AFS Server and Client

Tillman tillman at
Wed May 7 14:35:19 PDT 2003

On Wed, May 07, 2003 at 02:21:08PM -0400, Adam wrote:
> On Wed, 2003-05-07 at 00:21, Tillman wrote:
> > Aside from features like volume management, failover, kerberos
> > authentication, ease of client maintenance and intelligent client-side
> > caching, you mean? ;-)
> > 
> > I'd /love/ to see the OpenAFS server in the ports tree - the last
> > messages on it that I've seen on various mailing lists seem to imply
> > that it's Real Close Now.
> After reading up on AFS, I'd agree that there are many promising
> features there. However, isn't NFS3 supposed to address some of these
> shortcomings? 

You might be thinking about NFSv4 (v3 has been around for quite some
time now). It'll definitely correct some of the problems in NFS
(security and locking primarily), but like any NFS protocol it's aimed
at workgroup sized networks. It'll also come at a cost: it's stateful,
which is a change from traditional NFS.

There's also an age difference: AFS has been around a long time, and so
can be considered proven technology. Just not on FreeBSD :-)


If any man thinks he slays, and if another thinks he is slain, neither knows
the ways of truth. The Eternal in man cannot kill: the Eternal in man cannot
	Bhagavad Gita

More information about the freebsd-questions mailing list