3 ms·
That may be the first implementation of SMB that isn’t unusably slow. Every time an IT group gives me an SMB share, I beg them for SFTP access, which usually fa
by avidphantasm 3y ago
That may be the first implementation of SMB that isn’t unusably slow. Every time an IT group gives me an SMB share, I beg them for SFTP access, which usually falls on deaf ears.
- qwerty456127 3y agoEveryone I know have given up using SMB long ago. Techies use SFTP, non-techies use cloud services (including those self-hosted in companies intranets as well as Google Drive and competitors) and apps, some use WebDAV for some cases it suits Ok. And I have never seen anybody using NFS (despite it seeming quite popular according to its mentions on the web). I looked at it as it sounded interesting but gave up the Idea once I found out it does broadcats - I wanted file servers to be passive and only respond to direct requests. Regarding Microsoft - they say they are updating SMB to use QUIK for sake of eliminating the need in VPNing access to remote shares thanks to its encrypted nature (as I understood, they previously meant WebDAV to be used instead of SMB for VPNless remote file sharing). Nevertheless I doubt many people are going to find courage for exposing company file servers running Windows directly to open Internet without using a firewall and a VPN.
- folmar 3y agoIf you go to a big data center/colo/on premise server room and ask for some space usually the choice is either NFS or iSCSI. On the workstation/end-user area the choice is obviously different/wider.