Hi everyone !

Right now I can’t decide wich one is the most versatile and fit my personal needs, so I’m looking into your personal experience with each one of them, if you mind sharing your experience.

It’s mostly for secure shared volumes containing ebooks and media storage/files on my home network. Adding some security into the mix even tough I actually don’t need it (mostly for learning process).

More precisely how difficult is the NFS configuration with kerberos? Is it actually useful? Never used kerberos and have no idea how it works, so it’s a very much new tech on my side.

I would really apreciate some indepth personal experience and why you would considere one over another !

Thank you !

  • tetris11@lemmy.ml
    10·
    7 months ago

    NFS is fantastic from a practical standpoint. You can literally specify it in your fstab to mount the network share at boot.

    The best part is, there is no latency in waiting for it to mount. It only tries to fetch data once you request a resource from that mount path. Translation: If your network device is asleep, NFS will wake it up for you and fetch the resource on demand.

    I love NFS

    • mbirth@lemmy.mbirth.ukEnglish
      4·
      7 months ago

      You can literally specify it in your fstab to mount the network share at boot.

      Uh, the same is possible with any other file system, too.

      //nas/share    /mnt/whatever    smb3    defaults,auto,username=bob,password=xxx    0   0
        • mbirth@lemmy.mbirth.ukEnglish
          2·
          7 months ago

          I’ve never noticed any issues or long delays. My Raspberrys come up either way. Might take a bit longer if the NAS isn’t accessible - but they still come up. Only without the mounted shares, of course.

          As an alternative, you could do the same using systemd.

      • IceFoxX@lemm.ee
        1·
        7 months ago

        //nas/share. /mnt/smbshared cifs defaults,auto,ver=3,credentials=/some/safe/location 0 0

        +2 systemd-network dontknowyet entries (still for fstab Mount options)

        Another way ist working with systemd/systemctl and create .mount .automount units

    • mbirth@lemmy.mbirth.ukEnglish
      3·
      7 months ago

      NFS is fantastic from a practical standpoint.

      Only if you don’t care about the NAS’es file permission management and have the same uid on all your systems mounting the same shares via NFS. Not sure if it’s different with other NAS implementations, but on my Synology DS415+ all files put on there via NFS get the UID from the source system. Which isn’t the UID of my user on the Synology.

      E.g. on my Raspberrys, my user usually is uid 1000 / gid 1000. But on my Synology, my user is uid 1026 / gid 100. So the integrated management tools (e.g. File Station) show mangled permissions as the user with uid 1000 is not known.

      And the only real solution to this is to use a Kerberos server - which I think is a bit overkill in a 1 user environment. idmap doesn’t really work on my NAS.

    • LaggyKar@programming.dev
      2·
      7 months ago

      Have they done anything about the lack of security? Last I checked, anyone could mount an NFS share and access it as whatever user they wanted, without authentication.

      • tetris11@lemmy.ml
        1·
        7 months ago

        That’s a feature! If you can access that share as rw, you should be able to do anything to it IMO. If it’s hosted read-only, then no matter what privileges you mount it with, the data is still protected

    • pastermil@sh.itjust.works
      2·
      7 months ago

      I’m so used to SMB and SSH, especially with the file manager integration. I was wondering if we have something similar with nfs.