> On 02/18/2011 10:08, Rick Macklem wrote: > > The attached patches changes the behaviour so that it tries to > > get an unused port for each of the 4 cases. > > Am I correct in assuming that what you're proposing is to > (potentially) > have different ports for all 4 combinations? I would suggest that this > is not the right way to solve the problem. If I misunderstand, I > apologize. > Well, that was what I was proposing. I could be wrong, but as far as I know, this is allowed by Sun RPC. The port#s are assigned dynamically and registered with rpcbind. (I don't necessarily agree with the design, but this was/is how Sun RPC does it. The philosophy was/is that apps. don't know what port# is being used and shouldn't care. If sysadmins want to use a fixed port#, they can use command line options to override the default dynamic assignment. And, yes, this is one reason that Sun RPC is a pita w.r.t. firewalls. 1980s design...)
I don't know an easy way to get a non-assugned port# that is available for all 4 combinations of udp,tcp X ip4,ip6. If others know how to get a port# that is available for all 4 cases, I could implement that. rick _______________________________________________ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"