Re: [asterisk-users] Voicemail and remote directory with SSHFS
Hello, The voicemails are sent over to an independent server to save server resources (harddisk writing, harddisk space, etc.) and allocate more bandwidth to live RTP calls. The servers are located in different locations, with each one having an independent public IP address. Accordingly, I need to mount the voicemail directory on both servers. Thanks, Elliot On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 3:32 PM, Jeff LaCoursiere j...@jeff.net wrote: Lets start from the beginning. Why are using a network share for your voicemail in the first place? j On Fri, 22 May 2009, Elliot Murdock wrote: Hello Matt, I do agree with you that NFS is that UNIX standard for network filesystems and that what should essentially be used. However, I shied away from using it, because on the surface it looks too complicated to secure properly. It uses many ports, dynamic ports, different background daemons, etc. As I stated before, to mount one or two directories, it is just not worth the trouble to set up a NFS filesystem. Accordingly, I figured I would go from bottom up, starting with sshfs, samba (which uses only 445 and 139, straightforward config file), and then if those don't work out go through the trouble of setting up a NFS filesystem. If you know of any documents that simplify the NFS (not just how to set up a simple mount, but a full tutorial that describes how it works and how to fully secure it), then I would be more than happy to implement it. Later, Elliot On 5/21/09, Matt Watson m...@mattgwatson.ca wrote: Not that I;m exactly a big fan of NFS but... why would you choose to implement a filesystem that was designed to emulate Windows shares for your UNIX-type environment? You have to kind of expect odd problems like this when you choose to use things for other than their intended purpose. Samba I would say is probably alot more focused on providing storage shares for Windows desktop clients, not for UNIX-type clients. Sure there is some support to do what you want, but just keep in mind that similiar to using sshfs like you were trying before, Samba, was really not designed to be used by UNIX clients. You've already found the most obvious reason... case sensative filenames - which Windows does not support, and UNIX programs expect filesystems on your UNIX machine *will* support it. That seems kind of like me deciding to use ntfs on a local partition on linux box instead of ext3/4, jfs, reiserfs, etc. -- Matt On Thu, May 21, 2009 at 5:06 AM, Elliot Murdock murdo...@gmail.com wrote: Hello! Thanks...I set up a Samba mount, which works ok, except that Asterisk confuses a wave file as a wav49 file. I think it may have something do with the way Samba supports case sensitivity. Since Windows is not very aggressive when it comes to being case sensitive, I am thinking that Samba is saving files with the last three characters, wav, as uppercase, WAV. What is the procedure to ensure all the files are saved as is in Samba? Thanks, Elliot On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 5:12 PM, Tilghman Lesher tilgh...@mail.jeffandtilghman.com wrote: On Thursday 14 May 2009 08:14:17 Elliot Murdock wrote: The problem is a file locking problem that Asterisk needs to make changes to the directory. I was initially shying away from NFS and Samba, because I prefer to avoid any sort of security issues with only remotely mounting one or two directories. NFS and Samba are designed for larger applications, which makes those types of technology worthwhile. No, they're both designed as filesystems, which makes typical things like locking possible. SSH is designed as a communications medium, and someone has hacked filesystem support on top of it (poorly, apparently). SSHFS was never designed to be used in server production environments and should not be used there. I am wondering if there is any way to disable Asterisk's request to lock the directory. I know this may cause some loss in data, but for the volume voicemail receives, it should be rare enough that would make this approach an option. There is not. Use a real filesystem that supports file locking (or really, file linking, which is how the locking is implemented) procedures. -- Tilghman ___ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users ___ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users ___ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by
Re: [asterisk-users] Voicemail and remote directory with SSHFS
Hello Matt, I do agree with you that NFS is that UNIX standard for network filesystems and that what should essentially be used. However, I shied away from using it, because on the surface it looks too complicated to secure properly. It uses many ports, dynamic ports, different background daemons, etc. As I stated before, to mount one or two directories, it is just not worth the trouble to set up a NFS filesystem. Accordingly, I figured I would go from bottom up, starting with sshfs, samba (which uses only 445 and 139, straightforward config file), and then if those don't work out go through the trouble of setting up a NFS filesystem. If you know of any documents that simplify the NFS (not just how to set up a simple mount, but a full tutorial that describes how it works and how to fully secure it), then I would be more than happy to implement it. Later, Elliot On 5/21/09, Matt Watson m...@mattgwatson.ca wrote: Not that I;m exactly a big fan of NFS but... why would you choose to implement a filesystem that was designed to emulate Windows shares for your UNIX-type environment? You have to kind of expect odd problems like this when you choose to use things for other than their intended purpose. Samba I would say is probably alot more focused on providing storage shares for Windows desktop clients, not for UNIX-type clients. Sure there is some support to do what you want, but just keep in mind that similiar to using sshfs like you were trying before, Samba, was really not designed to be used by UNIX clients. You've already found the most obvious reason... case sensative filenames - which Windows does not support, and UNIX programs expect filesystems on your UNIX machine *will* support it. That seems kind of like me deciding to use ntfs on a local partition on linux box instead of ext3/4, jfs, reiserfs, etc. -- Matt On Thu, May 21, 2009 at 5:06 AM, Elliot Murdock murdo...@gmail.com wrote: Hello! Thanks...I set up a Samba mount, which works ok, except that Asterisk confuses a wave file as a wav49 file. I think it may have something do with the way Samba supports case sensitivity. Since Windows is not very aggressive when it comes to being case sensitive, I am thinking that Samba is saving files with the last three characters, wav, as uppercase, WAV. What is the procedure to ensure all the files are saved as is in Samba? Thanks, Elliot On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 5:12 PM, Tilghman Lesher tilgh...@mail.jeffandtilghman.com wrote: On Thursday 14 May 2009 08:14:17 Elliot Murdock wrote: The problem is a file locking problem that Asterisk needs to make changes to the directory. I was initially shying away from NFS and Samba, because I prefer to avoid any sort of security issues with only remotely mounting one or two directories. NFS and Samba are designed for larger applications, which makes those types of technology worthwhile. No, they're both designed as filesystems, which makes typical things like locking possible. SSH is designed as a communications medium, and someone has hacked filesystem support on top of it (poorly, apparently). SSHFS was never designed to be used in server production environments and should not be used there. I am wondering if there is any way to disable Asterisk's request to lock the directory. I know this may cause some loss in data, but for the volume voicemail receives, it should be rare enough that would make this approach an option. There is not. Use a real filesystem that supports file locking (or really, file linking, which is how the locking is implemented) procedures. -- Tilghman ___ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users ___ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users ___ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Voicemail and remote directory with SSHFS
Lets start from the beginning. Why are using a network share for your voicemail in the first place? j On Fri, 22 May 2009, Elliot Murdock wrote: Hello Matt, I do agree with you that NFS is that UNIX standard for network filesystems and that what should essentially be used. However, I shied away from using it, because on the surface it looks too complicated to secure properly. It uses many ports, dynamic ports, different background daemons, etc. As I stated before, to mount one or two directories, it is just not worth the trouble to set up a NFS filesystem. Accordingly, I figured I would go from bottom up, starting with sshfs, samba (which uses only 445 and 139, straightforward config file), and then if those don't work out go through the trouble of setting up a NFS filesystem. If you know of any documents that simplify the NFS (not just how to set up a simple mount, but a full tutorial that describes how it works and how to fully secure it), then I would be more than happy to implement it. Later, Elliot On 5/21/09, Matt Watson m...@mattgwatson.ca wrote: Not that I;m exactly a big fan of NFS but... why would you choose to implement a filesystem that was designed to emulate Windows shares for your UNIX-type environment? You have to kind of expect odd problems like this when you choose to use things for other than their intended purpose. Samba I would say is probably alot more focused on providing storage shares for Windows desktop clients, not for UNIX-type clients. Sure there is some support to do what you want, but just keep in mind that similiar to using sshfs like you were trying before, Samba, was really not designed to be used by UNIX clients. You've already found the most obvious reason... case sensative filenames - which Windows does not support, and UNIX programs expect filesystems on your UNIX machine *will* support it. That seems kind of like me deciding to use ntfs on a local partition on linux box instead of ext3/4, jfs, reiserfs, etc. -- Matt On Thu, May 21, 2009 at 5:06 AM, Elliot Murdock murdo...@gmail.com wrote: Hello! Thanks...I set up a Samba mount, which works ok, except that Asterisk confuses a wave file as a wav49 file. I think it may have something do with the way Samba supports case sensitivity. Since Windows is not very aggressive when it comes to being case sensitive, I am thinking that Samba is saving files with the last three characters, wav, as uppercase, WAV. What is the procedure to ensure all the files are saved as is in Samba? Thanks, Elliot On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 5:12 PM, Tilghman Lesher tilgh...@mail.jeffandtilghman.com wrote: On Thursday 14 May 2009 08:14:17 Elliot Murdock wrote: The problem is a file locking problem that Asterisk needs to make changes to the directory. I was initially shying away from NFS and Samba, because I prefer to avoid any sort of security issues with only remotely mounting one or two directories. NFS and Samba are designed for larger applications, which makes those types of technology worthwhile. No, they're both designed as filesystems, which makes typical things like locking possible. SSH is designed as a communications medium, and someone has hacked filesystem support on top of it (poorly, apparently). SSHFS was never designed to be used in server production environments and should not be used there. I am wondering if there is any way to disable Asterisk's request to lock the directory. I know this may cause some loss in data, but for the volume voicemail receives, it should be rare enough that would make this approach an option. There is not. Use a real filesystem that supports file locking (or really, file linking, which is how the locking is implemented) procedures. -- Tilghman ___ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users ___ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users ___ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users ___ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Voicemail and remote directory with SSHFS
Hello! Thanks...I set up a Samba mount, which works ok, except that Asterisk confuses a wave file as a wav49 file. I think it may have something do with the way Samba supports case sensitivity. Since Windows is not very aggressive when it comes to being case sensitive, I am thinking that Samba is saving files with the last three characters, wav, as uppercase, WAV. What is the procedure to ensure all the files are saved as is in Samba? Thanks, Elliot On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 5:12 PM, Tilghman Lesher tilgh...@mail.jeffandtilghman.com wrote: On Thursday 14 May 2009 08:14:17 Elliot Murdock wrote: The problem is a file locking problem that Asterisk needs to make changes to the directory. I was initially shying away from NFS and Samba, because I prefer to avoid any sort of security issues with only remotely mounting one or two directories. NFS and Samba are designed for larger applications, which makes those types of technology worthwhile. No, they're both designed as filesystems, which makes typical things like locking possible. SSH is designed as a communications medium, and someone has hacked filesystem support on top of it (poorly, apparently). SSHFS was never designed to be used in server production environments and should not be used there. I am wondering if there is any way to disable Asterisk's request to lock the directory. I know this may cause some loss in data, but for the volume voicemail receives, it should be rare enough that would make this approach an option. There is not. Use a real filesystem that supports file locking (or really, file linking, which is how the locking is implemented) procedures. -- Tilghman ___ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users ___ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Voicemail and remote directory with SSHFS
Not that I;m exactly a big fan of NFS but... why would you choose to implement a filesystem that was designed to emulate Windows shares for your UNIX-type environment? You have to kind of expect odd problems like this when you choose to use things for other than their intended purpose. Samba I would say is probably alot more focused on providing storage shares for Windows desktop clients, not for UNIX-type clients. Sure there is some support to do what you want, but just keep in mind that similiar to using sshfs like you were trying before, Samba, was really not designed to be used by UNIX clients. You've already found the most obvious reason... case sensative filenames - which Windows does not support, and UNIX programs expect filesystems on your UNIX machine *will* support it. That seems kind of like me deciding to use ntfs on a local partition on linux box instead of ext3/4, jfs, reiserfs, etc. -- Matt On Thu, May 21, 2009 at 5:06 AM, Elliot Murdock murdo...@gmail.com wrote: Hello! Thanks...I set up a Samba mount, which works ok, except that Asterisk confuses a wave file as a wav49 file. I think it may have something do with the way Samba supports case sensitivity. Since Windows is not very aggressive when it comes to being case sensitive, I am thinking that Samba is saving files with the last three characters, wav, as uppercase, WAV. What is the procedure to ensure all the files are saved as is in Samba? Thanks, Elliot On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 5:12 PM, Tilghman Lesher tilgh...@mail.jeffandtilghman.com wrote: On Thursday 14 May 2009 08:14:17 Elliot Murdock wrote: The problem is a file locking problem that Asterisk needs to make changes to the directory. I was initially shying away from NFS and Samba, because I prefer to avoid any sort of security issues with only remotely mounting one or two directories. NFS and Samba are designed for larger applications, which makes those types of technology worthwhile. No, they're both designed as filesystems, which makes typical things like locking possible. SSH is designed as a communications medium, and someone has hacked filesystem support on top of it (poorly, apparently). SSHFS was never designed to be used in server production environments and should not be used there. I am wondering if there is any way to disable Asterisk's request to lock the directory. I know this may cause some loss in data, but for the volume voicemail receives, it should be rare enough that would make this approach an option. There is not. Use a real filesystem that supports file locking (or really, file linking, which is how the locking is implemented) procedures. -- Tilghman ___ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users ___ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users ___ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Voicemail and remote directory with SSHFS
Hello! The problem is a file locking problem that Asterisk needs to make changes to the directory. I was initially shying away from NFS and Samba, because I prefer to avoid any sort of security issues with only remotely mounting one or two directories. NFS and Samba are designed for larger applications, which makes those types of technology worthwhile. I am wondering if there is any way to disable Asterisk's request to lock the directory. I know this may cause some loss in data, but for the volume voicemail receives, it should be rare enough that would make this approach an option. Thanks, Elliot On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 8:40 PM, David Gibbons d...@videon-central.comwrote: Tunnel samba or nfs through ssh, rather than using sshfs, then mount using once of those more ubiquitous standards. -Dave *From:* asterisk-users-boun...@lists.digium.com [mailto: asterisk-users-boun...@lists.digium.com] *On Behalf Of *Elliot Murdock *Sent:* Wednesday, May 13, 2009 1:09 PM *To:* Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion *Subject:* [asterisk-users] Voicemail and remote directory with SSHFS Hello! I am trying to mount a remote directory for voicemail using sshfs. However, whenever Asterisk attempts to write the file, it fails, because SSHFS cannot lock the directory. Is there a solution to this problem or an alternative method for using a remote directory for voicemail? Thanks, Elliot ___ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users ___ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Voicemail and remote directory with SSHFS
On Thursday 14 May 2009 08:14:17 Elliot Murdock wrote: The problem is a file locking problem that Asterisk needs to make changes to the directory. I was initially shying away from NFS and Samba, because I prefer to avoid any sort of security issues with only remotely mounting one or two directories. NFS and Samba are designed for larger applications, which makes those types of technology worthwhile. No, they're both designed as filesystems, which makes typical things like locking possible. SSH is designed as a communications medium, and someone has hacked filesystem support on top of it (poorly, apparently). SSHFS was never designed to be used in server production environments and should not be used there. I am wondering if there is any way to disable Asterisk's request to lock the directory. I know this may cause some loss in data, but for the volume voicemail receives, it should be rare enough that would make this approach an option. There is not. Use a real filesystem that supports file locking (or really, file linking, which is how the locking is implemented) procedures. -- Tilghman ___ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
[asterisk-users] Voicemail and remote directory with SSHFS
Hello! I am trying to mount a remote directory for voicemail using sshfs. However, whenever Asterisk attempts to write the file, it fails, because SSHFS cannot lock the directory. Is there a solution to this problem or an alternative method for using a remote directory for voicemail? Thanks, Elliot ___ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Voicemail and remote directory with SSHFS
Probably a permissions problem. Check out this article http://ubuntu.wordpress.com/2005/10/28/how-to-mount-a-remote-ssh-filesystem- using-sshfs/ _ From: asterisk-users-boun...@lists.digium.com [mailto:asterisk-users-boun...@lists.digium.com] On Behalf Of Elliot Murdock Sent: Wednesday, May 13, 2009 12:09 PM To: Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion Subject: [asterisk-users] Voicemail and remote directory with SSHFS Hello! I am trying to mount a remote directory for voicemail using sshfs. However, whenever Asterisk attempts to write the file, it fails, because SSHFS cannot lock the directory. Is there a solution to this problem or an alternative method for using a remote directory for voicemail? Thanks, Elliot ___ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Voicemail and remote directory with SSHFS
Tunnel samba or nfs through ssh, rather than using sshfs, then mount using once of those more ubiquitous standards. -Dave From: asterisk-users-boun...@lists.digium.com [mailto:asterisk-users-boun...@lists.digium.com] On Behalf Of Elliot Murdock Sent: Wednesday, May 13, 2009 1:09 PM To: Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion Subject: [asterisk-users] Voicemail and remote directory with SSHFS Hello! I am trying to mount a remote directory for voicemail using sshfs. However, whenever Asterisk attempts to write the file, it fails, because SSHFS cannot lock the directory. Is there a solution to this problem or an alternative method for using a remote directory for voicemail? Thanks, Elliot ___ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
