Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 2 Apr 1997 08:49:29 +0100 (BST)
From:      Doug Rabson <dfr@nlsystems.com>
To:        Guido van Rooij <guido@gvr.win.tue.nl>
Cc:        guido@freefall.freebsd.org, CVS-committers@freefall.freebsd.org, cvs-all@freefall.freebsd.org, cvs-sbin@freefall.freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: cvs commit:  src/sbin/mount_nfs mount_nfs.c
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSF.3.95q.970402084509.4064E-100000@kipper.nlsystems.com>
In-Reply-To: <199704020721.JAA07167@gvr.win.tue.nl>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 2 Apr 1997, Guido van Rooij wrote:

> > 
> > 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?

I will probably fix the usage of getmntopts so that flag negation works.
The issue of reserved or non-reserved ports is a red herring as far as
security goes.  The only reason for doing this is to improve
interoperability with other NFS servers, such as Linux, which reject
non-reserved ports.

--
Doug Rabson				Mail:  dfr@nlsystems.com
Nonlinear Systems Ltd.			Phone: +44 181 951 1891




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.3.95q.970402084509.4064E-100000>