[LUAU] SAMBA or NFS?

[Eric Hagen]

I agree with Doug on the recommendation of SAMBA, remember to read about
encryption of the passwords, and also take a hard look at the interface
option for SAMBA to allow it to only talk to your internal network as far
as shares go.

I would also recommend that you review any and all shares on your internal
network, given that anyone who gets into your gateway, will be able to
access them.  I would recommend sharing only one subdirectory from each
system.

Eric Hagen                  "Sometimes we get lost in the darkness, 
ehagen at Hawaii.Edu	     the dreamers learn to steer by the stars..."
			    "You fight for something because it is good.
	 				Not because it stands to succeed."

On Sun, 17 Jan 1999, Doug Stanfield wrote:

> Samba is probably best when ever Windows is part of the mix.  In order to do
> NFS you'd need NFS software to run on the win95 boxes.  Its difficult enough
> to get windows native software to run on w95.  A key consideration is that
> you keep security issues in mind, in this circumstance at least using
> tcp-wrappers on your masqeruading box.
> 
> -Doug-
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Danny [mailto:peps at Athena.Xceptions.COM]
> > Sent: Sunday, January 17, 1999 2:33 PM
> > To: luau at luau.hi.net
> > Subject: [LUAU] SAMBA or NFS?
> > 
> > 
> > whats the best solution in mounting fat32 hosts to a linux 
> > server? Here's
> > the scenario. Linux is the server and 2 win95 are hosts on 
> > ip-masq. I need
> > to give ftp access to those win boxes from the outside w/out 
> > having to ftp
> > the files from the gateway machine. which is the best way of 
> > making this
> > seemless as possible? SAMBA or NFS?
> >  
> > -danny
> > 
>