ac.il> <D0AD43EB-DED1-4744-892D-D8C028A0FB83@me.com> <YTXPR01MB0189C2D8BBA6A8341F780E6DDD300@YTXPR01MB0189.CANPRD01.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
> On 26. märts 2017, at 23:00, Rick Macklem <rmacklem@uoguelph.ca> wrote: > > Just in case it wasn't clear, I think this is a good idea and I think > you have a handle on any potential problems. > > Good luck with it, rick aye, thanks, just wanted to give people some time to react. And got some stupid cold meanwhile:D rgds, toomas > ________________________________________ > From: Toomas Soome <tsoome@me.com <mailto:tsoome@me.com>> > Sent: Tuesday, March 21, 2017 5:04:59 AM > To: Daniel Braniss > Cc: Baptiste Daroussin; Rick Macklem; FreeBSD Current > Subject: Re: NFSv2 boot & OLD_NFSV2 > > On 21. märts 2017, at 10:50, Daniel Braniss <danny@cs.huji.ac.il <mailto:danny@cs.huji.ac.il><mailto:danny@cs.huji.ac.il <mailto:danny@cs.huji.ac.il>>> wrote: > > > On 21 Mar 2017, at 10:13, Baptiste Daroussin <bapt@FreeBSD.org <mailto:bapt@FreeBSD.org><mailto:bapt@FreeBSD.org <mailto:bapt@FreeBSD.org>>> wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 09:58:21AM +0200, Daniel Braniss wrote: > > On 20 Mar 2017, at 23:55, Toomas Soome <tsoome@me.com <mailto:tsoome@me.com><mailto:tsoome@me.com <mailto:tsoome@me.com>>> wrote: > > > On 20. märts 2017, at 23:53, Rick Macklem <rmacklem@uoguelph.ca <mailto:rmacklem@uoguelph.ca><mailto:rmacklem@uoguelph.ca <mailto:rmacklem@uoguelph.ca>>> wrote: > > Baptiste Daroussin wrote: > On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 08:22:12PM +0200, Toomas Soome wrote: > Hi! > > The current boot code is building NFSv3, with preprocessor conditional OLD_NFSV2. Should NFSv2 code still be kept around or can we burn it? > > rgds, > toomas > > I vote burn > > Bapt > I would be happy to see NFSv2 go away. However, depending on how people configure > their diskless root fs, they do end up using NFSv2 for their root fs. > > Does booting over NFSv3 affect this? > > I think the answer is no for a FreeBSD server (since the NFSv2 File Handle is the same as > the NFSv3 one, except padded with 0 bytes to 32bytes long). > However, there might be non-FreeBSD NFS servers where the NFSv2 file handle is different > than the NFSv3 one and for that case, the user would need NFSv2 boot code (or > reconfigure their root fs to use NFSv3). > > To be honest, I suspect few realize that they are using NFSv2 for their root fs. > (They'd see it in a packet trace or via "nfsstat -m", but otherwise they probably > think they are using NFSv3 for their root fs.) > > rick > > if they do not suspect, they most likely use v3 - due to simple fact that you have to rebuild loader to use NFSv2 - it is compile time option. > > > old systems, 8.x, still use/boot v2, and so do old linux. > NetApp has discontinued support for v2, so we had to move this machines to use FreeBSD server and the day was > saved. So, till these machines get upgraded/discontinued we have a problem. There are several solutions > to this issue, but as long as it's a matter of getting rid for the sake of it, I would vote to keep it a while longer. > > danny > > > Given you are speaking of 8.x I suppose you are using the loader that comes with > it, meaning you are safe if we remove it from the loader in 12.0 (note as said > by Toomas that is it is already off by default in the 12.0 loader) am I missing > something? > > > as usual, did not read the whole thread, I assumed - wrongly - that support for v2 would be discontinued. > removing v2 support from the boot process is fine! great, go for it. It will only involve newer > hosts, and simplifying the boot process is always a good idea. > > sorry for the noise. > danny > > > > yes, just to clarify, the current loader code (in current), is having NFS code implemented as: > > #ifdef OLD_NFSV2 > > v2 implementation is here > > #else > > v3 implementation is here > > #endif > > Which does mean that pxeboot/loader.efi is built by default to use v3 only, but we do have 2 parallel implementations of the NFS readers. And yes, the question is just about boot loader reader code (we do not implement NFS writes) - and we are *not* talking about server side there. > > Indeed it also is possible to merge those 2 version implementations, but to be honest, I see very little point of doing that either, even if there is some setup still with v2 only server, there is still an option just to use TFTP based boot - especially given that current boot loader does provide parallel option to use either NFS or TFTP (via dhcp option 150), with existing binaries - that is, without having to re-compile. > > rgds, > toomas > > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-current@freebsd.org <mailto:freebsd-current@freebsd.org> mailing list > https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current <https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>; > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscribe@freebsd.org <mailto:freebsd-current-unsubscribe@freebsd.org>"help
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?D75DE5F6-A080-4DC3-B720-E9F0D6C95A97>