[ Date Index ] [ Thread Index ] [ <= Previous by date / thread ] [ Next by date / thread => ]
On Thursday 12 July 2007 13:39, Simon Waters wrote: > David Johnson wrote: > > NFS has zero security and authentication. > > NFSv4 happily uses Kerberos with GSS which is exactly the same sort of > thing that Windows does with CIFS. Stop living in the NFSv2 world ;) > > > Samba can have very complex security > > policies. It also makes it easy to share and access resources over a > > network. > > > > People need to get over their aversion to anything associated with > > Microsoft - just because Microsoft use the SMB protocol (they didn't even > > write it) does not mean that it isn't a perfectly good protocol. > > Being written by Microsoft does not mean that that it is a bad protocol. > > But it is a "bad" protocol, in that it is chatty, complex, difficult to > understand, and has evolved meanderingly over time, and as a result is > slow, and with variable quality of interoperability. I remember spending hours waiting for MS Exchanges to acknowledge each other while our Unix boxes were talking happily as soon as they were aware of each other. > > NFS was on the other hand is comparatively lightweight (I can hear older > folks laughing), based on a couple of relatively clean technologies ONC > RPC, and VFS. So it was easy to change the behaviour of various layer, > such as securing ONC RPC. > > The problem was getting everyone to play the same way, and interoperably. Still plays hard to get sometimes. Tom te tom te tom -- The Mailing List for the Devon & Cornwall LUG http://mailman.dclug.org.uk/listinfo/list FAQ: http://www.dcglug.org.uk/linux_adm/list-faq.html