[rescue] Solaris 9 NFS client with Linux server
ag at computer.org
Wed Aug 8 01:45:02 CDT 2007
On 8/8/07, Steve Sandau <ssandau at gwi.net> wrote:
> Geoffrey S. Mendelson wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 07, 2007 at 07:32:14AM -0400, Steve Sandau wrote:
> >> I have tried different versions of the mount command including such
> >> options as rsize=1024 wsize=1024 proto=tcp vers=3 without changing the
> >> behavior at all. There is no firewall on either box, and they are on
> >> same network with nothing but a 10m hub in between.
> > Try UDP instead of TCP. NFS over TCP is not supported well in older
> Linux systems
> > (if at all), and in a LAN adds a lot of extra uneccessary overhead.
> I tried UDP and have the same problem unfortunately. I am not sure what
> the default is, UDP or TCP.
> I have another clue, though. This server works fine with Linux clients
> and Sol 10 clients, but is broken with Sol 9 clients, SPARC and x86. Is
> there possibly a daemon that I have neglected to start that could cause
> I don't think it is DNS-related at all; mounting with the IP address
> instead of the name causes the same thing.
> Running ethereal shows a problem 'ls' generating a "READDIRPLUS" request
> that a working response does not have. After that I get fragmented UDP
> packets, duplicates and retransmissions. But a sniff of an sftp session
> shows no such errors.
readdirplus is a NFS3 operation. Perhaps your sever is NFSv2-only?
If so, then just set your clients to make NFSv2 connections. it's an
option that can be specified in /etc/vfstab at mount-time. There's a
way to pass the same option via automount's config files too. The
client and server are supposed to negotiate v3/v2 at mount time
automatically. Why this isn't working properly is an interesting question.
To be honest, I've had no success with Linux as a NFS server in recent
years (unexplained hangs with "NFS server not responding, with no
packets being sent at all). That's with clients of Solaris 9, HPUX 11i,
If possible, I'd advise using it as a client only. Use Solaris or *BSD
for a server if reliability's important. (Isn't it always?)
I'd love to be proven wrong on this point, BTW: I'd love one of my Linux
boxes to be a (reliable) NFS server to a mix of clients.
More information about the rescue