Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2011 22:06:56 +0100 From: Andrea Venturoli <ml@netfence.it> To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: statd/lockd startup failure Message-ID: <4D5D8DF0.8080900@netfence.it> In-Reply-To: <20110217032858.GA17686@icarus.home.lan> References: <201102091420.p19EKJ5u001268@m5p.com> <AANLkTi=2vA=C8B=NEaGrPgGNv2JJr9KEDJps8uoy8_92@mail.gmail.com> <20110217032858.GA17686@icarus.home.lan>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 02/17/11 04:28, Jeremy Chadwick wrote: > On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 09:46:37PM -0500, Michael Proto wrote: >> On Wed, Feb 9, 2011 at 9:20 AM,<george+freebsd@m5p.com> wrote: >>> Under 8.2-PRERELEASE (GENERIC kernel), about 15% of the times I boot up >>> (with rpc.statd and rpc.lockd enabled in rc.conf), I get: >>> >>> Feb 4 07:31:11 wonderland rpc.statd: bindresvport_sa: Address already in use >>> Feb 4 07:31:11 wonderland root: /etc/rc: WARNING: failed to start statd >>> >>> and slightly later: >>> >>> Feb 4 07:31:36 wonderland kernel: NLM: unexpected error contacting NSM, stat=5, errno=35 >>> >>> I can start rpc.statd and rpc.lockd manually at this point (and I have to >>> start them to run firefox and mail with my NFS-mounted home directory and >>> mail spool). But what might cause the above errors? -- George Mitchell >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list >>> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable >>> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" >>> >> >> Don't rpc.statd and lockd try to choose a random port upon startup? Yes, by default. > I >> seem to remember a similar problem I had a long time ago. I opted to >> use a consistent, not-used port and haven't seen the problem since >> (this was years ago, so I can't remember if the error you're seeing >> was identical to mine). >> >> /etc/rc.conf: >> rpc_statd_flags="-p 898" >> rpc_lockd_flags="-p 4045" I have: rpc_statd_flags="-p 918" rpc_lockd_flags="-p 868" Still statd occasionally fails to start. It might be that something else has already bound to port 918, though I don't know what. I'll check as soon as I have the chance. > Locking down the port numbers as you showed is the best choice, plus > allows for proper firewall rules to be added. However, be aware not all > daemons support this. Reliable firewall rules for NFS = good luck. Since I put the above in rc.conf, I've had more problems with NFS and ipfw. I also vaguely remember some daemons having hooks to open ipfw ports dinamically. bye & Thanks av.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4D5D8DF0.8080900>