On Thursday, 2002-07-25 at 14:51:09 -0500, Dast wrote: > Mike Renfro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > On Thu, Jul 25, 2002 at 01:07:19PM -0500, Dast wrote: > > > So my question is, is it safer to host the NFS from the DMZ and > > > mount remotely on machines in the internal network, or host the NFS > > > from a machine on the internal network and remotely mount in the > > > DMZ? Or does it matter? > > I suppose it depends on what sort of activity you need to do over the > > NFS mount. > Thanks for the feedback. That certainly gives me something to chew > on. > The mount will be just bulk file storage. I haven't decided if the > machine in the DMZ needs read/write or just read access, however. > Everything on that mount should be publicly accessible to all users, > so in terms of one user getting another's files, that isn't an issue. If you don't have realtime requirements, you could rsync between the two machines. HTH, Lupe CHristoph -- | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://www.lupe-christoph.de/ | | I have challenged the entire ISO-9000 quality assurance team to a | | Bat-Leth contest on the holodeck. They will not concern us again. | | http://public.logica.com/~stepneys/joke/klingon.htm | -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
