4 ms·

It's not about who implements an SMB server (it's a separate layered filesystem, smbfs, on Solaris, not ZFS itself) but about the convenience of doing only:

by 4ad 14y ago

It's not about who implements an SMB server (it's a separate layered filesystem, smbfs, on Solaris, not ZFS itself) but about the convenience of doing only: # zfs set sharesmb=on export/home and configuring access just by setting (with chmod) the Windows compatible ACLs on the ZFS filesystem itself. Authentication can also work as expected in a Windows shop. Doing all this in Samba is a PITA.

zdw 14y ago
Has anyone tried to use Samba4's Active Directory implementation with Illumos ZFS SMB support (ie, without Samba's SMB implementation) ?
- 4ad 14y ago
  No, why would they? It's not needed, a Solaris server can join a Windows Active Directory domain.
  - fragmede 14y ago
    I think zdw is asking if Samba can be the Active Directory controller while using the ZFS SMB stack.
    - zdw 14y ago
      Exactly - if it worked, it would be a solid Windows server replacement for storage focused deployments.
ibotty 14y ago
win compatible acls are incompatible to posix acls. that's hard to argue away.
- 4ad 14y ago
  ZFS has NT ACLs, not POSIX ACLs.