10-02-2007, 03:00 PM
|
| Junior Member | | Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 0
| |
 Re: NFS Exporting a samba share
"Nico Kadel-Garcia" wrote in message news:...
> "Mike Eisler" wrote in message
> news:36f0f19f.0407090925.4a44dabb@posting.google.c om...
> > "Nico Kadel-Garcia" wrote in message
> news:...
> > > Mike Eisler wrote:
> > >
> > > >> In this case the client machine (Solaris 9) does have a samba client
> > > >> available. The only problem is that I'm not sure how well samba
> > > >
> > > > An in-kernel SMB client? for Solari s9. I knew there
> > > > were couple for Linux. Wow, I guess there's no need for NFSv4
> > > > now. :-)
> > >
> > > Especially because AFS is available for Solaris, Linux, Windows, and
> MacOS
> > > X, allowing a far more secure authentication structure and robust file
> > > access for remotely connected sites.
> >
> > Kerberos V5 authentication, integrity, and
> > privacy for NFS has been shipping since 1998.
>
> Friend, have you ever *tried* to integrate Kerberos into NFS in the wild?
Yes. I've even shipped implementations of it.
ANyway, what do you mean by integrating Kerberos into NFS? Either
the NFS client and server support RFC 2203 or they don't. Only one
commerically supported UNIX client supports the RFC today, and
several servers.
> It's..... pretty painful, at least the last couple of times *I* tried it.
Do tell.
> And you missed the "robust" part. There is still no fix for the "if you lose
> network connections of a hard-mounted NFS directory, you often need to
> reboot both the server and the client to clean up the mess" problem. This
This is somethig I've never personally experienced, though I've tended
to confine myself to good clients. Indeed, in the early days of NFS,
my desktop ran completely diskless. In those days servers were less
reliable than clients, and hard mounts meant the desk top was frozen.
Then the server came back, the desktop came back to life, and
everything continued. No mess.
Since then, at least one client has added a forced unmount option.
> has been true for many years, and remains unchanged, especially since a lot
> of NFS clients have built-in antique sources and lack these resources but
> are expected to continue operating as modern servers.
>
> OSF/1, anyone?
OSF/1 is shipped by who now?
Anyway, I've nothing against AFS, except that people can't find
anyone to provide reliable commerical support for it now that IBM is
EOLing the commercial product. I wish OpenAFS all the best, but I fear
that just with the original CMU license, the
OpenAFs license will prevent it from taking hold. It was because of
the original license terms that AFS never made significant inroads, whereas,
NFS source code, for $25K a copy, and an optional $250K buy out of the
royalties, made it deal that no could refuse.
I find it interesting that people are looking running CIFS on UNIX/Linux
client and the file server.
 |