Dear Sun Managers,
Sorry about the unexpected delay for this summary. My original question was:
We have a network with Sun Servers (Solaris 1.1.2) and PC's running Windows
3.11/Windows NT Workstation. We are considering of changing the Lan Manager
connectivity to NFS. What are the advantages/disadvantages of installing NFS on
the client machines to connect to UNIX, or leaving SAMBA as a Lan Manager server
installed on the UNIX machines. Will there be considerable increase in speed
when transferring large amounts of data?
The replies could be summarized as follows:
1) LM Servers are installed on the server machine only, while NFS would have
to be installed on the client machines. This would complicate the administration
of the client machines.
2) SAMBA is a free LM Server that is known to work quite well. If the
problme of support is brought up by the company, then SUN have LM servers which
can be purchased (We have a problem with the company management, who state that
free support is no support).
3) Some administrators found NFS faster and more reliable than the LM
Servers. I believe this to be true, although I have not yet set up an NFS client
to be able to test both packages. I will update the summary when I will do so.
NFS handles transfer of large files better than LM, but from my point of view,
the problem really lies in the Microsoft NetBEUI protocol, which I find does not
work well over really large networks.
4) NFS does not yet support long file names, and there are problems with the
mangled 8.3 names of DOS. SAMBA is much more secure - it is the connection
itself that is authenticated, not each file operation.
-- Jean-Pierre Aquilina +---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+ | Jean-Pierre Aquilina | | Management Systems Unit Ltd. | Gattard House | | National Road | | Blata-l-Bajda HMR 02 | | Malta | | | | E-mail: Jean.Pierre.P.Aquilina@magnet.mt | | Tel: (+356) 2599 2618 | | Fax: (+356) 2599 2901 | +---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Fri Sep 28 2001 - 23:11:06 CDT