On 2/23/06, O Plameras <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Check main advantages/disadvantages over NFS/NIS/SAMBA here and be > clear as to the reasons why you'd prefer one from the other. You be the > judge if it's that intricate to manage and administer.
Just to be clear, Used to manage OpenAFS on an AIX production machine. With the advent of NFS version 4, take a look at the features: from: http://www.vanemery.com/Linux/NFSv4/NFSv4-no-rpcsec.html 1. Works well through firewalls and NAT devices 2. Lock and mount protocols are integrated into the NFS protocol 3. Stateful operations (handles client or server crashes pretty well) 4. Strong security is built-in: uses RPCSEC_GSS (based on GSS-API) 5. Makes extensive use of client-side caching 6. Supports replication and migration 7. Vendor-independent, platform-independent, protocol-independent IETF standard 8. Will support Unix-like clients as well as Windows clients 9. Supports ACLs 10. Handles Unicode (UTF-8) filenames for internationalization 11. Good performance on Internet, even on high-latency, low-bandwidth links Take a look at 1,4,5,8,9. That's openafs strengths.. and that's why we use it. But not really for long. IBM does not support it... even if we have software/hardware AIX supported box. :( Backupwise, in our infrastructure, the new netbackup does not support AFS anymore. tar/cpio does not cut it. For management, it will take pages to read the installation and configuring openafs. NFS, how about less than 5 steps to enable and configure? I would not venture with the hands down winner, samba. Edit one file, restart the daemon and off you go... One more thing, with NFSv4 using TCP, how about mounting a remote file system via ssh tunnelling... that's cool. regards, Andre _________________________________________________ Philippine Linux Users' Group (PLUG) Mailing List [email protected] (#PLUG @ irc.free.net.ph) Read the Guidelines: http://linux.org.ph/lists Searchable Archives: http://archives.free.net.ph
