Discussion:
NFS or SAMBA ?
Jean-François
2009-02-13 19:41:41 UTC
Permalink
Hi All,

I am mounting network drives. Would you recommand the use of NFS or
SAMBA for home use ?
For both performance and security, please advise your recommandations.

Thank you.
Regards,
J-F
johan beisser
2009-02-13 19:59:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jean-François
I am mounting network drives. Would you recommand the use of NFS or
SAMBA for home use ?
What would you be serving to? PC Boxen? MacOS X? Linux? Another
OpenBSD box?

Both protocols are appropriate for similar - but not entirely the same
- setups.
Post by Jean-François
For both performance and security, please advise your recommandations.
NFS is horribly insecure. By default it's just bad with little to no
authentication for the user outside of standard UNIX permissions. It's
fairly fast though, limited more by the capability of your network
than by the protocol itself.

Samba, while somewhat more secure than NFS, is very slow. While I
don't like it, I do use it very heavily since it's supported by all
OSs and all systems I have to interact with on the IT side of things.
Jean-François
2009-02-13 20:10:31 UTC
Permalink
Hi,

It's for sharing btw Linux / OpenBSD. Last one is server. Probably other
than Linux client one day. However for Windowd there are ways to install
NFS client.
I'm not speaking about network bandwith limitations but about the
efficiency of the protocol which sometimes might be preventing from
going fast on fast networks.
About security this is an internal network for the moment but it might
also be accessible from the net later on.

Thanks for your advises ...

J-F
Post by johan beisser
Post by Jean-François
I am mounting network drives. Would you recommand the use of NFS or
SAMBA for home use ?
What would you be serving to? PC Boxen? MacOS X? Linux? Another
OpenBSD box?
Both protocols are appropriate for similar - but not entirely the same
- setups.
Post by Jean-François
For both performance and security, please advise your recommandations.
NFS is horribly insecure. By default it's just bad with little to no
authentication for the user outside of standard UNIX permissions. It's
fairly fast though, limited more by the capability of your network
than by the protocol itself.
Samba, while somewhat more secure than NFS, is very slow. While I
don't like it, I do use it very heavily since it's supported by all
OSs and all systems I have to interact with on the IT side of things.
Duncan Patton a Campbell
2009-02-14 19:38:53 UTC
Permalink
On Fri, 13 Feb 2009 21:10:31 +0100
Post by Jean-François
Hi,
It's for sharing btw Linux / OpenBSD. Last one is server. Probably other
than Linux client one day. However for Windowd there are ways to install
NFS client.
I'm not speaking about network bandwith limitations but about the
efficiency of the protocol which sometimes might be preventing from
going fast on fast networks.
You want NFS. Samba is a good rework of a poorly designed protocol.

Dhu
Post by Jean-François
About security this is an internal network for the moment but it might
also be accessible from the net later on.
Thanks for your advises ...
johan beisser
2009-02-14 19:42:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jean-François
Hi,
It's for sharing btw Linux / OpenBSD. Last one is server. Probably other
than Linux client one day. However for Windowd there are ways to install
NFS client.
And, all of those ways suck. Sadly, to windows Samba is about the best
method there is.
Post by Jean-François
I'm not speaking about network bandwith limitations but about the
efficiency of the protocol which sometimes might be preventing from
going fast on fast networks.
NFS is a clear winner there.
Post by Jean-François
About security this is an internal network for the moment but it might
also be accessible from the net later on.
Make IPSec or other tunneling for the NFS packets your friend now, then.
Post by Jean-François
Thanks for your advises ...
sorry there's no good news.
Guillermo Bernaldo de Quiros Maraver
2009-02-13 19:57:09 UTC
Permalink
if you have a shared network between WINDOWS and OpenBSD i recommend
Samba if not, NFS ....

NFS => Insecure ....
SAMBA => Have a problems, but, it's more secure.
Post by Jean-François
Hi All,
I am mounting network drives. Would you recommand the use of NFS or
SAMBA for home use ?
For both performance and security, please advise your recommandations.
Thank you.
Regards,
J-F
Henning Brauer
2009-03-09 15:56:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by Guillermo Bernaldo de Quiros Maraver
if you have a shared network between WINDOWS and OpenBSD i recommend
Samba if not, NFS ....
NFS => Insecure ....
SAMBA => Have a problems, but, it's more secure.
that is the most ridiculous bullshit I have ever read here in some time.
--
Henning Brauer, ***@bsws.de, ***@openbsd.org
BS Web Services, http://bsws.de
Full-Service ISP - Secure Hosting, Mail and DNS Services
Dedicated Servers, Rootservers, Application Hosting - Hamburg & Amsterdam
Felipe Alfaro Solana
2009-03-09 16:06:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by Henning Brauer
Post by Guillermo Bernaldo de Quiros Maraver
if you have a shared network between WINDOWS and OpenBSD i recommend
Samba if not, NFS ....
NFS => Insecure ....
SAMBA => Have a problems, but, it's more secure.
that is the most ridiculous bullshit I have ever read here in some time.
Why do you exactly thing that is bullshit?
Jean-Francois
2009-03-13 07:10:00 UTC
Permalink
BTW this thread helped me a lot (I was the originator) and I agree that
NFS works a lot very well. Over Gigabyte network it's looking like
really a local disk behaviour.

I have still troubles copying videos because the Linux desktop
constantly loads the litle snapshot of the vid file it is transferring ,
this icon of the file that shown one of the picture of the film, and as
it does constantly update this imate while transferring it really
interferes and the flow is reduced to somewhat few m/s instead of approx
60 m/s when transferring normally.

Kind regards
J-F
Post by Felipe Alfaro Solana
Post by Henning Brauer
Post by Guillermo Bernaldo de Quiros Maraver
if you have a shared network between WINDOWS and OpenBSD i recommend
Samba if not, NFS ....
NFS => Insecure ....
SAMBA => Have a problems, but, it's more secure.
that is the most ridiculous bullshit I have ever read here in some time.
Why do you exactly thing that is bullshit?
ropers
2009-03-13 17:58:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jean-Francois
BTW this thread helped me a lot (I was the originator) and I agree that
NFS works a lot very well. Over Gigabyte network it's looking like
really a local disk behaviour.
I have still troubles copying videos because the Linux desktop
constantly loads the litle snapshot of the vid file it is transferring ,
this icon of the file that shown one of the picture of the film, and as
it does constantly update this imate while transferring it really
interferes and the flow is reduced to somewhat few m/s instead of approx
60 m/s when transferring normally.
This sounds like a problem with your Linux GUI configuration and Linux
allowing that preview generation task somehow compete with its
transfer task for access to the file (not sure why; if the preview
generation tried to temporarily lock the file it would sort of explain
things, but why would that job try to do that?). Or maybe the Linux
preview generation task is so eager to catch up with and gets so
confused by the constantly changing file that it generates such an
amount of load on the Linux system that this negatively impacts the
transfer task.

In any case, there isn't really anything OpenBSD does to cause this,
nor probably anything your OpenBSD box could do to fix this.

But in case you're using Nautilus/GNOME on your Linux box, you may
want to look at Edit -- Preferences -- Preview in Nautilus, where you
can tell it to show thumbnails for local files only, or only for files
below a certain size, or not show thumbnails at all.

regards,
--ropers

Shagbag OpenBSD
2009-03-11 19:13:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by Henning Brauer
Post by Guillermo Bernaldo de Quiros Maraver
if you have a shared network between WINDOWS and OpenBSD i recommend
Samba if not, NFS ....
NFS => Insecure ....
SAMBA => Have a problems, but, it's more secure.
that is the most ridiculous bullshit I have ever read here in some time.
--
BS Web Services, http://bsws.de
Full-Service ISP - Secure Hosting, Mail and DNS Services
Dedicated Servers, Rootservers, Application Hosting - Hamburg & Amsterdam
that is the most entertaining flame I have ever read here in some time. LOL!
I'm loving your aggression man. ^_^
Continue reading on narkive:
Loading...