[OpenAFS] the future
Mon, 01 Oct 2012 22:09:05 -0400
This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
On 10/1/2012 12:48 AM, Troy Benjegerdes wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 30, 2012 at 11:38:10PM +0200, Lars Schimmer wrote:
>> On 30.09.2012 21:10, Troy Benjegerdes wrote:
>>> One-time deals (on linux) that require interaction will blow up all k=
>>> of automated tools and leave the rank and file admins your enemy.=20
>> Easy, user do call admins angry and stupid. And Admins change OpenAFS =
>> NFS/SMB/or anything else, which is free and easy to deploy.
>> Nearly everything is free, functional and already included.
>> Why hassle with more work, incompatible licenses and all the user supp=
> Having migrated from NFSv3 to AFS (and then OpenAFS), I'd have to say t=
> NFS may be free, but it doesn't really fall into the 'functional' categ=
> But this was several years ago, so there might have been some magic tha=
> happened with NFS I haven't seen yet.
> Can anyone who has experience migrating to/from OpenAFS from/to anythin=
> else in the last 2-3 years please comment? If there's really something =
> free, functional, and already included then I'd like to know what the=20
> heck it is.
I will remind the community of OpenEFS <http://www.openefs.org/> which
was developed specifically to permit a large financial institution to
use NFSv3 for global software distribution via a firm-wide name space.
While it is true that AFS3 provides a large amount of administrator
functionality in the box that is not present in competing products, that
doesn't prevent organizations from spending money to replicate that
functionality at a higher layer.
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc"
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (MingW32)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----