Date: Thu, 09 Jan 1997 04:34:34 +0800 From: Peter Wemm <peter@spinner.DIALix.COM> To: Bill Paul <wpaul@skynet.ctr.columbia.edu> Cc: grog@lemis.de, current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: What's happened to nfsd and mountd? Message-ID: <199701082034.EAA06856@spinner.DIALix.COM> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 08 Jan 1997 15:06:21 EST." <199701082006.PAA24840@skynet.ctr.columbia.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Bill Paul wrote: > Of all the gin joints in all the towns in all the world, Peter Wemm had > to walk into mine and say: > > [nfsd/mountd are fubared] > > > > It's most likely something in the RPC library in libc, not in the program s. > > > > The first thing that springs to mind is that it looks like it's happening > > here in clnt_udp.c: > > if (sendto(cu->cu_sock, cu->cu_outbuf, outlen, 0, > > (struct sockaddr *)&(cu->cu_raddr), cu->cu_rlen) != outlen) { > > cu->cu_error.re_errno = errno; > > if (fds != &readfds) > > free(fds); > > return (cu->cu_error.re_status = RPC_CANTSEND); > > } > > > > In this case, it looks to me like the socket is created and bound > > correctly, Hmm, I'll dig into it some more. > > I would be more inclined to check pmap_set() or get_myaddress(). (I think > you did frob get_myaddress().) Yes, but nothing that is likely to cause this problem. Before, it used to get the address of the first interface, which was a bit non-determinate. It could either be a loopback or real interface. The change was to make it return a "real" address always, but if none exist, it falls back to a loopback address. get_myaddress() copies the entire sockaddr_in out from the SIOCGIFCONF data. Perhaps something is getting spammed there? pmap_set() uses that to create the address for the udp transport. For what it's worth, nfsd/mountd work for me. I just did a 'make world' and restarted all my rpc/yp/nfs*/etc and it seems to work fine still. I have not yet booted a new kernel after the if.h/if_var.h/etc changes from a little while back. > It would also help if we knew if these people > are doing funky things with virtual interfaces or multihomed hosts. (This > information is important people! When you describe a problem, you should > go into _excrutiating_ detail. What may seem unimportant to you may speak > volumes to us.) Agreed.. an 'ifconfig -a' would be useful. Cheers, -Peter
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199701082034.EAA06856>