[lkml]   [1996]   [Jul]   [20]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: Alternate solutions (Was: Re: NFS still has caching problem)

why should we follow what sun does? We wrote our own filesystem
because it is better than ufs. similarly we can still have NFS, no matter
how broken it is and move forward at the same time by creating a better
filesystem ( one that works rather than just research based; although we
can pick the minds of people that are versed in it, there were some good
concepts in the Sprite filesystem ).


On Wed, 17 Jul 1996 wrote:

> > Do we want to write a whole new filesystem from scratch or just take care
> > of some issues in NFS, for me those would be security and reliability. I
> > think that the more "noble" of the two solutions is to build a new one
> > designed right from the and implemented with security in mind,as well as
> > the replication support, and other features you listed, but do we have
> > time and resources to accomplish the "noble" solution?
> Unfortunately doing the "noble" thing means that you won't
> interoperate with anyone else in the world. If we don't interoperate,
> few people will use it. There is a better way...
> Sun Microsystems is currently working on using GSSAPI (using the
> Kerberos V5 mechanism, but that can be changed) to authenticate and
> protect (integrity and confidentiality) ONC RPC. In fact, someone
> from Sun is presenting this at the Usenix Security Symposium in San
> Jose next week.
> This new security method could then be used to protect NFS (v2 or v3).
> I think this might be the best course of action: embrace this
> technology and be the first non-Sun platform to support it! That
> would be a coup, wouldn't it?
> -derek

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:37    [W:0.148 / U:0.128 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site