On Saturday 03 Oct 2009, Hugo Mills wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 03, 2009 at 11:16:39AM +0100, Rob Malpass wrote:
> > Can someone tell me please if what I'm trying to do is
> > overcomplicating things? I'm thinking of setting up some sort of
> > domain controller for the Linux part of my network i.e. to have my
> > own (and any other family member's) user area under a remote box as
> > opposed to at present where it's located on each box under /home.
> >
>
> (*) Note: Neither of these is strictly true -- NFSv4 can, I believe,
> do user-level security on shares, and I recall seeing options in Samba
> for mount-level security. However, I know little about either of those
> options.
NFSv4 is marginally more complex to set up than NFSv3 but it has a number of
advantages:
1) It's TCP based and more tunable, so it's theoretically much faster and
easier to route over a network. I've done this without a problem on my boxes
at home.
2) It does Kebreros so you can get SSH grade security: authentication,
authorisation and encryption, I must confess I've not got this to work yet.
--
Adam Trickett
Overton, HANTS, UK
I never really understood how there could be things that would
drive you insane just because you knew them until I ran into Windows.
-- anon
--
Please post to: Hampshire@mailman.lug.org.uk
Web Interface: https://mailman.lug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/hampshire
LUG URL: http://www.hantslug.org.uk
--------------------------------------------------------------
