You need something redhats GFS Which I believe requires the clients to be able to communicate in some form over tcp to allow "fencing" to work...software that controls multiple client access.

Most clustered FS's do require SNMP access to the fabric in order to conduct fencing.

Is SNMP more secure than NFS?

Regards, Max

The may be other too like STORnext from ADIC.

Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry

-----Original Message----- From: "Glenn Dekhayser" gdekhayser@voyantinc.com Date: Fri, 6 Apr 2007 14:55:22 To:toasters@mathworks.com Subject: Weird NFS need

So I figured I'd give the group a shot at this.

I've got a client that wants to have 2 linux-based ftp/http servers, one in the LAN and one in the DMZ, share some data. NFS would be perfect.

However-

The security group will not allow server in the DMZ to access the LAN-based Netapp through the firewall for its NFS resource. Also, I cannot put an interface from the Netapp into the DMZ.

They WILL allow it if it's encrypted.

I saw WebNFS, does Netapp support some sort of NFS over HTTPS? or SSH?

Alternatively, the client said that what would be allowed is if the two servers could share the same LUN- FC only, no iSCSI. Has anyone out there tried that before, what needs to be done on the linux side to make that happen?

Thanks

Glenn (the other one)