Bug 1102647
Summary: | nfs: reset command does not alter the result for nfs options earlier set | |||
---|---|---|---|---|
Product: | [Red Hat Storage] Red Hat Gluster Storage | Reporter: | Saurabh <saujain> | |
Component: | gluster-nfs | Assignee: | Niels de Vos <ndevos> | |
Status: | CLOSED ERRATA | QA Contact: | Saurabh <saujain> | |
Severity: | high | Docs Contact: | ||
Priority: | high | |||
Version: | rhgs-3.0 | CC: | amainkar, barumuga, divya, mzywusko, ndevos, saujain, sharne, vagarwal | |
Target Milestone: | --- | Keywords: | Patch, ZStream | |
Target Release: | RHGS 3.0.3 | |||
Hardware: | x86_64 | |||
OS: | Linux | |||
Whiteboard: | ||||
Fixed In Version: | glusterfs-3.6.0.33-1 | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |
Doc Text: |
Previously, even though nfs.rpc-auth-reject option was reset, hosts/addresses which were rejected before, were still unable to access the volume over NFS. With this fix, the issue is resolved and hosts/addresses that were rejected are now allowed to access the volume over NFS.
|
Story Points: | --- | |
Clone Of: | ||||
: | 1103050 (view as bug list) | Environment: | ||
Last Closed: | 2015-01-15 13:37:25 UTC | Type: | Bug | |
Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- | |
Documentation: | --- | CRM: | ||
Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | ||
oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | ||
Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | ||
Embargoed: | ||||
Bug Depends On: | ||||
Bug Blocks: | 1103050, 1162694 |
Description
Saurabh
2014-05-29 11:28:12 UTC
Good catch. Could you try with a host3 which was not in allow/reject list? yeah the mount works on the host3, [root@rhsauto009 ~]# showmount -e 10.70.37.62 Export list for 10.70.37.62: /dist-rep * [root@rhsauto009 ~]# mkdir /mnt/nfs-test [root@rhsauto009 ~]# mount -t nfs -o vers=3 10.70.37.62:/dist-rep /mnt/nfs-test [root@rhsauto009 ~]# ls /mnt/nfs-test file file1 [root@rhsauto009 ~]# Posted the patch for review: http://review.gluster.org/#/c/7931/ *** Bug 1048761 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** Fix is already accepted upstream. I am not sure if we are planning to put the fix for Denali. Commit details: =============== commit 211785f29904995324bfd3c7fa4b35a498bf632a Author: Santosh Kumar Pradhan <spradhan> Date: Fri May 30 12:37:23 2014 +0530 rpc: Reconfigure() does not work for auth-reject Problem: If volume is set for rpc-auth.addr.<volname>.reject with value as "host1", ideally the NFS mount from "host1" should FAIL. It works as expected. But when the volume is RESET, then previous value set for auth-reject should go off, and further NFS mount from "host1" should PASS. But it FAILs because of stale value in dict for key "rpc-auth.addr.<volname>.reject". It does not impact rpc-auth.addr.<volname>.allow key because, each time NFS volfile gets generated, allow key ll have "*" as default value. But reject key does not have default value. FIX: Delete the OLD value for key irrespective of anything. Add NEW value for the key, if and only if that is SET in the reconfigured new volfile. Signed-off-by: Santosh Kumar Pradhan <spradhan> Change-Id: Ie80bd16cd1f9e32c51f324f2236122f6d118d860 BUG: 1103050 Reviewed-on: http://review.gluster.org/7931 Reviewed-by: Niels de Vos <ndevos> Tested-by: Gluster Build System <jenkins.com> Reviewed-by: Rajesh Joseph <rjoseph> Reviewed-by: Anand Avati <avati> Thanks, Santosh executed the same test on the build glusterfs-3.6.0.33-1.el6rhs.x86_64 and found that presently it works fine. 1. create a volume of 6x2, start it 2. gluster volume set <vol-name> nfs.rpc-auth-allow "host1" 3. gluster volume set <vol-name> nfs.rpc-auth-reject "host2" 4. try mount from host1 and host2 result ---- host1(PASS) and host2(FAILS) --- as expected 5. gluster volume reset <vol-name> 6. try mount from host1 and host2 Niels, Could you review the edited doc text and sign-off? Made a minor adjustment, looks good to me. Since the problem described in this bug report should be resolved in a recent advisory, it has been closed with a resolution of ERRATA. For information on the advisory, and where to find the updated files, follow the link below. If the solution does not work for you, open a new bug report. https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2015-0038.html |