Nicolas Williams wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 20, 2008 at 11:25:28AM -0600, Doug McCallum wrote:
>
>>> NFS supports share ACLs of a sort now in the form of host/negroup lists.
>>>
>>> Shouldn't CIFS also support such an ACL mechanism?
>>>
>>>
>> The NFS host based access control will be putback into Nevada in build 102.
>>
>
> Er, NFS has had it forever. Do you mean that CIFS will also have it in
> build 102? If so, that's really cool.
>
Sorry. I did mean NFS style host based access control on CIFS.
>
>>> I pointed out that NFS has a notion of shares and share ACLs, but I see
>>> that the notion of share ACLs for CIFS is based on Windows file ACLs, as
>>> opposed to the NFS share-ACL-as-host/netgroup-list that we have now.
>>>
>>> In NFS there's no TreeConnect-type operation, but a share-level ACL can
>>> still be applied in operations that deal with paths.
>>>
>> Correct.
>>
>
> Can we expect to see a future case adding share-level ACLs (beyond
> host-based ACLs) to the NFS server?
>
There aren't any current plans. The CIFS share-level ACLs are part of the
Microsoft specification so we need to get those added. It seems like a
reasonable
RFE for NFS to provide an alternative namespace using resource names.