On Tuesday 09 May 2006 00:59, Robert Thurlow wrote: > Kaiwai Gardiner wrote: > > Being that SUN has a comprehensive agreement with Microsoft, and CIFS > > IIRC is an openstandard, > > CIFS? An open standard? No way. Microsoft has never managed to > publish anything complete enough for independent implementation, > and has always felt free to change the implementation in Windows > without bothering to tell anyone else. Part of the problem has > been that there hadn't been any kind of spec within Microsoft for > years, other than the code. Recent attempts to get a complete > specification (e.g. SNIA) have been driven by other vendors, not > Microsoft. For an open standard, I'd want a body to be able to > recommend changes that Microsoft would actually implement, and > that's never happened.
Ah, I must be confusing myself between an openstandard and a RFC - oh well. Worse case scenario, SUN creates a java based NFS client/server for Windows users - as for the good old business case, "why not" :-) > > there is nothing stopping SUN from implementing a kosher > > CDDL compatible version of SMB/CIFS. > > This part is true :-) And hopefully once the SES/JES is opensourced, there will be heavy integration between the SUN Directory server and thus, lets call it SUN CIFS. Matty _______________________________________________ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
