>IMO, that more or less describes what IBM/Transarc has been doing
>for some time now. In fact, they even seem to avoid having new
>customers.
>
>BSD and Linux users are possibly better off if they use arla:
>http://www.stacken.kth.se/projekt/arla/
It seems to be a race.
IBM / Transarc AFS is dying.
The Open Source AFS project, Arla, may arrive in time to replace
IBM / Transarc AFS, but so far Arla only has clients. In order
to keep AFS alive there will need to be an Arla server.
It is possible that IBM / Transarc AFS may die out before
Arla servers arrive. E.g. Intel's computing support people
tell me that the only servers we have that support AFS are
being EOL'ed. As it is now, it costs me 2,500$/GB to buy disk
space on our AFS capable servers, as compared to, what, 230$ US
for 60GB on a PC. Obviously, our AFS capable servers are obsolete,
expensive, SUN boxes. I'm motivated to run a LINUX Arla server,
but don't know where to look.
Are there any other similar wide-area filesystem technologies?
DFS, sure maybe, but I have never understood why our support
guys consistently refuse to look that way.
