+----- On Fri, 02 Oct 1998 20:07:01 CDT, writes: | The last time the subject of ACLs came up, I sent | out a message that said the following: | | I'd like to see them support all the different ACL types, Solaris, NT, | Digital Unix, Irix, etc. (at least, I think the latter two have them) | and have them all interoperate reasonably well. But that's no doubt a | big undertaking for Netapp with very little return. | | It might make more sense is to wait on a standard ACL protocol (maybe | as part of NFS v4) and then implement that and everyone will talk the | same language.
The ACL's are handled with a separate protocol which is IMHO the best way to handle them. One only needs to look at the SMB^H^H^HCIFS protocol to see the wisdom of doing it this way. The protocol is even rudimentally described in /usr/include/rpcsvc/nfs_acl.x.
| I hve reasons to believe the above statement is still an accurate | reflection of NTAP's plans. Of course, ACLs for NT were necessary, | and given the nature of the next NFS standard it may become important | for them to implement Solaris ACLs as well. It will be interesting | to see if they can make NT and NFS ACLs interoperate - if anyone can, | I'm confident it will be Netapp. :)
In the mean time it's a plus for Sun and a minus for Network Appliance. After many years of working with Auspex servers I have come to the conclusion that if you want NFS then Sun is your safest bet, if not always fastest or best performance.
/Michael