[nycbug-talk] network protocols: lab time?

[Pete Wright]

G. Rosamond wrote:

>
> On May 12, 2004, at 10:37 AM, Pete Wright wrote:
>
>> Bob Ippolito wrote:
>>
>>> On May 11, 2004, at 7:11 PM, Sunny Dubey wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Tuesday 11 May 2004 07:06 pm, you wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> CIFS and SMB aren't really worth talking about separately..
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I believe their implementations are not the same, or so it appears 
>>>> in the
>>>> linux kernel because each has their own kernel module from the 
>>>> samba guys
>>>>
>>>> hence why it should be tested seperately
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> We were talking about OS X, on the NYC BSD Users Group mailing 
>>> list.  I'm not sure what the implementation details of the Linux 
>>> kernel has to do with that ;)
>>
>>
>>
>> why should we limit the test to just Mac/OS X tho?  Maybe for the 
>> initial testing it would be helpful to establish a base line using 
>> Mac/OS X, but in the furture i'd think the differences between a 
>> FreeBSD box serving NFSv3 versus a FreeBSD box server netatalk could 
>> be more interesting(and cheaper for us to test ;^).  I still think we 
>> should target a OS X client tho...
>>
>>
>>
>
> We should either use multiple protocols on one OS/platform, or one 
> protocol with multiple plaforms/OS's.
>
> It seems  that the main contention is about protocols, so maybe we 
> stick to one platform/OS and test multiple protocols.
>
yea that a good point, maybe we should send an email to the apple folks 
for an Xserve/OSX server lisc. for this.
-p



-- 
~~~oO00Oo~~~
Pete Wright
pete at nomadlogic.org
www.nomadlogic.org/~pete