From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG  Sat Sep  1 14:42:16 2012
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B508A106566B;
	Sat,  1 Sep 2012 14:42:16 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from lists@c0mplx.org)
Received: from home.opsec.eu (home.opsec.eu [IPv6:2001:14f8:200::1])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 60F0B8FC0C;
	Sat,  1 Sep 2012 14:42:16 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from pi by home.opsec.eu with local (Exim 4.77 (FreeBSD))
	(envelope-from <lists@c0mplx.org>)
	id 1T7otp-00075y-Ma; Sat, 01 Sep 2012 16:42:13 +0200
Date: Sat, 1 Sep 2012 16:42:13 +0200
From: Kurt Jaeger <lists@c0mplx.org>
To: Scot Hetzel <swhetzel@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20120901144213.GF3324@home.opsec.eu>
References: <50407056.3000606@passap.ru>
	<CAGH67wThx5oveWc8h4RE9ya9=KT_VPnP4x-jQvA690b-7=tEww@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAGH67wTNNvuGEZB2m40Vbj6hT8KBgCXCoyqngy1yXO-wAxy4LQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<alpine.BSF.2.00.1208311234040.97131@mp2.macomnet.net>
	<50407912.60809@passap.ru>
	<CACdU+f_YrXjmwE_byWPnft5Ha+8P3shJz=RA9+VCWxusHCv34Q@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CACdU+f_YrXjmwE_byWPnft5Ha+8P3shJz=RA9+VCWxusHCv34Q@mail.gmail.com>
Cc: "freebsd-rc@FreeBSD.org" <freebsd-rc@freebsd.org>,
	Garrett Cooper <yanegomi@gmail.com>,
	Maxim Konovalov <maxim.konovalov@gmail.com>,
	freebsd-current@freebsd.org, matteo@freebsd.org, bsam@passap.ru
Subject: Re: rpcbind does not honor -h flag
X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current
	<freebsd-current.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 01 Sep 2012 14:42:16 -0000

Hi!

> >>>>      Please file a PR against rc ASAP.

> >> http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=kern/117711

> Looks like Matteo Riondato had created a patch for the problem in 2008:
> 
> http://people.freebsd.org/~matteo/diff/117711rpcbind.diff
> 
> but he never received any feedback from Carlos Eduardo Monti to see if
> the patch fixed the problem.

> I don't know if the patch will apply to the current FreeBSD rpcbind
> code, give it a try and submit a follow up to the PR.

In the current form the patch fails in rpcbind.c on 9.1-RC1.

There are two problems with the current rpcbind.c.

1) It seems to be that even if some -h is given, the
rpcbind code uses some SUN-RPC trickery around the /etc/netconfig
file to open sockets for localhost in v4 and v6.

Is it required to bind to localhost according to the RPC spec ?

2) And it opens some dynamic ports for other uses -- anybody has an
idea why this is necessary ? Is there an requirement for this in the spec ?

Below is an example of both issues.

root     rpcbind    2134  4  udp6   *:*                   *:*
root     rpcbind    2134  5  stream /var/run/rpcbind.sock
root     rpcbind    2134  6  udp6   *:111                 *:*
root     rpcbind    2134  7  udp6   *:924                 *:*
root     rpcbind    2134  8  tcp6   *:111                 *:*
root     rpcbind    2134  9  udp4   *:111                 *:*
root     rpcbind    2134  10 udp4   *:645                 *:*
root     rpcbind    2134  11 tcp4   *:111                 *:*

Here's rpcbind started with -h <myip>:

root     rpcbind    2195  4  udp6   *:*                   *:*
root     rpcbind    2195  5  stream /var/run/rpcbind.sock
root     rpcbind    2195  6  udp6   ::1:111               *:*
root     rpcbind    2195  7  udp6   *:1013                *:*
root     rpcbind    2195  8  tcp6   ::1:111               *:*
root     rpcbind    2195  9  udp4   127.0.0.1:111         *:*
root     rpcbind    2195  10 udp4   <myip>:111            *:*
root     rpcbind    2195  11 udp4   *:634                 *:*
root     rpcbind    2195  12 tcp4   127.0.0.1:111         *:*
root     rpcbind    2195  13 tcp4   <myip>:111            *:*

One can see two dynamic udp ports opened (one v4, one v6).

I might be naive, but from what I understand, it should not open
that many sockets, but only like this:

root     rpcbind    2195  10 udp4   <myip>:111            *:*
root     rpcbind    2195  13 tcp4   <myip>:111            *:*

If this naive 'spec' is correct, would a patch to do just this and
nothing more be OK ?

-- 
pi@opsec.eu            +49 171 3101372                         8 years to go !