So at work we have several document repositories, and while most of our clients are Windows PCs, the servers are running nix variants, (Linux and BSD, mostly), so we have a bunch of Samba instances running at various locations.
The Windows clients are *not* joined to any domain, and we do not have a Windows domain controller (nor, frankly, does anyone want one). However, the Samba machines are in pseudo-domain mode, with a "password" server and an LDAP backend. This works some of the time, but very often it seems like the magic that Samba uses to authenticate users does not work from version to version. Right now I am struggling with a samba server that, though its configuration is copied from a working machine, behaves completely differently. So I was thinking of ditching Samba for AFS. It has a number of benefits over Samba, I think, such as the kerberos auth, the universal namespace (I always have users who complain that their directory was deleted from the server, only to find out that they're talking to the wrong server), and the (more) consistent ACL structure. I have a working AFS cell, and from what I can tell the Windows client (OpenAFS + MIT KfW) is fairly stable. But I haven't been testing for very long, and I was wondering if anyone has been here before me, and knows what headaches I can expect. How does AFS tend to fail, and how often? Has anyone ditched AFS for Samba (or anything else) and what drove you away? Is everyone who has used AFS in production in the past screaming "Nnnooo!" in slow motion? It seems like an actively developed technology that nonetheless is rarely used, so I'm kind of working in a vacuum of opinions. Toby _______________________________________________ bblisa mailing list [email protected] http://www.bblisa.org/mailman/listinfo/bblisa
