NFS

Is it gud?
Do you use it?
What for?
What makes it better or worse than other solutions?

Attached: NFS.jpg (800x533, 23K)

Anyone?
Just wanna talk about Jewtel and Poozen I guess?
fuck Sup Forums

Attached: 9p_nfs.png (2000x768, 400K)

whats to discuss? You share files on a network with it. It's been around forever and it has some warts but generally works. Default choice if you only have to worry about unix-like clients, and don't need Samba for windows.

It's great for my usecase. My host is archlinux and shares some of its files with my windows and linux-based guests. Fast and it works.

It's good for when you want to host integral parts of your system on a network share (like a home folder or something) or if you need the highest throughput possible
Otherwise SMB shares are easier to manage. Especially if you'll be disconnecting/reconnecting frequently.

need for speed filesystem

it's the best, but it has the worst range of support.

if you need literally everything to be able to use it, ftp

most stuff, smb

least stuff but best performance, nfs

I use samba since there's always that 'one windows machine'

>Is it gud?
If you have a stable link and don't need line speed.
>Do you use it?
Yes.
>What for?
Sharing media.
>What makes it better or worse than other solutions?
Bundles with my os and just works, especially if you don't have to worry about uid mapping.
It can have you pulling your hair out if you don't have a got network link because it tries to hard to look like a real filesystem but the client is too dumb to do anything if it can't talk to the server for a moment.
Also I would like to point out that the OP is very low effort ands fails to incite discussion because of its own complete lack of noteworthiness, literally just read the man page.
There is more interesting stuff going on with Intel and and right now.

SMB3 is faster.

As pointed out in the thread, it just werks.

However, security was basically non-existent before NFSv4, which doesn't seem to be used very often and is sparsely documented. It also gave me some troubles working between BSD and Linux.

So in short, if you can be sure all your devices support it go with NFS, if not, consider smb, and if that isn't supported then FTP?

crying laughing emoji

note that neither Android or Windows support NFS.

Basically just use smb or sftp.

If you want to be able to mount it as if it were a windows drive use smb.

id love to use it but theres no way i can get my girlfriend to use a OS that supports it without nigger rigging, so smb it is.
desu the performance difference isnt really huge for my use, and beyond that in certain cases smb is actually faster if i remember right.
neat stuff though

sshfs is literally superior in every scenario

or just use sshfs, the optimal solution for 90% of mounting usecases.

Fair enough. Both are botnets.
never heard of this one. is it that good?

In my opinion NFSv3 is bad, very bad
>no real authentication
>no encryption
>no auditing
>it lives in the kernel
Let that sink in
A NETWORK FILE SYSTEM LIVES IN THE KERNEL!!!!

Once you share something the only way to control how someone on the network has access to it is by looking at their address
In my opinion this is madness

Maybe when it came out NFS was good but now it's a security nightmare
NFSv4 fixes this problems but it's munch harder to setup

In my opinion Samba is a much better solution

>Is it gud?
no
>Do you use it?
sometimes, but only with kerberos
>What for?
the fuck?
>What makes it better or worse than other solutions?
it's slow, it's shitty, has a tendency to be undebuggable and cause all kinds of weirdness in the kernel.

smb is better in almost every way other than the whole fucking samba implementation lag.

but really in 2018, probably should be using some object storage with an appropriate FUSE implementation instead.

This
Easy to setup
Provides a remote terminal
Encrypted
SSH + Samba is all you need
Maybe rsync too if you need it

it's alright, performance is bad and i've never got the reconnect options to work reliably, and a filesystem that spontaneously unmounts itself isn't something i'd use seriously

>it lives in the kernel
try it on a high-speed link and discover why cifs/nfs are good and fuse is a toy

I use NFS at home because I watch videos on my laptop which are on my home server. It took like 30 seconds to set it up and it works. Also I'm the only user in my network. Maybe one day I'll switch if others don't require a lot of manual reading either. My use case is so simple I don't want to spend a long time with it.

Not kidding. Security is better and even has a multipath system. NFS is basically something you set up in a very minimal and basic setup where you blindly trust every computer. NFSv4 kinda solves the security issue but requires GSSAPI to work and there are basically no wide accepted standards so you will end up using sec=sys anyway which is basically what v3 does.

>some object store
We are talking about a file system.

this

Maybe I'm doing something wrong but nfsv4 fails to saturate my gigabit link.

Good for static connected systems, with workarounds for mobile when using automounter. For home, better to use ssh.

It's fantastic, tunable, easy to implement, and had low overhead. Older versions (2 and below) had numerous security issues at the protocol level, but if you are on an internal trusted network, you've got no problems.

CIFS is the closest common thing to it, and by contrast it's very chatty, and not very tunable. The protocol itself was more secure earlier, but the implementations of it have been a security nightmare. The old implementations were buggy, the new ones are buggy, and vulnerabilities can literally exist for decades before being fixed, and longer before everyone has patched them.

Basically, NFS if you just need Unix clients to get the data, and aren't exposing NFS to the internet. CIFS if you absolutely need windows clients or shitty embedded systems that only speak CIFS.

Eh? How are the windows NFS clients now? Last I tried was 2012, and you still need extra packages and it was still flakey.

Most filesystems live in the kernel. Linus hates anything to do with microkernels so if you want good filesystem performance you put it in the kernel.

I use it because it's fast and can actually handle unicode file names unlike smb. Also sshfs is slow as balls.

and nfs isn't one.

it's a shitty "RPC" before CORBA was even formalized in practice.

You niggas are dumb.

- NFS is not safe. You have to trust all computers in your network.
- Unless you use v4 with GSSAPI which is needlessly complicated (requires working kerberos infrastructure). Such configuration (NFS+GSSAPI) is so exotic and you can expect shitty interoperability between different OS and implementations.

the virgin nfs vs the chad iscsi

fuse would like a word

they're not really comparable

i don't have the time for it

>note that neither Android or Windows support NFS.
By default that is, you can enable the NFS client Windows Feature which is built-in into Windows since a couple of years.