[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1257884799.3044.7.camel@heimdal.trondhjem.org>
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2009 05:26:39 +0900
From: Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@....uio.no>
To: Chris Friesen <cfriesen@...tel.com>
Cc: Ben Hutchings <bhutchings@...arflare.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
Linux kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: sunrpc port allocation and IANA reserved list
On Tue, 2009-11-10 at 12:37 -0600, Chris Friesen wrote:
> On 11/10/2009 11:53 AM, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > On Tue, 2009-11-10 at 11:43 -0600, Chris Friesen wrote:
>
> >> Given that a userspace application can be stopped and restarted at any
> >> time, and a sunrpc registration can happen at any time, what is the
> >> expected mechanism to prevent the kernel from allocating a port for use
> >> by sunrpc that reserved or well-known?
> >>
> >> Apparently Redhat and Debian have distro-specific ways of dealing with
> >> this, but is there a standard solution? Should there be?
> >>
> >> The current setup seems suboptimal.
> >
> > I believe both RH and Debian are using the same implementation:
> > <http://cyberelk.net/tim/software/portreserve/>.
>
> That helps with the startup case, but still leaves a possible hole if an
> app using a fixed port number is restarted at runtime. During the
> window where nobody is bound to the port, the kernel could randomly
> assign it to someone else.
Just use /proc/sys/sunrpc/{max,min}_resvport interface to restrict the
range used to a safer one. That's what it is for...
Trond
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists