Re: RPC protocol problem?

D.Mitchelldcs.shef.ac.uk

• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
• Next message: Steve Salvini: "Re: nfsbug"
• Previous message: Rafi Sadowsky: "Re: RPC protocol problem?"
• Maybe in reply to: Baba Z Buehler: "RPC protocol problem?"
• Next in thread: Peter Wemm: "Re: RPC protocol problem?"

>The portmap protocol procedure number 5 is an RPC call forwarding
>service. You specify to a remote portmap that you would like it to call
>a routine on the remote host for you, and give you the results back. 
>(why this is in there is beyond me...)

I think it's there for broadcast commands such as rusers - a client just
broadcasts a request to every portmapper on the net to call rpc.rusersd
on its behalf - otherwise it would have to individually contact each
rpc.rusersd daemon.

Anyway, am I correct in believing that the export bug only works if the
fileystem is exported to localhost, and not for the "real" local 
hostname or aliases?


Dave.

* David Mitchell, Systems Administrator,    email: D.Mitchelldcs.shef.ac.uk
* Dept. Computer Science, Sheffield Uni.    phone: +44 114-282-5573
* 211 Portobello St, Sheffield S1 4DP, UK.  fax:   +44 114-278-0972
*
* Standards (n). Battle insignia or tribal totems

• Next message: Steve Salvini: "Re: nfsbug"
• Previous message: Rafi Sadowsky: "Re: RPC protocol problem?"
• Maybe in reply to: Baba Z Buehler: "RPC protocol problem?"
• Next in thread: Peter Wemm: "Re: RPC protocol problem?"