On 06/16/2012 05:43 PM, Pittigher, Raymond - ES wrote:
> Yes, I configured the /etc/idmapd... file and set the Domain variable. Started the systemctl restart nfs-idmap.service.
One thing I noticed....but am still scratching my head.... I need to go back and
check the "test" mailing list archives. But I recall something about no longer
needed the idmapd to run as a service when the system in acting as a client.
Regardless of that.... I found that on my system rpc.idmapd would not start on book
when the service was enabled. The only way I could get it to start on boot was to
also enable NetworkManager-wait-online.service.
--
Never be afraid to laugh at yourself, after all, you could be missing out on the joke
of the century. -- Dame Edna Everage
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
06-18-2012, 10:43 AM
Raymond Pittigher
NFSv4
On 06/16/2012 11:33 AM, Ed Greshko wrote:
On 06/16/2012 05:43 PM, Pittigher, Raymond - ES wrote:
Yes, I configured the /etc/idmapd... file and set the Domain variable. Started the systemctl restart nfs-idmap.service. If I go back to NFSv3 it all looks OK. It also seems to be only a problem with Fedora 17 at the moment. I did a clean install with Fedora 16 and had it working properly then did the upgrade to 17 and NFSv4 is missing some, not all, of the mappings. That list above is a small paste of about 300 users. I then did a clean install of Fedora 17 and it also has the same problem. About 20% did the UID/GID mapping and showed the username while the rest showed the nfsnobody mapping. Re-mounting to NFSv3 fixes the listing.
I wonder what email client you are using....since it quotes previous poorly making it
hard to determine who wrote what.....
Your NFS4 server system....what is that?
You said you're only having trouble with F17 as the NFS4 client. You've also said
that some uid/gid are mapping correctly while others are not.
Would it be possible to give a larger sample size than the 2? And could you do an ls
-ln with the file system unmounted just to verify the mount points were created
correctly?
I only have a few exported file systems and a few users and not seeing any problems.
Maybe you can describe your exports and mount points a bit more?
The server is RHEL6.2 and the clients are either Centos or Fedora and the problem seems to be with release 17.
On all clients the mount uses defaults. So on the F17 box we have:
172.30.5.244:/users/ on /users type nfs4
(rw,relatime,vers=4.0,rsize=1048576,wsize=1048576, namlen=255,hard,proto=tcp,port=0,timeo=600,retrans =2,sec=sys,clientaddr=172.30.5.169,local_lock=none ,addr=172.30.5.244)
On a RHEL system with defaults we have:
172.30.5.244:/users on /users type nfs4
(rw,noatime,nodiratime,hard,intr,addr=172.30.5.244 ,clientaddr=172.30.5.240)
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
06-18-2012, 11:27 AM
Ed Greshko
NFSv4
On 06/18/2012 06:43 PM, Raymond Pittigher wrote:
>
>
> The server is RHEL6.2 and the clients are either Centos or Fedora and the problem
> seems to be with release 17. On all clients the mount uses defaults. So on the F17
> box we have:
>
> 172.30.5.244:/users/ on /users type nfs4
> (rw,relatime,vers=4.0,rsize=1048576,wsize=1048576, namlen=255,hard,proto=tcp,port=0,timeo=600,retrans =2,sec=sys,clientaddr=172.30.5.169,local_lock=none ,addr=172.30.5.244)
>
> A longer listing shows:
> drwxr-x---. 134 4294967294 4294967294 90112 Jun 15 11:14 vcasio
> drwx--x---. 2 4294967294 4294967294 4096 Jun 26 2007 vchou
> drwx------. 4 4294967294 4294967294 4096 Oct 18 2007 vehrlich
> drwx------. 4 4294967294 4294967294 4096 Jun 12 07:40 vixxx.jxxx
> drwx------. 4 vikram.paxxxn vikram.paxxxn 4096 Apr 26 16:21
> vikxxx.paxxxn
> drwx------. 4 vincent.boxxxxxura vincent.bxxxxxxtura 4096 May 31 07:54
> vincent.bxxxxxxtura
> drwx------. 4 4294967294 4294967294 4096 Dec 27 20:16
> vladimir.swxxxxxxxj
> drwx--x--x. 23 4294967294 4294967294 12288 Jun 14 15:43 vpatel
> drwx--x--x. 80 4294967294 4294967294 4096 Jun 13 15:05 vsawant
> drwx--x---. 78 4294967294 4294967294 4096 Oct 26 2010 vskiendz
> drwx------. 4 4294967294 4294967294 4096 Feb 3 2010 wbartus
> drwxrwx---. 30 root wem 4096 Apr 6 2010 WEM
> drwxrwx---. 4 nfsnobody xxxusers2 4096 Aug 19 2006
> Wireless_Lifeline
> drwx------. 12 4294967294 4294967294 4096 Jul 1 2008 wjohnsto
> drwx--x---. 72 4294967294 4294967294 20480 Oct 17 2011 wjones
> drwx--x---. 54 4294967294 4294967294 4096 Jul 29 2011 wlanniga
> drwx--x---. 42 4294967294 4294967294 4096 Apr 26 2011 wwong
> drwxrwxr-x. 2 jwilliam xx31337 4096 Feb 14 10:18 xdevenv
> drwx------. 24 4294967294 4294967294 4096 Jun 7 09:13
> xiaoying.xx
> drwxr-xr-x. 199 4294967294 4294967294 12288 Jun 15 16:20 yfarrah
> drwx--x---. 4 4294967294 4294967294 4096 Jun 12 15:38 yliu
> drwx--x---. 12 4294967294 4294967294 4096 Jun 27 2008 zaeria
> drwx------. 4 4294967294 4294967294 4096 Feb 23 2010 zbarak
>
> On a RHEL system with defaults we have:
> 172.30.5.244:/users on /users type nfs4
> (rw,noatime,nodiratime,hard,intr,addr=172.30.5.244 ,clientaddr=172.30.5.240)
>
> And a listing of:
>
> drwxr-x---. 134 vcascio vcascio 90112 Jun 15 11:14
> vcasio
> drwx--x---. 2 vchou vchou 4096 Jun 26 2007
> vchou
> drwx------. 4 vehrlich vehrlich 4096 Oct 18 2007
> vehrlich
> drwx------. 4 vixxx.jxxx vixxx.jxxx 4096 Jun 12 07:40
> vixxx.jxxx
> drwx------. 4 vikxxx.paxxxn vikxxx.paxxxn 4096 Apr 26 16:21
> vikxxx.paxxxn
> drwx------. 4 vincent.bxxxxxxtura vincent.bxxxxxxtura 4096 May 31 07:54
> vincent.bxxxxxxtura
> drwx------. 4 vladimir.swxxxxxxxj vladimir.swxxxxxxxj 4096 Dec 27 20:16
> vladimir.swxxxxxxxj
> drwx--x--x. 23 vpatel vpatel 12288 Jun 14 15:43
> vpatel
> drwx--x--x. 80 vsawant vsawant 4096 Jun 13 15:05
> vsawant
> drwx--x---. 78 vskiendz vskiendz 4096 Oct 26 2010
> vskiendz
> drwx------. 4 wbartus wbartus 4096 Feb 3 2010
> wbartus
> drwxrwx---. 30 root wem 4096 Apr 6 2010 WEM
> drwxrwx---. 4 nfsnobody xxxusers2 4096 Aug 19 2006
> Wireless_Lifeline
> drwx------. 12 wjohnsto wjohnsto 4096 Jul 1 2008
> wjohnsto
> drwx--x---. 72 wjones wjones 20480 Oct 17 2011
> wjones
> drwx--x---. 54 wlanniga wlanniga 4096 Jul 29 2011
> wlanniga
> drwx--x---. 42 wwong wwong 4096 Apr 26 2011
> wwong
> drwxrwxr-x. 2 jwilliam xx31337 4096 Feb 14 10:18
> xdevenv
> drwx------. 24 xiaoying.wu xiaoying.wu 4096 Jun 7 09:13
> xiaoying.xx
> drwxr-xr-x. 199 yfarrah yfarrah 12288 Jun 15 16:20
> yfarrah
> drwx--x---. 4 yliu yliu 4096 Jun 12 15:38
> yliu
> drwx--x---. 12 zaeria zaeria 4096 Jun 27 2008
> zaeria
> drwx------. 4 zbarak zbarak 4096 Feb 23 2010
> zbarak
>
>
I see.... So, you are basically exporting a single directory structure (/users) from
your RH6.2 system and mounting it on /users on several other systems and the only
system with problems is the F17 system. And naturally you've got the same users and
groups on all systems with the same UID/GID's.
The one question that pops to mind is .... Why have you defined the mount options as
you did on the F17 system and not the RHEL system? Not that I would think it would
make a difference....but have you tried with the same options on the F17 system? I'm
wondering if the sec=sys being defined isn't someone causing an issue.
--
Never be afraid to laugh at yourself, after all, you could be missing out on the joke
of the century. -- Dame Edna Everage
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
06-18-2012, 11:40 AM
Raymond Pittigher
NFSv4
On 06/18/2012 07:27 AM, Ed Greshko wrote:
On 06/18/2012 06:43 PM, Raymond Pittigher wrote:
The server is RHEL6.2 and the clients are either Centos or Fedora and the problem
seems to be with release 17. On all clients the mount uses defaults. So on the F17
box we have:
172.30.5.244:/users/ on /users type nfs4
(rw,relatime,vers=4.0,rsize=1048576,wsize=1048576, namlen=255,hard,proto=tcp,port=0,timeo=600,retrans =2,sec=sys,clientaddr=172.30.5.169,local_lock=none ,addr=172.30.5.244)
On a RHEL system with defaults we have:
172.30.5.244:/users on /users type nfs4
(rw,noatime,nodiratime,hard,intr,addr=172.30.5.244 ,clientaddr=172.30.5.240)
I see.... So, you are basically exporting a single directory structure (/users) from
your RH6.2 system and mounting it on /users on several other systems and the only
system with problems is the F17 system. And naturally you've got the same users and
groups on all systems with the same UID/GID's.
The one question that pops to mind is .... Why have you defined the mount options as
you did on the F17 system and not the RHEL system? Not that I would think it would
make a difference....but have you tried with the same options on the F17 system? I'm
wondering if the sec=sys being defined isn't someone causing an issue.
I am using NIS to keep the users/groups the same across all systems. Yes it is old and outdated but it works
for what I need it for. I have tried several different options including the defaults for all, this just
happens to be where I am at now. If I change the F17 to use NFSv3 it all seems fine. The only options for sec
are sys or kerberos and sec=sys is the default.
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
06-18-2012, 11:51 AM
Ed Greshko
NFSv4
On 06/18/2012 07:40 PM, Raymond Pittigher wrote:
> I am using NIS to keep the users/groups the same across all systems. Yes it is old
> and outdated but it works for what I need it for. I have tried several different
> options including the defaults for all, this just happens to be where I am at now.
> If I change the F17 to use NFSv3 it all seems fine. The only options for sec are
> sys or kerberos and sec=sys is the default.
Nothing wrong with using NIS. Should keep things in order.... It has been a long
time since I last used it...but it served me well in the past.
I was just curious that "maybe" specifying the sec options and other may be
"confusing" the system. So, if you just change everything to the equivalent of this....
getfacl users and then drop into users and go getfacl on a good/bad entry?
Yes, I'm grasping at straws.... :-)
--
Never be afraid to laugh at yourself, after all, you could be missing out on the joke
of the century. -- Dame Edna Everage
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
06-18-2012, 12:00 PM
Raymond Pittigher
NFSv4
On 06/18/2012 07:51 AM, Ed Greshko wrote:
On 06/18/2012 07:40 PM, Raymond Pittigher wrote:
I am using NIS to keep the users/groups the same across all systems. Yes it is old
and outdated but it works for what I need it for. I have tried several different
options including the defaults for all, this just happens to be where I am at now.
If I change the F17 to use NFSv3 it all seems fine. The only options for sec are
sys or kerberos and sec=sys is the default.
Nothing wrong with using NIS. Should keep things in order.... It has been a long
time since I last used it...but it served me well in the past.
I was just curious that "maybe" specifying the sec options and other may be
"confusing" the system. So, if you just change everything to the equivalent of this....
#
# /etc/fstab
# Created by anaconda on Mon Jun 11 03:08:30 2012
#
# Accessible filesystems, by reference, are maintained under '/dev/disk'
# See man pages fstab(5), findfs(8), mount(8) and/or blkid(8) for more info
#
/dev/mapper/vg_dhcp5169-lv_root / ext4 defaults 1 1
UUID=bde99a9d-779d-4211-b3e1-808b62ed0195 /boot ext4 defaults 1 2
/dev/mapper/vg_dhcp5169-lv_swap swap swap defaults 0 0
172.30.5.244:/users /users nfs4 defaults 0 0
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
06-18-2012, 12:17 PM
Ed Greshko
NFSv4
Raymond Pittigher <raymond.pittigher@exelisinc.com> wrote:
>the fstab is set at defaults. i am guessing something has changed with
>the nfs-utils package maybe with nis?
>
>[root@dhcp5169 ~]# getfacl /users/zbarak/
>getfacl: Removing leading '/' from absolute path names
># file: users/zbarak/
># owner: 4294967294
># group: 4294967294
>user::rwx
>group::---
>other::---
>
>[root@dhcp5169 ~]# getfacl /users
>getfacl: Removing leading '/' from absolute path names
># file: users
># owner: root
># group: root
>user::rwx
>group::r-x
>other::r-x
>
>[root@dhcp5169 ~]# cat /etc/fstab
>
>#
># /etc/fstab
># Created by anaconda on Mon Jun 11 03:08:30 2012
>#
># Accessible filesystems, by reference, are maintained under
>'/dev/disk'
># See man pages fstab(5), findfs(8), mount(8) and/or blkid(8) for more
>info
>#
>/dev/mapper/vg_dhcp5169-lv_root / ext4
>defaults 1 1
>UUID=bde99a9d-779d-4211-b3e1-808b62ed0195 /boot ext4
> defaults 1 2
>/dev/mapper/vg_dhcp5169-lv_swap swap swap
>defaults 0 0
>172.30.5.244:/users /users nfs4 defaults 0 0
>
Well that all looks good. I know there have been changes to nfs-utils. One change involved the idmap service and no longer needing to run it on the client. But I just wrote a bugzilla against it for random mounts failing at boot time. Since I don't see mapping problems I'd be more suspect of NIS.
--
Sent from my Android tablet with K-9 Mail.
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
06-18-2012, 12:57 PM
Raymond Pittigher
NFSv4
On 06/18/2012 08:17 AM, Ed Greshko wrote:
Raymond Pittigher <raymond.pittigher@exelisinc.com> wrote:
the fstab is set at defaults. i am guessing something has changed with
the nfs-utils package maybe with nis?
#
# /etc/fstab
# Created by anaconda on Mon Jun 11 03:08:30 2012
#
# Accessible filesystems, by reference, are maintained under
'/dev/disk'
# See man pages fstab(5), findfs(8), mount(8) and/or blkid(8) for more
info
#
/dev/mapper/vg_dhcp5169-lv_root / ext4
defaults 1 1
UUID=bde99a9d-779d-4211-b3e1-808b62ed0195 /boot ext4
defaults 1 2
/dev/mapper/vg_dhcp5169-lv_swap swap swap
defaults 0 0
172.30.5.244:/users /users nfs4 defaults 0 0
Well that all looks good. I know there have been changes to nfs-utils. One change involved the idmap service and no longer needing to run it on the client. But I just wrote a bugzilla against it for random mounts failing at boot time. Since I don't see mapping problems I'd be more suspect of NIS.
But with NFSv4 as NFSv3 looks and works fine on F17.
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
06-18-2012, 01:16 PM
Ed Greshko
NFSv4
On 06/18/2012 08:57 PM, Raymond Pittigher wrote:
>> Well that all looks good. I know there have been changes to nfs-utils. One change
>> involved the idmap service and no longer needing to run it on the client. But I
>> just wrote a bugzilla against it for random mounts failing at boot time. Since I
>> don't see mapping problems I'd be more suspect of NIS.
>>
>>
> But with NFSv4 as NFSv3 looks and works fine on F17.
Yes... But, and this is where I've forgotten most of what I know about NIS, maybe
there is a different way NIS is accessed on v4 than v3 to get the UID/GID mappings to
the users?
I suppose if I were in your shoes I'd try generating an appropriate passwd file on an
F17 system (in a VM?) and not use NIS just to see what happens? Maybe rule something
out?
And if that works....then still file a bugzilla against nfs-utils. If those
reviewing it find it is the wrong component...they will change it. That has happened
to me more times than I care to admit. :-)
--
Never be afraid to laugh at yourself, after all, you could be missing out on the joke
of the century. -- Dame Edna Everage
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
06-18-2012, 01:26 PM
Ed Greshko
NFSv4
Ahh....
One thing that just popped into my mind..... Again, recall that NIS is not in my
memory.....
When you run NIS do you have user names and groups and such defined only in NIS
databases? I mean, isn't the passwd files basically where only system users are defined?
What were to happen if you had a situation where a uid was defined in passwd and in
the NIS maps and a conflict existed?
Possible?
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
NFSv4
