From owner-freebsd-questions  Thu Mar 13 20:51:58 1997
Return-Path: <owner-questions>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id UAA18421
          for questions-outgoing; Thu, 13 Mar 1997 20:51:58 -0800 (PST)
Received: from time.cdrom.com (root@time.cdrom.com [204.216.27.226])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id UAA18413
          for <questions@freebsd.org>; Thu, 13 Mar 1997 20:51:55 -0800 (PST)
Received: from time.cdrom.com (jkh@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by time.cdrom.com (8.8.5/8.6.9) with ESMTP id UAA20243; Thu, 13 Mar 1997 20:50:58 -0800 (PST)
To: Doug Rabson <dfr@render.com>
cc: Klaus Werner Krygier <krygier@kph.uni-mainz.de>, questions@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: NFSV3 - NFS on FreeBSD 2.2 
In-reply-to: Your message of "13 Mar 1997 10:50:22 GMT."
             <seendk6p75.fsf@minnow.render.com> 
Date: Thu, 13 Mar 1997 20:50:58 -0800
Message-ID: <20240.858315058@time.cdrom.com>
From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@time.cdrom.com>
Sender: owner-questions@freebsd.org
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

> Without testing, it seems to me that you could simply hack mountd.c
> and remove the two calls to svc_register which register the v3 mountd
> protocol.  If the mountd refuses to talk the v3 protocol, then the
> client at the other end will fall back to v2 (which uses the v1 mountd
> protocol to be confusing).

Heh, that's a rather better place to attack the problem than
where I was looking, that's for sure. :-)

						Jordan