BLU Discuss list archive
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Discuss] CIFS Usage
- Subject: [Discuss] CIFS Usage
- From: richard.pieri at gmail.com (Richard Pieri)
- Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2014 17:01:22 -0500
- In-reply-to: <53024C7F.6070805@kjkelra.com>
- References: <53014282.5070908@kjkelra.com> <53015224.3090207@gmail.com> <530156C3.6030506@gmail.com> <53016BA9.3060601@kjkelra.com> <53021C81.2090601@gmail.com> <53024C7F.6070805@kjkelra.com>
jbk wrote: > Moving away would be good if I knew what pitfalls the alternatives have. Um... none? No, that's a lie. NFS access control is based on client-side UIDs, AFS access control is based on a strong authentication system, and sshfs access control is based on users not being utterly incompetent. These encompass about 98% of the problems you'll encounter. -- Rich P.
- References:
- [Discuss] CIFS Usage
- From: jbk at kjkelra.com (jbk)
- [Discuss] CIFS Usage
- From: tmetro+blu at gmail.com (Tom Metro)
- [Discuss] CIFS Usage
- From: richard.pieri at gmail.com (Richard Pieri)
- [Discuss] CIFS Usage
- From: richard.pieri at gmail.com (Richard Pieri)
- [Discuss] CIFS Usage
- From: jbk at kjkelra.com (jbk)
- [Discuss] CIFS Usage
- Prev by Date: [Discuss] CIFS Usage
- Next by Date: [Discuss] what do I do with all this junk?
- Previous by thread: [Discuss] CIFS Usage
- Next by thread: [Discuss] CIFS Usage
- Index(es):
