[Discuss] CIFS Usage

[richard.pieri at gmail.com (Richard Pieri)]

Tom Metro wrote:
> Before dealing with more ugly workarounds for Samba, if you're not
> required to run it, you might want to consider NFS or sshfs instead. You
> can't beat the security model for sshfs, if that matters to you, and it

I submit that the OpenAFS security model beats the sshfs security model. 
The client-side caching mechanism blows both sshfs and NFS performance 
out of the water. The convenience of having an entire cell available 
under /afs/${site} really can't be beat.

OpenAFS requires significant effort to set up and maintain whereas sshfs 
just requires sshd and some FUSE modules.

But I agree with Tom's sentiment: hacking SMB/CIFS isn't worth it 
outside of Windows shops that require SMB for whatever reasons.

-- 
Rich P.