Hi Folks,
This is noteworthy. I have a Windows Server 2012R2. I am using "DFS" and "Off-Line Files".
* "DFS" is "Distributed File System", which among other things "exports" the designated Windows file systems as SMB "Shares". Its goal is to "accumulate" disparate filesystems into a single filesystem, like Linux does, with the added feature of duplication/synchronization of client filesystems. In particular, Windows user "profiles" are shared as "\TCLC.org\users\Profile<username>. * "Off-line Files" syncs a client copy with the "Share" to compensate for the "Share" periodically vanishing from transient conditions or you're traveling and not "connected".
I also have a bunch of Fedora boxes. I mount my Windows user profile on "/home/cjm", which gives me everything I would see on a Windows machine.
I also have a few NASes. Parenthetically, I have an ASUStore AS3204 v2, and I can heartily recommend it. Among other features, it supports hardlinks in the filesystem, which Buffalo NASes do not, and this means rSnapshot can run on ASUStore, which is pretty good news. I also have a couple of Buffalo LinkStations, which are also acceptable, but surprisingly primitive in comparison, and not without some inconvenient bugs surrounding "ownership and permissions", however they can be hacked to expose ssh and a command line.
I mount the NASs on two paths, depending on the access I choose to grant. For root access, I mount \NAS0.TCLC.org\d0 on /net/nas0/d0, for example, and there is nothing remarkable about this. For user access, I mount the NAS in the user's filesystem: /home/<user>/net/nas0/d0, which mount point is on the Windows filesystem, and that mount point is visible from any of the Windows desktops at the same level as "Desktop", "Documents", and "Downloads".
Now, here's the point of this post: Windows Server can see that Fedora mount! It is not clear to me who is freelancing and extending their mandate -- "DFS", or "Off-line Files", but Windows server is aware that a Fedora box has mounted a filesystem on a Widows profile directory, and copies it, meaning files that should only be visible on the Fedora box are visible on the Windows desktop! This would simply be interesting and possibly beneficial, except this storage comes at a non-zero cost in space on the Windows Server 2012r2 disk, thanks to "Offline Files", or maybe "DFS" -- I don't know.
I discovered this because I am in the middle of a project to re-factor my storage, which has become unmanageable, and I was rsync'ing big file trees around, and they started to show up on my Server!
I'm not posting this as a problem for solving because I can easily work around it by simply doing my refactoring as root. No mounts within the "profile" filesystem; no volunteer files. I am posting this as an interesting observation that might be generally useful to know. Windows Server 2012r2 is spying on you! (-:
Dunno but I'm sticking with NFSv4.
On Wed, Dec 14, 2022 at 12:14 PM Chris Miller cjm@tryx.org wrote:
Hi Folks,
This is noteworthy. I have a Windows Server 2012R2. I am using "DFS" and "Off-Line Files".
- "DFS" is "Distributed File System", which among other things
"exports" the designated Windows file systems as SMB "Shares". Its goal is to "accumulate" disparate filesystems into a single filesystem, like Linux does, with the added feature of duplication/synchronization of client filesystems. In particular, Windows user "profiles" are shared as "\TCLC.org\users\Profile<username>.
- "Off-line Files" syncs a client copy with the "Share" to compensate
for the "Share" periodically vanishing from transient conditions or you're traveling and not "connected".
I also have a bunch of Fedora boxes. I mount my Windows user profile on "/home/cjm", which gives me everything I would see on a Windows machine.
I also have a few NASes. Parenthetically, I have an ASUStore AS3204 v2, and I can heartily recommend it. Among other features, it supports hardlinks in the filesystem, which Buffalo NASes do not, and this means rSnapshot can run on ASUStore, which is pretty good news. I also have a couple of Buffalo LinkStations, which are also acceptable, but surprisingly primitive in comparison, and not without some inconvenient bugs surrounding "ownership and permissions", however they can be hacked to expose ssh and a command line.
I mount the NASs on two paths, depending on the access I choose to grant. For root access, I mount \NAS0.TCLC.org\d0 on /net/nas0/d0, for example, and there is nothing remarkable about this. For user access, I mount the NAS in the user's filesystem: /home/<user>/net/nas0/d0, which mount point is on the Windows filesystem, and that mount point is visible from any of the Windows desktops at the same level as "Desktop", "Documents", and "Downloads".
Now, here's the point of this post: Windows Server can see that Fedora mount! It is not clear to me who is freelancing and extending their mandate -- "DFS", or "Off-line Files", but Windows server is aware that a Fedora box has mounted a filesystem on a Widows profile directory, and copies it, meaning files that should only be visible on the Fedora box are visible on the Windows desktop! This would simply be interesting and possibly beneficial, except this storage comes at a non-zero cost in space on the Windows Server 2012r2 disk, thanks to "Offline Files", or maybe "DFS" -- I don't know.
I discovered this because I am in the middle of a project to re-factor my storage, which has become unmanageable, and I was rsync'ing big file trees around, and they started to show up on my Server!
I'm not posting this as a problem for solving because I can easily work around it by simply doing my refactoring as root. No mounts within the "profile" filesystem; no volunteer files. I am posting this as an interesting observation that might be generally useful to know. Windows Server 2012r2 is spying on you! (-: -- Chris.
V:916.799.9461 F:916.974.0428
A: Because we read from top to bottom, left to right. Q: > Why should I start my reply below the quoted text?
Lug-nuts mailing list -- lug-nuts@bigbrie.com To unsubscribe send an email to lug-nuts-leave@bigbrie.com
Hi Linus,
Dunno but I'm sticking with NFSv4.
I'm not sure that's an option, and if it is an option, I'm pretty sure that it wouldn't be advisable. My Fedora boxes are all clients; the server is Windows Server 2012r2, and if you can replace NTFS/DFS with NFSv4, I'm pretty sure that will cause more problems than it solves.
But, if you think you understand what happened, that by all means enlighten me, because I haven't the slightest idea.
Last time I set it up it was on NT but I just checked and I think it may still be an option. looks like It's even supporting v4.1 in 2022 if I read this right. https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows-server/storage/nfs/nfs-overview As I recall and that's a real wildcard it doesn't matter what the server filesystem is, if it has an NFS driver it's a network file system and all translation, rights mappings etc. etc. is handled by the linux driver or windows MMC plug-in so everybody sees it their way. Think you can even run like 2, 3 and 4 at the same time while migrating or waiting for vendor catch-up.
On Thu, Dec 15, 2022 at 7:27 PM Chris Miller cjm@tryx.org wrote:
Hi Linus,
Dunno but I'm sticking with NFSv4.
I'm not sure that's an option, and if it is an option, I'm pretty sure that it wouldn't be advisable. My Fedora boxes are all clients; the server is Windows Server 2012r2, and if you can replace NTFS/DFS with NFSv4, I'm pretty sure that will cause more problems than it solves.
But, if you think you understand what happened, that by all means enlighten me, because I haven't the slightest idea. -- Chris.
V:916.799.9461 F:916.974.0428
A: Because we read from top to bottom, left to right. Q: > Why should I start my reply below the quoted text?
Hi Linus,
Last time I set it up it was on NT but I just checked and I think it may still be an option. looks like It's even supporting v4.1 in 2022 if I read this right. [ https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows-server/storage/nfs/nfs-overview | https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows-server/storage/nfs/nfs-overview ] As I recall and that's a real wildcard it doesn't matter what the server filesystem is, if it has an NFS driver it's a network file system and all translation, rights mappings etc. etc. is handled by the linux driver or windows MMC plug-in so everybody sees it their way. Think you can even run like 2, 3 and 4 at the same time while migrating or waiting for vendor catch-up.
Interesting ... So NFSv4 is a drop-in replacement for DFS? That would be good news. The DFS filesystem namespace aggregation works well, but I never got the replication working well; "writes" would unpredictably fail and I think I had other problems but I simply stopped using the replication feature and did daily backups instead. In my mind there is a lot of room for improvement in DFS but it never occurred to me to look for a replacement.
I don't know if DFS is the "freelancer" in my observation or the "Off-line" files is, and it is not enough of a problem for me to undertake the effort to run experiments to find out, although it sounds like I could drop NFSv4 into the role I have for DFS and not be any worse off. Or I could go take a nap.
-
Chris Miller -
Linus Sphinx