[LUNI] NFS woes

[Joe Frost]

On Tue, Jun 03, 2003 at 07:29:20AM -0500, john.pehoski at megomat.com wrote:
> Hi Joe, 
> 
> I responded to the list but it was never posted.  I think you're on to
> something-- see below.  Thanks for your help.
> 
> JP
> >  > john.pehoski at megomat.com wrote:
> >  > >I have RH8.0 running on an old Dell Optiplex that will be used for a
> > file
> >  > >server and run either MySQL or postgreSql.  With /etc/hosts,
> > hosts.allow,
> >  > >hosts.deny and exports set up for the (so far) one valid client,
> > service
> >  > >nfs start runs the nfs server.  Although I can ping the server from
> the
> >  > >client (running RH9), if I try to "mount -n 10.1.1.100:/eng
> > /tmp/mnt -t
> >  > >nfs" from the client, the response is "mount: RPC: Remote system
> error-
> >
> > That's a bit funny looking mount command. I'd be more inclined to run
> > mount -t nfs 10.1.1.100:/eng /tmp/mnt
> 
> That produced the same "Connection refused" message.
> 
> >
> >  > >Connection refused".  What's missing?
> >  > >
> >
> > Can you mount the nfs share from the server on the server?
> 
> mount /eng produces "mount: /eng is not a block device".  / can't be
> mounted remotely either with the same error messages, and / is already
> mounted.


Try doing an nfs mount.  just like above and see what
happens.  I thought we might be able to eliminate any
network problems if we mount it via nfs locally. So
run this command on the server

mount -t nfs localhost:/eng /tmp/mnt

> 
> > Double check your hosts.allow and hosts.deny.
> 
> hosts.allow has the TCP/IP address of the one valid client.  hosts.deny is
> empty.

Would you mind taking just commenting the line out of
/etc/hosts.allow so we could eliminate that as a source
of your woes?

> 
> >In fact post them if you want.  Have you rerun exportfs -a since
> adding the export?
> Yes.
> 
> > Make sure the everything's really running--Run netstat -an on the server.

I guess specifically look for something like

tcp    0    0 0.0.0.0:2049     0.0.0.0:*        LISTEN

when you run netstat -an.  As far as I can tell 2049 is
the port that the nfsd process listens on.

> 
> The list of foreign hosts show all 0.0.0.0.
> 
> > Run nmap against the server from the client.  You should see port 2049
> open.
> 
> It's not shown.  "The 1035 ports scanned but not shown below are in state:
> filtered."  When I installed RH, I deliberately didn't add a firewall (this
> is an internal network with no internet connection) but I guess that does
> not necessarily mean that some other type of filter may be in place.
> 

> Thanks.
> 

-- 
Joe Frost
http://joe.the-frosts.org