[nycbug-talk] [Fwd: Security Threat Watch 028]
pete at nomadlogic.org
Tue May 11 17:44:13 EDT 2004
Bob Ippolito wrote:
> On May 11, 2004, at 4:50 PM, Pete Wright wrote:
>> Bob Ippolito wrote:
>>>>> If you're an OS X shop that forces everyone into using SMB,
>>>>> you're just
>>>>> making your life more difficult.
>> yea i disagree here, sorry.
> Obviously, it's hard to say that the time you've invested in making
> sure that only this more "open" protocol is supported hasn't bought
> you more than resource fork ugliness, mysterious long file transfer
> interruptions, filename handling peculiarities, and permission
> issues. Most of these things can probably be worked around, but that
> takes time that would've probably been better spent leaving things to
> AFP for an "OS X shop".
couple things then i gotta work ;) i don't rely on smb. sorry if it
came out like that. frankly i use the best tool for the job at hand.
nine times outta ten it's nfs.
now, do i run a "pure" apple shop. no, aside from home users and
apple corp. i can't think of any apple only shops. in fact i would
argue that it would be a bad thing to rely on a single technology/vendor
for anything. thank god steve figured that out and let's me mix and
match all sorts of crazy things like smb/nfs/sneaker-net(that's my
favorite)/afp to get things working.
from what i've seen working at various places in the city is that
people are using OSX on the desktop and building a cheap linux/bsd
fileservers for storage. it works, takes less than a day to implement
and everyone is happy. is it ideal? no. thank god, otherwise i'd
prolly be outta work ;^)
>>>> sure, but its also a very chatty protocol, which is enough to
>>>> steer me away from it.
>>> Are you sure you're not talking about AppleTalk, the network layer
>>> that AFP doesn't depend on or even typically use in OS X?
>> so what does OS X use now on the "network" layer?
>> here's an interesting link regarding AppleTalk and the OSI layers:
> TCP/IP / ZeroConf / Rendezvous / LDAP takes the place of AppleTalk.
which one is it by default? i'm honestly interested. i was under the
assumption that DDP("AppleTalk") was being used when i enable
"AppleTalk" in the OSX controll panel. how else would OSX clients be
able to play with OS 8/9 clients and vice-versa?
>>> Even if it *were* particularly chatty, the protocol was originally
>>> designed a long time ago. Could it even have a remotely possible
>>> chance of bogging down your 100mbit or faster ethernet?
>> yes, yes it can. it's happend to me a couple times actually.
>> i've spent far too much time trying to debug AppleTalk problems
>> during the OS8/9 days to even go back to that situation. now i'm
>> really curious tho, i'd like to see some comparisons between afp
>> over appletalk vs. non-appletalk. does it run as quickly, what
>> about the overhead etc...
> You're talking about AppleTalk again, I was talking about AFP. It's
> well known that AppleTalk is indeed chatty, but I haven't heard
> anyone ever say that same of AFP.
yea i know i was. still think it's interesting tho...
pete at nomadlogic.org
More information about the talk