On Wed, Jul 14, 2010 at 7:12 PM, Gordon Messmer <yinyang at eburg.com> wrote: > On 07/13/2010 05:19 PM, Kwan Lowe wrote: >> On Tue, Jul 13, 2010 at 7:44 PM, Gordon Messmer<yinyang at eburg.com> wrote: >>> I'm not sure I can help, but I'm very curious. How old are these >>> systems, that they don't support NFSv3? >> >> It's a combination of some very old (RH2.1) systems and a rigid >> certification process. > > Red Hat Linux 2.1, from 1995? > > You mentioned "compliance", but not how NFSv3 will help you mean a > specific need. How will moving the NFSv2 export from Windows 2008 to > CentOS help you become more "compliant"? :) I know... believe me... The clients cannot be upgraded for several more months, possibly over a year from now. They do not support NFS3. The Windows server does support NFS2, but per the guidelines, this version is not allowed. It's not the NFS protocol itself, but some decisions that were made several years ago on how files were placed on the server. They are essentially open to the world (i.e., to guest access), but this was acceptable at the time because it was on an isolated network and there were no other users defined on the system. Since we cannot modify the client at this time (i.e., install an NFS3 capable client), and the underlying issue cannot be solved by changing permissions on the server, we considered adding a third server that would mount the Windows server then re-export it to the clients. We could then lock down the new server to comply with the guidelines.