Re: Samba vs NFS
From: Andrew (Andrew_at_corbis.co.nz)
Date: 02/23/05
- Previous message: Frank Burkhardt: "Re: Samba vs NFS"
- In reply to: Raul Dias: "Re: Samba vs NFS"
- Next in thread: Gregory D. Rosenberg: "Re: Samba vs NFS"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2005 13:13:49 +1300 To: Raul Dias <chaos@swi.com.br>, focus-linux@securityfocus.com
in a linux to linux environment you might consider LUFS which lets u
mount files systems via ssh
LUFS is enabling you to mount into your file hierarchy a remote
computer's file system, which is accessible by various means (ftp, ssh,
etc.). Then, the access to the remote files will be completely network
transparent. In other words, you'll be able to read/modify remote files
as if they were local, watch movies/listen to MP3s from FTP/SSH/Gnutella
servers *without* copying them locally. Sheer magic. Now skip to the
next section.
http://lufs.sourceforge.net/lufs/
i'd favour openafs over nfs, but i'm not so fond of either.
Raul Dias wrote:
>On Mon, 2005-02-21 at 17:07 -0800, Avery Payne wrote:
>
>
>
>>NFS is becoming "long in the tooth" and there are replacements that are
>>being proposed, but none have gained as much widespread traction as
>>NFS. Look up AFS (and its cousin, OpenAFS), SFS, and the terms "network
>>filesystem" or "distributed filesystem" in Google. AFS has also been
>>around but uses Kerberos authentication, SFS takes NFS further with
>>encryption and vastly-stronger user validation.
>>
>>
>
>So,
>
>What is suggested in a Linux to Linux environment to replace NFS?
>
>AFAIK, NFS is only good if you (the admin) have total control over the
>clients (root access and user accounts always map to the same uid like
>LDAP, NIS).
>
>OTOH, if other people (you don't trust) have root access or uids are not
>map the sameway everywhere, NFS security is gone.
>
>So, what other FS address this problems in Linux? Good authentication,
>criptography if desired but not mandatory (some times it can slow down
>the system), and most important stability.
>
>A few years ago I search for a replacement of NSF (v3) and found nothing
>good enough on Linux. Most solutions were on slow development and had
>bad stability.
>
>NFS v4 seems to address this problems but it is not close to be ready
>(AFAIK). RedHat seems to have some closed source fs solution (GFS i
>think).
>
>I even thought already about using a SAMBA to SAMBA Linux solution to
>address parts of this problems.
>
>
>
>So, what is there for real today?
>
>
>Raul Dias
>
>
>
>
-- Cheers, Andrew Horton Corbis Digital Printing Ltd <http://www.corbis.co.nz> Corbis Digital Printing Ltd 21 Opawa Rd, Opawa P.O. Box 10337, ChCh Phone : 03 3776644 Fax : 03 9822036 Cell : 0274 646959 Email : andrew@corbis.co.nz <mailto:andrew@corbis.co.nz> Web : http://www.corbis.co.nz Thank you for choosing Corbis This e-mail message and attachments are confidential to Corbis Digital Printing Limited and subject to legal privilege. If you have received this e-mail in error, please advise the sender immediately and destroy the message and any attachments. If you are not the intended recipient you are notified that any use, distribution, amendment, copying or any action taken or omitted to be taken in reliance of this message or attachments is prohibited.
- Previous message: Frank Burkhardt: "Re: Samba vs NFS"
- In reply to: Raul Dias: "Re: Samba vs NFS"
- Next in thread: Gregory D. Rosenberg: "Re: Samba vs NFS"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Relevant Pages
|
|
