NFSv4 without portmapper ? (resent)

[Gabriel Barazer]

J. Bruce Fields wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 14, 2006 at 04:22:15PM +0100, Gabriel Barazer wrote:
>   
>> I am testing the nfs utils (not patched for now) on a clean system (in
>> fact it's a kind of linux from scratch). I want to write a bootscript
>> designed to start _only_ the nfsv4 server or a nfsv4 client (without
>> support for nfsv2/3). Since nfsv4 is designed to operate on only 1 TCP
>> port, is the portmapper still required ?
>>     
>
> I think the server will still try to register itself with the local
> portmapper.  But you can run portmap with the "-i 127.0.0.1" option and
> then it'll only accept local connections.
>   
The original portmapper doesn't have this option. the -i or -l 
(localhost only) options are only provided by patches. Since this is not 
a problem rebuilding a new version of the portmapper (my system is still 
experimental), I don't understand why the server is trying to register 
with the portmapper whereas it is not needed ? Maybe a little fix in the 
nfsd code is necessary ?

I haven't tested yet the client side, but rpc.idmapd is the only daemon 
required, right ? I'm trying to mount a root filesystem with nfsv4 (from 
an initrd, since nfsroot v4 is not supported)

Gabriel