The answer you got from NetApp is part
right and part wrong. It's correct in that a filer cannot host a
DFS root. It also cannot do some of the cooler DFS features like
DFS-R (DFS Replication) with 2003 R2 systems. However, it's also
incorrect because a filer *can* participate in DFS as a target device to
which DFS links.
As an example, I can create a domain-based
DFS root and point links within that root at my filer with no problems.
IIRC - VFM doesn't replace DFS, but
acts more as a "manager" of DFS and gives you some extra features
from a management perspective, but you're still required to implement DFS
for VFM to work. It's been a while since we've looked at VFM so the
details are a bit fuzzy.
Jeff Mery - MCSE, MCP
National Instruments
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Allow me to extol the virtues of the Net Fairy, and of all the fantastic
dorks that make the nice packets go from here to there. Amen."
TB - Penny Arcade
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mike Partyka <mpartyka@acmn.com> Sent by: owner-toasters@mathworks.com
10/11/2007 09:32 AM
To
"toasters@mathworks.com" <toasters@mathworks.com>
cc
Subject
Microsoft DFS participation and Virtual
File Manager
Hello All,
I’ve seen some posts recently talking about using the filer to participate
in a DFS schema. I asked NetApp support if a filer could participate in
MS DFS and was told no, and referred to Virtual File Manager which seems
to replace the DFS schema not allow the filer to participate. What is required
from a NetApp storage perspective to participate in MS DFS? Also does anyone
have familiarity with VFM and whether if has any advantages over VFM?
Thx
--
Michael Partyka - Technical
Engineer
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Applied Communications of MN
3496 Shoreline Drive
Spring Park, MN, 55348
o. 952 .471 .8558
c. 612 .669 .8268
e.mpartyka@acmn.com