Have you tested prefetching reads on the NFS server node?
That should help for streaming reads as ultimatively
initial by the ftp user.

— Peter
 
On 2015 Nov 3 Tue, at 04:49, Martin Gasthuber <[email protected]> wrote:

> the path via NFS is already checked - problem here is not the bandwidth, 
> although the WAN ports allows for 2 x 10GE, its the file rate we need to 
> optimize. With NFS, in between GPFS and FTP, we saw ~2 times less file 
> download rate. My concern are also not really about raw IB access and misuse 
> - its because IPoIB, in order to minimize the risk, we had to reconfigure all 
> other cluster nodes to refuse IP connects through the IB ports from that node 
> - more work, less fun ! Probably we had to go the slower NFS way ;-)
> 
> best regards,
>  Martin
>> On 2 Nov, 2015, at 16:22, Wahl, Edward <[email protected]> wrote:
>> 
>> First off let me recommend vsftpd.   We've used that in a few single point 
>> to point cases to excellent results. 
>> 
>> Next, I'm going to agree with Johnathan here, any hacker that someone gains 
>> advantage on an FTP server will probably not have the knowledge to take 
>> advantage of the IB, however there are some steps you could take to mitigate 
>> this on a node such as you are thinking of:
>> 
>> -Perhaps an NFS share from an NSD across IB instead of being a native GPFS 
>> client?  This would remove any possibility of escalation exploits gaining 
>> access to other servers via SSH keys on the IB fabric but will reduce this 
>> nodes speed of access.  On the other hand almost any  IB faster than SDR 
>> probably is going to wait on the external network unless it's 40Gb or 100Gb 
>> attached.
>> 
>> -firewalled access and/or narrow corridor for ftp access. This is pretty 
>> much a must.
>> 
>> -fail2ban like product checking the ftp logs. Takes some work, but if the 
>> firewall isn't narrow enough this is worth it.
>> 
>> Ed Wahl
>> OSC
>> 
>> 
>> ________________________________________
>> From: [email protected] 
>> [[email protected]] on behalf of Martin Gasthuber 
>> [[email protected]]
>> Sent: Monday, November 02, 2015 8:53 AM
>> To: gpfsug main discussion list
>> Subject: [gpfsug-discuss] GPFS (partly) inside dmz
>> 
>> Hi,
>> 
>> we are currently in discussion with our local network security people about 
>> the plan to make certain data accessible to outside scientists via ftp - 
>> this implies that the host running the ftp daemon runs with their ethernet 
>> ports inside a dmz. On the other hand, all NSD access is through IB (and 
>> should stay that way). The biggest concerns are around the possible intrude 
>> from that ftp host (running as GPFS client) through the IB infrastructure to 
>> other cluster nodes and possible causing big troubles on the scientific 
>> data. Did anybody here has similar constrains and possible solutions to 
>> mitigate that risk ?
>> 
>> best regards,
>> Martin
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> gpfsug-discuss mailing list
>> gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org
>> http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss
>> _______________________________________________
>> gpfsug-discuss mailing list
>> gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org
>> http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss
> 
> _______________________________________________
> gpfsug-discuss mailing list
> gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org
> http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss

_______________________________________________
gpfsug-discuss mailing list
gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org
http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss

Reply via email to