Reply To: NAS (Network-Attached Storage)

Forums Network Management Request a new feature NAS (Network-Attached Storage) Reply To: NAS (Network-Attached Storage)


Hi Fluvio,

Good job with ZS however CIFS (samba) may not be the best choice. If you are CIFS server it is nasty see 2. below, if only CIFS client (which is of limited use) — I’d rather see NFS support, at lease client support.

I suggest NFS over CIFS for a few reasons:
1. CIFS is a mess! Lots of unneeded traffic on the network – requires SMB and NMB daemon (for server) support which are really messy.
2. Configuration of CIFS is difficult for users – I fix smb.conf all the time and there are too many options.
3. Support for client is not too much trouble (e.g., mount -t cifs …) but would require cooperation with the Windows config to work well. Frankly, the only thing this brings to the party is the ability to talk to Windows filesystems. Is it worth it?
4. NFS is much simpler to implement (either as server or client) and in the network environment much more useful.

Thanks for listening,