You are not logged in.

#1 2009-03-06 20:15:53

litemotiv
Forum Fellow
Registered: 2008-08-01
Posts: 5,026

Are there downsides to enabling NFS v1 and v2 for mountd?

So Arch's default NFS config has v1 and v2 disabled in /etc/conf.d/nfs:

MOUNTD_OPTS="--no-nfs-version 1 --no-nfs-version 2"

Which makes sense, i guess. When using Autofs though for instance, this is somewhat of a problem, since by default it relies on showmount to determine remote shares automatically. The MOUNTD_OPTS above need to be removed for showmount to work, or it will throw an error similar to this:

rpc mount export: RPC: Program/version mismatch; low version = 3, high version = 3

So the question is: is it 'bad' to allow mountd to use NFS v1 and v2, are there any downsides to it? I would suspect the highest available version to be used for the actual mount regardless of the allowed versions, but it this also the case?

If it just means a small memory overhead on the server i wouldn't consider this a problem personally.


ᶘ ᵒᴥᵒᶅ

Offline

#2 2009-05-11 19:59:50

Dieter@be
Forum Fellow
From: Belgium
Registered: 2006-11-05
Posts: 1,961
Website

Re: Are there downsides to enabling NFS v1 and v2 for mountd?

bump.  i also would like to know this smile


< Daenyth> and he works prolifically
4 8 15 16 23 42

Offline

#3 2009-05-12 13:43:08

h4mx0r
Member
Registered: 2008-04-17
Posts: 11

Re: Are there downsides to enabling NFS v1 and v2 for mountd?

I think I recall v2 being much faster but I am not sure about features and things. I really liked using nfs on local network last I tried it perhaps I'll set it up again soon.

Offline

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB