NFS Windows/Linux

[warlord at mit.edu (Derek Atkins)]

The only problem is that SMB is completely insecure, cannot be
secured, and leaves your windows machine virtually open to attack.
NFS at least has some semblance of security, and newer versions of NFS
will even incorporate Kerberos V5 security through the GSS_RPC
security flavors.

If at all possible, I'd recommend you use NFS.  I'd recommend you
_ONLY_ use SMB behind a facist firewall.  And I __HATE__ firewalls.

-derek

mikebw at bilow.bilow.uu.ids.net (Mike Bilow) writes:

> 
> 
> 
> Glenn Burkhardt wrote in a message to Mike Bilow:
> 
> > > there are nfs servers for win 95, I think.  try FTP software and try
> > > chameleon.
> 
>  GB> Yes, there are NFS servers for Win95.  We use Xlink, which
>  GB> was the least  expensive.  I've also tried NCD's NFS server,
>  GB> which is just now out in a new edition.  
> 
>  GB> Beware - these products are not necessarily very robust. 
>  GB> Actually, I'm not sure if it's the products or Microsoft's
>  GB> TCP/IP implementation.  I've not been able to use 'tar' to
>  GB> backup an entire disk to tape with either Xlink or NCD. 
>  GB> Win95 crashes.
> 
>  GB> If you have Linux, do consider SAMBA, and mount the Win95
>  GB> disk with 'smbfs'. 
> 
>  GB> Also, I've heard that Hummingbird has the best NFS product,
>  GB> but I have no  experience with it.
> 
> I've watched a number of replies on this thread, and I really have to emphasize
> my original advice: use smbfs.
> 
> NFS is an inherently bad protocol.  It depends upon all sorts of oddball things
> that make juggling look easy.  There is no freeware NFS implementation for
> Windows that I know about, and no one has yet mentioned one.  Even if you do
> buy NFS for Windows, it will eat a lot of memory and resources on the Windows
> side where these are scarce.  In addition, every Windows client will require an
> expensive and potentially complicated and unreliable installation.
> 
> On the other hand, Linux smbfs will provide direct access to the native
> networking which comes included with Windows for Workgroups and Windows 95.  It
> puts the resource burden on the Linux side, which is better equipped to handle
> it.  It introduces far fewer complexities, especially involving security, than
> NFS.  And, of course, it is free.
>  
> -- Mike
> 
> 

-- 
       Derek Atkins, SB '93 MIT EE, SM '95 MIT Media Laboratory
       Member, MIT Student Information Processing Board  (SIPB)
       URL: http://web.mit.edu/warlord/      PP-ASEL      N1NWH
       warlord at MIT.EDU                        PGP key available