From owner-cvs-sbin Tue Apr 1 23:21:43 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id XAA12129 for cvs-sbin-outgoing; Tue, 1 Apr 1997 23:21:43 -0800 (PST) Received: from gvr.win.tue.nl (root@gvr.win.tue.nl [131.155.210.19]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id XAA12122; Tue, 1 Apr 1997 23:21:34 -0800 (PST) Received: (from guido@localhost) by gvr.win.tue.nl (8.8.5/8.8.2) id JAA07167; Wed, 2 Apr 1997 09:21:27 +0200 (MET DST) From: Guido van Rooij Message-Id: <199704020721.JAA07167@gvr.win.tue.nl> Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sbin/mount_nfs mount_nfs.c In-Reply-To: from Doug Rabson at "Apr 1, 97 06:51:59 pm" To: dfr@nlsystems.com (Doug Rabson) Date: Wed, 2 Apr 1997 09:21:27 +0200 (MET DST) Cc: guido@freefall.freebsd.org, CVS-committers@freefall.freebsd.org, cvs-all@freefall.freebsd.org, cvs-sbin@freefall.freebsd.org X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL28 (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-cvs-sbin@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk Doug Rabson wrote: > On Tue, 1 Apr 1997, Guido van Rooij wrote: > > > guido 97/04/01 09:20:18 > > > > Modified: sbin/mount_nfs mount_nfs.c > > Log: > > Make mount_nfs use reserved ports by default.. Mounts already use > > a reserved port, so why not the nfs rpc's themselves? > > With user allowed mounts, this perhaps needs a closer look, but > > on the other hand, a user could already specify the flag. > > If normal users should not be able to use resserved ports, the kernel > > should check for the flag at mount time. > > Did you leave a way to clear the NFSMNT_RESVPORT flag? The -P option sets > it and so does -o resvport but -o noresvport won't work since the handling > of the altflags passed to getmntopts by mount_nfs is bogus. It only > handles setting flags and not clearing flags. It should be passing > &nfsargsp->flags to getmntopts and the option table should use NFSMNT_* > flags instead of ALTF_*. > It doesn't handle. But when you want to be able tomount with non reserved ports, also the mounts itsself should come form such a port. Currently that is not true. Perhaps we should just not offer non-resvports? Or only based on uid? -Guido