In article <20080128002703.0138311703@yamt.dyndns.org>,
YAMAMOTO Takashi <yamt@mwd.biglobe.ne.jp> wrote:
>> In article <20080127084912.56D7B11703@yamt.dyndns.org>,
>> YAMAMOTO Takashi <yamt@mwd.biglobe.ne.jp> wrote:
>> >> On Jan 26,  7:57pm, yamt@mwd.biglobe.ne.jp (YAMAMOTO Takashi) wrote:
>> >> -- Subject: Re: CVS commit: src/lib/libc/rpc
>> >> 
>> >> | > Module Name:	src
>> >> | > Committed By:	christos
>> >> | > Date:		Fri Jan 25 19:43:53 UTC 2008
>> >> | > 
>> >> | > Modified Files:
>> >> | > 	src/lib/libc/rpc: pmap_getport.c
>> >> | > 
>> >> | > Log Message:
>> >> | > PR/37864: Wolfgang Stukenbrock: when requesting TCP rcp-service
>> >port numbers
>> >> | > UDP is used
>> >> | > 
>> >> | > 
>> >> | > To generate a diff of this commit:
>> >> | > cvs rdiff -r1.16 -r1.17 src/lib/libc/rpc/pmap_getport.c
>> >> | > 
>> >> | > Please note that diffs are not public domain; they are subject to the
>> >> | > copyright notices on the relevant files.
>> >> | 
>> >> | does it make sense to retry on RPC_PROGNOTREGISTERED?
>> >> 
>> >> Can't a program register only for tcp and not for udp?
>> >> 
>> >> christos
>> >
>> >your change is about the transports used by the portmapper itself,
>> >not by the queried services, right?
>> 
>> Yes, I was confused. It does not make sense to retry if the program
>> was found not to be registered.
>> 
>> >honestly speaking, i don't understand the rationale of this change.
>> >if tcp is so reliable, why don't you try it when protocol != IPPROTO_TCP?
>> 
>> I think that Wolfgang was trying to use NIS across a network where UDP
>> was not available/reliable.
>
>then, doesn't it make more sense to always try both transports?
>

I'll make it do that.

christos