On Mon, Oct 09, 2006 at 07:48:13PM -0700, Andy Ruhl wrote:
> On 10/9/06, Byron Servies <bservies@pacang.com> wrote:
> >I freely admit I am out of my depth, but wasn't NFSv4 designed to
> >solve a lot of these long-standing NFS problems?

The security of NFSv3 isn't that bad if you implementent all the
security related extensions (e.g. Kerberos authentification).
Unfortunately most implementations don't which is why those
extensions are required in NFSv4.

> I think NFS4 isn't the only answer though. There's AFS too, ...

I don't know AFS very well. Why was the BSD version never integrated
in e.g. NetBSD or FreeBSD? It seems to be in the Linux 2.6.18 kernel.

> ... and other variants. I don't think NFS4 should necessarily be the "next"
> networked filesystem that NetBSD uses simply because it's called NFS,

I'm not aware that NetBSD is somehow limited to support only one
network filesystem. It will support as many network filesystems
as somebody wrote the necessary code for. The reasone that NFSv[23]
is currently the prefered network filesystem is because is has the
best implementation (kernel client and server, bootloaders, etc.).
If you want to use another network filesystem write the code for
it and submit it, please.

> but I haven't really done my NFS4 homework either.

One of the nice aspects of NFSv[23] is that most operating system support
it out of the box. It is my impression that NFSv4 might get their
eventually which would make it the obvious choice.

	Kind regards

-- 
Matthias Scheler                                  http://zhadum.org.uk/