Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

NetApp disable nfs v4.0 for new share servers #244

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: stable/xena-m3
Choose a base branch
from
Open

NetApp disable nfs v4.0 for new share servers #244

wants to merge 1 commit into from
+11 −11

Conversation

Carthaca
Copy link
Collaborator

@Carthaca Carthaca commented Feb 13, 2025 •
edited
Loading

this has been the default for ONTAP 9.7 and 9.8 and we mistakenly
relied on that it would stay that way in
3503a19

But since ONTAP 9.9.1 the default is to enable nfsv40 again.

Now making the disablement explicit, since we now have a proper way to
distinguish between options that should be set on create and those
that should be set on update, too.

Change-Id: I39e2da2c3393ec95312c09a608a997a29981a471

@Carthaca Carthaca force-pushed the nfsv40_disable_again branch from 14e5e1a to 3b867c0 Compare February 13, 2025 23:51
@Carthaca
NetApp disable nfs v4.0 for new share servers
1306d57 
this has been the default for ONTAP 9.7 and 9.8 and we mistakenly
relied on that it would stay that way in
3503a19

But since ONTAP 9.9.1 the default is to enable nfsv40 again.

Now making the disablement explicit, since we now have a proper way to
distinguish between options that should be set on create and those
that should be set on update, too.

Change-Id: I39e2da2c3393ec95312c09a608a997a29981a471
@Carthaca Carthaca force-pushed the nfsv40_disable_again branch from 3b867c0 to 1306d57 Compare February 14, 2025 08:06
@Carthaca Carthaca marked this pull request as ready for review February 14, 2025 08:06
@Carthaca
Copy link
Collaborator Author

This is more a nice-to-have for the flexgroup setup (since they said they will anyhow mount with v4.1)

@chuan137
Copy link
Member

chuan137 commented Feb 17, 2025 •
edited
Loading

sth to follow up when Maurice back from vacation

  1. why it's safe to update nfs3 and nfs41, shouldn't be the same logic applying to nfs40? i.e. allowed protols are configured on a new vserver, but never modify them, to avoid disruption to connected clients
  2. with 'create' method, it would be more consistent to apply the nfs3 and nfs41 setttings together with nfs40. It works for us now because they are enabled by default, which aligns with our desired configuration.

@Carthaca
Copy link
Collaborator Author

sth to follow up when Maurice back from vacation

  1. why it's safe to update nfs3 and nfs41, shouldn't be the same logic applying to nfs40? i.e. allowed protols are configured on a new vserver, but never modify them, to avoid disruption to connected clients
  2. with 'create' method, it would be more consistent to apply the nfs3 and nfs41 setttings together with nfs40. It works for us now because they are enabled by default, which aligns with our desired configuration.

I fully agree, same logic should be applied for other protocol versions

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@kpawar-sap kpawar-sap kpawar-sap approved these changes

@chuan137 chuan137 Awaiting requested review from chuan137 chuan137 is a code owner

@sumitarora2786 sumitarora2786 Awaiting requested review from sumitarora2786 sumitarora2786 is a code owner

@crenduchinta88 crenduchinta88 Awaiting requested review from crenduchinta88 crenduchinta88 is a code owner

At least 2 approving reviews are required to merge this pull request.

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
3 participants
@Carthaca @chuan137 @kpawar-sap