From owner-freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Wed Dec 18 23:16:27 2019 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 349FA1C8EA3 for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2019 23:16:27 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from SRS0=pYOZ=2I=quip.cz=000.fbsd@elsa.codelab.cz) Received: from elsa.codelab.cz (elsa.codelab.cz [94.124.105.4]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 47dW9608Wtz3P0s for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2019 23:16:25 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from SRS0=pYOZ=2I=quip.cz=000.fbsd@elsa.codelab.cz) Received: from elsa.codelab.cz (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by elsa.codelab.cz (Postfix) with ESMTP id 617A828426; Thu, 19 Dec 2019 00:16:23 +0100 (CET) Received: from illbsd.quip.test (ip-62-24-92-232.net.upcbroadband.cz [62.24.92.232]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by elsa.codelab.cz (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 54BD02842E; Thu, 19 Dec 2019 00:12:01 +0100 (CET) Subject: Re: SMBv1 Deprecation / SMBv2 support in FreeBSD To: Matt B Cc: "freebsd-fs@freebsd.org" References: <9b556cbe-f9f3-ab15-6fcd-71397d18c126@freebsd.org> <20170623104654.07e5a3e0@ernst.home> <45b0864b-680c-8fe0-f5a5-353b6373d069@freebsd.org> <20170624045543.GY39245@kduck.kaduk.org> From: Miroslav Lachman <000.fbsd@quip.cz> Message-ID: Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2019 00:12:00 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/52.0 SeaMonkey/2.49.3 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 47dW9608Wtz3P0s X-Spamd-Bar: +++ Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=none; dmarc=none; spf=none (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of SRS0=pYOZ=2I=quip.cz=000.fbsd@elsa.codelab.cz has no SPF policy when checking 94.124.105.4) smtp.mailfrom=SRS0=pYOZ=2I=quip.cz=000.fbsd@elsa.codelab.cz X-Spamd-Result: default: False [3.98 / 15.00]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; TO_DN_EQ_ADDR_SOME(0.00)[]; RCVD_VIA_SMTP_AUTH(0.00)[]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; TO_DN_SOME(0.00)[]; IP_SCORE(0.88)[ip: (0.37), ipnet: 94.124.104.0/21(0.19), asn: 42000(3.73), country: CZ(0.09)]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; RCVD_TLS_LAST(0.00)[]; DMARC_NA(0.00)[quip.cz]; AUTH_NA(1.00)[]; NEURAL_SPAM_MEDIUM(0.91)[0.909,0]; RCVD_COUNT_THREE(0.00)[3]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_SOME(0.00)[]; RCPT_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2]; RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE(0.00)[4.105.124.94.list.dnswl.org : 127.0.10.0]; NEURAL_SPAM_LONG(0.99)[0.993,0]; R_SPF_NA(0.00)[]; FORGED_SENDER(0.30)[000.fbsd@quip.cz,SRS0=pYOZ=2I=quip.cz=000.fbsd@elsa.codelab.cz]; FREEMAIL_TO(0.00)[gmail.com]; R_DKIM_NA(0.00)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; ASN(0.00)[asn:42000, ipnet:94.124.104.0/21, country:CZ]; FROM_NEQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[000.fbsd@quip.cz,SRS0=pYOZ=2I=quip.cz=000.fbsd@elsa.codelab.cz]; MID_RHS_MATCH_FROM(0.00)[] X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2019 23:16:27 -0000 Matt B wrote on 2017/06/24 16:35: > It is about decreasing the attack surface. I certainly trust the level of > security and validation the Kerberos provides. The physical act of going > into the security gateways and opening ports is quite the menial task. The > main problem I have with the implementation is the deployment of keytabs to > the physical systems, which is a bit of a process to actually get the key > over there, then configuring idmapping in Windows, which brings another > round of issues regarding AD structure and permissions on the shares. More > ports open between the DMZ and the core is just one more negative reason > (to me) to not go forward with an NFS Kerberos deployment. Kerberos and NFS > are definitely a great combination when the configuration suites the > situation. I am looking into figuring out how to just implement SMBv2 for > BSD as I believe that is the best solution for my network architecture. I would like to resurrect this old thread from 2017-06 as I have the need to use mount_smbfs on FreeBSD but this old implementation (still) lacks support for SMB2/3. I am not a developer so I cannot do any coding work. I would like to know if somebody tried to add support for SMBv2 to FreeBSD? Is it really hard to extend it to support SMB2? Or should it be implemented from scratch? I tried to find more on this topic in mailing lists and FreeBSD forums without much success. I found that Apple open source has it. For example https://opensource.apple.com/source/smb/smb-759.40.1/kernel/smbfs/smbfs_smb_2.c.auto.html I know Apple kernel is too different but anyway - can it be ported to FreeBSD in some way? It is very sad that FreeBSD is so far behind competitors in some network service where FreeBSD was very strong in the past. CIFS/SMB2 is the only option in some heterogenous environments. Kind regards Miroslav Lachman From owner-freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Thu Dec 19 16:47:47 2019 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 07B0F1E4F62 for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2019 16:47:47 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from martin@lispworks.com) Received: from lwfs1-cam.cam.lispworks.com (mail.lispworks.com [46.17.166.21]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 47dyV92xbnz3N4G for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2019 16:47:44 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from martin@lispworks.com) Received: from higson.cam.lispworks.com (higson.cam.lispworks.com [192.168.1.7]) by lwfs1-cam.cam.lispworks.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id xBJGleFs003670; Thu, 19 Dec 2019 16:47:40 GMT (envelope-from martin@lispworks.com) Received: from higson.cam.lispworks.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by higson.cam.lispworks.com (8.14.4) id xBJGlexa028177; Thu, 19 Dec 2019 16:47:40 GMT Received: (from martin@localhost) by higson.cam.lispworks.com (8.14.4/8.14.4/Submit) id xBJGleRa028173; Thu, 19 Dec 2019 16:47:40 GMT Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2019 16:47:40 GMT Message-Id: <201912191647.xBJGleRa028173@higson.cam.lispworks.com> From: Martin Simmons To: Miroslav Lachman <000.fbsd@quip.cz> CC: theunusualmatt@gmail.com, freebsd-fs@freebsd.org In-reply-to: (message from Miroslav Lachman on Thu, 19 Dec 2019 00:12:00 +0100) Subject: Re: SMBv1 Deprecation / SMBv2 support in FreeBSD References: <9b556cbe-f9f3-ab15-6fcd-71397d18c126@freebsd.org> <20170623104654.07e5a3e0@ernst.home> <45b0864b-680c-8fe0-f5a5-353b6373d069@freebsd.org> <20170624045543.GY39245@kduck.kaduk.org> X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 47dyV92xbnz3N4G X-Spamd-Bar: / Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=none; dmarc=none; spf=none (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of martin@lispworks.com has no SPF policy when checking 46.17.166.21) smtp.mailfrom=martin@lispworks.com X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-0.68 / 15.00]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-0.93)[-0.930,0]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; RCPT_COUNT_THREE(0.00)[3]; TO_DN_SOME(0.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-0.73)[-0.734,0]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; DMARC_NA(0.00)[lispworks.com]; AUTH_NA(1.00)[]; RCVD_COUNT_THREE(0.00)[3]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_SOME(0.00)[]; RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE(0.00)[21.166.17.46.list.dnswl.org : 127.0.10.0]; R_SPF_NA(0.00)[]; RCVD_NO_TLS_LAST(0.10)[]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; R_DKIM_NA(0.00)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; ASN(0.00)[asn:51055, ipnet:46.17.166.0/24, country:GB]; FREEMAIL_CC(0.00)[gmail.com]; IP_SCORE(-0.02)[country: GB(-0.08)] X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2019 16:47:47 -0000 >>>>> On Thu, 19 Dec 2019 00:12:00 +0100, Miroslav Lachman said: > > I would like to resurrect this old thread from 2017-06 as I have the > need to use mount_smbfs on FreeBSD but this old implementation (still) > lacks support for SMB2/3. > > I am not a developer so I cannot do any coding work. I would like to > know if somebody tried to add support for SMBv2 to FreeBSD? Is it really > hard to extend it to support SMB2? Or should it be implemented from scratch? > I tried to find more on this topic in mailing lists and FreeBSD forums > without much success. I found that Apple open source has it. For example > https://opensource.apple.com/source/smb/smb-759.40.1/kernel/smbfs/smbfs_smb_2.c.auto.html > I know Apple kernel is too different but anyway - can it be ported to > FreeBSD in some way? > > It is very sad that FreeBSD is so far behind competitors in some network > service where FreeBSD was very strong in the past. > > CIFS/SMB2 is the only option in some heterogenous environments. Have you tried using sysutils/fusefs-smbnetfs? I don't know how fast it is, but I think FreeBSD's FUSE has improved since that thread started. __Martin From owner-freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Thu Dec 19 18:40:48 2019 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EB3C21E781C for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2019 18:40:48 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from SRS0=/0C1=2J=quip.cz=000.fbsd@elsa.codelab.cz) Received: from elsa.codelab.cz (elsa.codelab.cz [94.124.105.4]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 47f10b5zblz3yZS for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2019 18:40:47 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from SRS0=/0C1=2J=quip.cz=000.fbsd@elsa.codelab.cz) Received: from elsa.codelab.cz (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by elsa.codelab.cz (Postfix) with ESMTP id AF0CB28416; Thu, 19 Dec 2019 19:40:44 +0100 (CET) Received: from illbsd.quip.test (ip-62-24-92-232.net.upcbroadband.cz [62.24.92.232]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by elsa.codelab.cz (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 6A9BA28428; Thu, 19 Dec 2019 19:40:43 +0100 (CET) Subject: Re: SMBv1 Deprecation / SMBv2 support in FreeBSD To: Martin Simmons Cc: theunusualmatt@gmail.com, freebsd-fs@freebsd.org References: <9b556cbe-f9f3-ab15-6fcd-71397d18c126@freebsd.org> <20170623104654.07e5a3e0@ernst.home> <45b0864b-680c-8fe0-f5a5-353b6373d069@freebsd.org> <20170624045543.GY39245@kduck.kaduk.org> <201912191647.xBJGleRa028173@higson.cam.lispworks.com> From: Miroslav Lachman <000.fbsd@quip.cz> Message-ID: Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2019 19:40:42 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/52.0 SeaMonkey/2.49.3 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <201912191647.xBJGleRa028173@higson.cam.lispworks.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 47f10b5zblz3yZS X-Spamd-Bar: +++ Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=none; dmarc=none; spf=none (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of SRS0=/0C1=2J=quip.cz=000.fbsd@elsa.codelab.cz has no SPF policy when checking 94.124.105.4) smtp.mailfrom=SRS0=/0C1=2J=quip.cz=000.fbsd@elsa.codelab.cz X-Spamd-Result: default: False [3.82 / 15.00]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; RCVD_VIA_SMTP_AUTH(0.00)[]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; RCPT_COUNT_THREE(0.00)[3]; TO_DN_SOME(0.00)[]; IP_SCORE(0.88)[ip: (0.37), ipnet: 94.124.104.0/21(0.19), asn: 42000(3.73), country: CZ(0.09)]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; RCVD_TLS_LAST(0.00)[]; DMARC_NA(0.00)[quip.cz]; AUTH_NA(1.00)[]; NEURAL_SPAM_MEDIUM(0.76)[0.759,0]; RCVD_COUNT_THREE(0.00)[3]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_SOME(0.00)[]; NEURAL_SPAM_LONG(0.99)[0.985,0]; RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE(0.00)[4.105.124.94.list.dnswl.org : 127.0.10.0]; R_SPF_NA(0.00)[]; FORGED_SENDER(0.30)[000.fbsd@quip.cz,SRS0=/0C1=2J=quip.cz=000.fbsd@elsa.codelab.cz]; R_DKIM_NA(0.00)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; ASN(0.00)[asn:42000, ipnet:94.124.104.0/21, country:CZ]; FROM_NEQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[000.fbsd@quip.cz,SRS0=/0C1=2J=quip.cz=000.fbsd@elsa.codelab.cz]; MID_RHS_MATCH_FROM(0.00)[]; FREEMAIL_CC(0.00)[gmail.com] X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2019 18:40:49 -0000 Martin Simmons wrote on 2019/12/19 17:47: >>>>>> On Thu, 19 Dec 2019 00:12:00 +0100, Miroslav Lachman said: >> >> I would like to resurrect this old thread from 2017-06 as I have the >> need to use mount_smbfs on FreeBSD but this old implementation (still) >> lacks support for SMB2/3. >> >> I am not a developer so I cannot do any coding work. I would like to >> know if somebody tried to add support for SMBv2 to FreeBSD? Is it really >> hard to extend it to support SMB2? Or should it be implemented from scratch? >> I tried to find more on this topic in mailing lists and FreeBSD forums >> without much success. I found that Apple open source has it. For example >> https://opensource.apple.com/source/smb/smb-759.40.1/kernel/smbfs/smbfs_smb_2.c.auto.html >> I know Apple kernel is too different but anyway - can it be ported to >> FreeBSD in some way? >> >> It is very sad that FreeBSD is so far behind competitors in some network >> service where FreeBSD was very strong in the past. >> >> CIFS/SMB2 is the only option in some heterogenous environments. > > Have you tried using sysutils/fusefs-smbnetfs? I don't know how fast it is, > but I think FreeBSD's FUSE has improved since that thread started. I didn't tried it because what I read about it on forums is nothing good. Slow, unstable, not suitable for mounting 30+ shares on boot from fstab. Somebody reported speed with fusefs-smbnetfs less than 1Mbps. Also I found somebody trying to use gvfs to access samba shares on headless servers but again it was something I don't want in production. It gvfs is also userspace for browsing not for permanent mounting on defined mount points. I didn't find any other alternative in ports. Kind regards Miroslav Lachman From owner-freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Thu Dec 19 20:10:20 2019 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AFDF31EA0B5 for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2019 20:10:20 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bfriesen@simple.dallas.tx.us) Received: from smtp.simplesystems.org (smtp.simplesystems.org [65.66.246.90]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 47f2zv42FWz44vM for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2019 20:10:19 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bfriesen@simple.dallas.tx.us) Received: from scrappy.simplesystems.org (scrappy.simplesystems.org [65.66.246.73]) by smtp.simplesystems.org (8.14.4+Sun/8.14.4) with ESMTP id xBJKAA2B001910; Thu, 19 Dec 2019 14:10:10 -0600 (CST) Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2019 14:10:10 -0600 (CST) From: Bob Friesenhahn X-X-Sender: bfriesen@scrappy.simplesystems.org To: Miroslav Lachman <000.fbsd@quip.cz> cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: SMBv1 Deprecation / SMBv2 support in FreeBSD In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: <9b556cbe-f9f3-ab15-6fcd-71397d18c126@freebsd.org> <20170623104654.07e5a3e0@ernst.home> <45b0864b-680c-8fe0-f5a5-353b6373d069@freebsd.org> <20170624045543.GY39245@kduck.kaduk.org> <201912191647.xBJGleRa028173@higson.cam.lispworks.com> User-Agent: Alpine 2.20 (GSO 67 2015-01-07) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.5.16 (smtp.simplesystems.org [65.66.246.90]); Thu, 19 Dec 2019 14:10:11 -0600 (CST) X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 47f2zv42FWz44vM X-Spamd-Bar: - Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=none; dmarc=none; spf=pass (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of bfriesen@simple.dallas.tx.us designates 65.66.246.90 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=bfriesen@simple.dallas.tx.us X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-1.66 / 15.00]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-0.96)[-0.961,0]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; TO_DN_SOME(0.00)[]; R_SPF_ALLOW(-0.20)[+mx]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-0.84)[-0.842,0]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; RCVD_TLS_LAST(0.00)[]; DMARC_NA(0.00)[dallas.tx.us]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_SOME(0.00)[]; RCPT_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2]; IP_SCORE(0.44)[asn: 7018(2.28), country: US(-0.05)]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; R_DKIM_NA(0.00)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; ASN(0.00)[asn:7018, ipnet:65.64.0.0/13, country:US]; RCVD_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2] X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2019 20:10:20 -0000 On Thu, 19 Dec 2019, Miroslav Lachman wrote: >> but I think FreeBSD's FUSE has improved since that thread started. > > I didn't tried it because what I read about it on forums is nothing good. > Slow, unstable, not suitable for mounting 30+ shares on boot from fstab. > Somebody reported speed with fusefs-smbnetfs less than 1Mbps. > Also I found somebody trying to use gvfs to access samba shares on headless > servers but again it was something I don't want in production. It gvfs is > also userspace for browsing not for permanent mounting on defined mount > points. Illumos has more modern SMB support in kernel. FreeBSD already uses Illumos CDDL-licensed code via zfs and perhaps experience with the zfs port would help with reusing Illumos code. I don't know if starting with the Illumos SMB CDDL-licensed code fits with the objectives of the FreeBSD project. Obviously, it would be a lot of work. Bob -- Bob Friesenhahn bfriesen@simple.dallas.tx.us, http://www.simplesystems.org/users/bfriesen/ GraphicsMagick Maintainer, http://www.GraphicsMagick.org/ Public Key, http://www.simplesystems.org/users/bfriesen/public-key.txt From owner-freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Thu Dec 19 20:26:30 2019 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3A6BE1EA8F6 for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2019 20:26:30 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from asomers@gmail.com) Received: from mail-oi1-f175.google.com (mail-oi1-f175.google.com [209.85.167.175]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "GTS CA 1O1" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 47f3LY1vVdz45g0 for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2019 20:26:28 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from asomers@gmail.com) Received: by mail-oi1-f175.google.com with SMTP id l136so3673144oig.1 for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2019 12:26:28 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=fi10kavSYvdilRQvaiZLrOvdX8VO8LpHB9+9pD9pTKE=; b=Gwce0a/ZNYXm/0ETy4ydL3tSI1K8LzrdvNuh6kMGM6+bTfmLO26cbjkzxoBAVgiE+i Snaxkcpr10qOnjjdoJ1xe7wS7mIxsdYpkugKF2GnZhVPx6RySrkxzZpAg2Jp+6Zoqt/k VRr26zVEQZvKW1k4CF8RzDYpPZ4oc17cQrhn60hYMRN9AyxngI0JvAVhbPG455pH6DzT M1iXy9FghVNfUx3ihIxH8sINL0FuRMN2BZ1bPLiHpNf4J+e41Q5hH3K5KC5J/J8hoRzA 06hNoIoL6JkJkmTxSs7JjBr2wFyQ7YAcRnGu3SxtJthMfnpanZb3rW+63rwGRPJ3RitM PlBA== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAX9udA/31Qx7lo8VndKHCnsJrLEKAOChiKbddXIacSQOhcOTnTE ifbnqbJ3H/aQ3fj2qg+vcgM6s5oMTcPSDLrTKqc= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqwmYVaJCcjt0MgygA7Sk7EgTxvZqzWZBgPkxhjkx9w4lk2aviJubHjQyrTVClbUjREvleR+fw0pcJhdAxNwZEo= X-Received: by 2002:aca:5ad4:: with SMTP id o203mr3112835oib.73.1576787187983; Thu, 19 Dec 2019 12:26:27 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <9b556cbe-f9f3-ab15-6fcd-71397d18c126@freebsd.org> <20170623104654.07e5a3e0@ernst.home> <45b0864b-680c-8fe0-f5a5-353b6373d069@freebsd.org> <20170624045543.GY39245@kduck.kaduk.org> <201912191647.xBJGleRa028173@higson.cam.lispworks.com> In-Reply-To: From: Alan Somers Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2019 13:26:16 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: SMBv1 Deprecation / SMBv2 support in FreeBSD To: Miroslav Lachman <000.fbsd@quip.cz> Cc: Martin Simmons , freebsd-fs , theunusualmatt@gmail.com X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 47f3LY1vVdz45g0 X-Spamd-Bar: -- Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=none; dmarc=none; spf=pass (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of asomers@gmail.com designates 209.85.167.175 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=asomers@gmail.com X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-2.07 / 15.00]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-1.00)[-1.000,0]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; RCPT_COUNT_THREE(0.00)[4]; R_SPF_ALLOW(-0.20)[+ip4:209.85.128.0/17]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-0.999,0]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[multipart/alternative,text/plain]; PREVIOUSLY_DELIVERED(0.00)[freebsd-fs@freebsd.org]; DMARC_NA(0.00)[freebsd.org]; TO_DN_SOME(0.00)[]; URI_COUNT_ODD(1.00)[3]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+,1:+,2:~]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_SOME(0.00)[]; RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE(0.00)[175.167.85.209.list.dnswl.org : 127.0.5.0]; IP_SCORE(-1.07)[ip: (-0.30), ipnet: 209.85.128.0/17(-3.12), asn: 15169(-1.90), country: US(-0.05)]; FORGED_SENDER(0.30)[asomers@freebsd.org,asomers@gmail.com]; RWL_MAILSPIKE_POSSIBLE(0.00)[175.167.85.209.rep.mailspike.net : 127.0.0.17]; R_DKIM_NA(0.00)[]; FREEMAIL_ENVFROM(0.00)[gmail.com]; ASN(0.00)[asn:15169, ipnet:209.85.128.0/17, country:US]; FROM_NEQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[asomers@freebsd.org,asomers@gmail.com]; RCVD_TLS_ALL(0.00)[]; RCVD_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.29 X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2019 20:26:30 -0000 On Thu, Dec 19, 2019 at 11:40 AM Miroslav Lachman <000.fbsd@quip.cz> wrote: > Martin Simmons wrote on 2019/12/19 17:47: > >>>>>> On Thu, 19 Dec 2019 00:12:00 +0100, Miroslav Lachman said: > >> > >> I would like to resurrect this old thread from 2017-06 as I have the > >> need to use mount_smbfs on FreeBSD but this old implementation (still) > >> lacks support for SMB2/3. > >> > >> I am not a developer so I cannot do any coding work. I would like to > >> know if somebody tried to add support for SMBv2 to FreeBSD? Is it really > >> hard to extend it to support SMB2? Or should it be implemented from > scratch? > >> I tried to find more on this topic in mailing lists and FreeBSD forums > >> without much success. I found that Apple open source has it. For example > >> > https://opensource.apple.com/source/smb/smb-759.40.1/kernel/smbfs/smbfs_smb_2.c.auto.html > >> I know Apple kernel is too different but anyway - can it be ported to > >> FreeBSD in some way? > >> > >> It is very sad that FreeBSD is so far behind competitors in some network > >> service where FreeBSD was very strong in the past. > >> > >> CIFS/SMB2 is the only option in some heterogenous environments. > > > > Have you tried using sysutils/fusefs-smbnetfs? I don't know how fast it > is, > > but I think FreeBSD's FUSE has improved since that thread started. > > I didn't tried it because what I read about it on forums is nothing > good. Slow, unstable, not suitable for mounting 30+ shares on boot from > fstab. Somebody reported speed with fusefs-smbnetfs less than 1Mbps. > Also I found somebody trying to use gvfs to access samba shares on > headless servers but again it was something I don't want in production. > It gvfs is also userspace for browsing not for permanent mounting on > defined mount points. > > I didn't find any other alternative in ports. > > Kind regards > Miroslav Lachman > I think you should give it a shot. I rewrote the FUSE kernel module for FreeBSD 12.1. Some of the changes, like to cacheing, could have big effects on smb performance. And cem made some changes in 2018 to the I/O size which led to big improvements in other file systems' performance, too. At the very least a benchmark would be interesting. -Alan From owner-freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Thu Dec 19 20:39:08 2019 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AE7F41EAC5B for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2019 20:39:08 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from cse.cem@gmail.com) Received: from mail-ot1-f65.google.com (mail-ot1-f65.google.com [209.85.210.65]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "GTS CA 1O1" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 47f3d7627Xz4626 for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2019 20:39:07 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from cse.cem@gmail.com) Received: by mail-ot1-f65.google.com with SMTP id c22so8733443otj.13 for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2019 12:39:07 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:reply-to :from:date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=pg4ZR7yDuiCTNfwLmKX4D0r4WazUE9FJogsJCvcNZ5Q=; b=Rw3HhNpA9FHzaGEiJH+8BQ6vM441c+fiZ/gnfk0/ZHYuUX0Z2fKIRt1aZuzFniwBHO PHUgHh402QEGGhesK9R5HXeqUAQb/OROelAfiuGQidV4WThAx5VO/KKCXCWKixgxN1jV ExLu1udaWclsFH9vxtiNrqDD4E5LYjVuCqeTQk/CllvMp1zUo2pAfbgLGIvASeboiXnA GwYTKBPbxWhW+Ei56FE7pMy7JBksLL6BomiDnP0GSmyJCe1ljrQ1Wm7qWlvBPgI82lhV suwySEN+pRGDr+0PRsaWqFJhbcgZyKSs8BDWpS8eYA+iH1cZl2pnSzP77OZVO3BLb+qH oMXQ== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAXMKMFyLWuS8/r0oAdCsJ2pncxg9XTc8TJi/xTb/jDULEEHpQy1 VP6JLdrwkN1hGQ984MyPp0RasWuI X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqxF+H3S1W/WEXTU5hZDKFbRmPxi/dFNO26oC5eKMdK6nQP7jTyBW2I/Q+8WBxl3zzrWk4egrA== X-Received: by 2002:a9d:7a88:: with SMTP id l8mr11300623otn.187.1576787946391; Thu, 19 Dec 2019 12:39:06 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-ot1-f53.google.com (mail-ot1-f53.google.com. [209.85.210.53]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id s9sm2358070oic.15.2019.12.19.12.39.05 for (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 19 Dec 2019 12:39:05 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-ot1-f53.google.com with SMTP id h9so6186153otj.11 for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2019 12:39:05 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 2002:a05:6830:1116:: with SMTP id w22mr11165069otq.216.1576787945600; Thu, 19 Dec 2019 12:39:05 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <9b556cbe-f9f3-ab15-6fcd-71397d18c126@freebsd.org> <20170623104654.07e5a3e0@ernst.home> <45b0864b-680c-8fe0-f5a5-353b6373d069@freebsd.org> <20170624045543.GY39245@kduck.kaduk.org> <201912191647.xBJGleRa028173@higson.cam.lispworks.com> In-Reply-To: Reply-To: cem@freebsd.org From: Conrad Meyer Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2019 12:38:54 -0800 X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: Message-ID: Subject: Re: SMBv1 Deprecation / SMBv2 support in FreeBSD To: Bob Friesenhahn Cc: Miroslav Lachman <000.fbsd@quip.cz>, freebsd-fs Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 47f3d7627Xz4626 X-Spamd-Bar: --- Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=none; dmarc=none; spf=pass (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of csecem@gmail.com designates 209.85.210.65 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=csecem@gmail.com X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-3.09 / 15.00]; RCVD_VIA_SMTP_AUTH(0.00)[]; HAS_REPLYTO(0.00)[cem@freebsd.org]; RWL_MAILSPIKE_GOOD(0.00)[65.210.85.209.rep.mailspike.net : 127.0.0.18]; R_SPF_ALLOW(-0.20)[+ip4:209.85.128.0/17]; REPLYTO_ADDR_EQ_FROM(0.00)[]; RCVD_COUNT_THREE(0.00)[4]; TO_DN_ALL(0.00)[]; FORGED_SENDER(0.30)[cem@freebsd.org,csecem@gmail.com]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; R_DKIM_NA(0.00)[]; FREEMAIL_ENVFROM(0.00)[gmail.com]; ASN(0.00)[asn:15169, ipnet:209.85.128.0/17, country:US]; TAGGED_FROM(0.00)[]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-1.00)[-1.000,0]; FROM_NEQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[cem@freebsd.org,csecem@gmail.com]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; RCPT_COUNT_THREE(0.00)[3]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-1.000,0]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; PREVIOUSLY_DELIVERED(0.00)[freebsd-fs@freebsd.org]; DMARC_NA(0.00)[freebsd.org]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_SOME(0.00)[]; RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE(0.00)[65.210.85.209.list.dnswl.org : 127.0.5.0]; IP_SCORE(-1.09)[ip: (-0.37), ipnet: 209.85.128.0/17(-3.12), asn: 15169(-1.90), country: US(-0.05)]; RCVD_TLS_ALL(0.00)[] X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2019 20:39:08 -0000 The apple code looks like a decent starting point if someone wants to try this in-kernel. For one, it's definitely derived from the existing FreeBSD smbfs code. SMB2 and 3 support has been added, and I didn't examine how much the vnode interface was changed. But this is suggestive that reconciling it into our tree would not be awful. One concern is the license on some portions of the new apple code is the APSL2. AIUI, and obviously IANAL, the APSL2 is somewhat similar to the file-basis copyleft property that the CDDL has. I don't know if we have any existing APSL2 code in tree, or if the foundation's lawyers would approve it. Perhaps the non-BSDL files would have to live in a sys/apsl subdirectory. That doesn't seem like a blocker for adapting Apple's smbfs implementation, but again, not a lawyer, and I haven't even skimmed the code. Best, Conrad On Thu, Dec 19, 2019 at 12:10 PM Bob Friesenhahn wrote: > > On Thu, 19 Dec 2019, Miroslav Lachman wrote: > > >> but I think FreeBSD's FUSE has improved since that thread started. > > > > I didn't tried it because what I read about it on forums is nothing good. > > Slow, unstable, not suitable for mounting 30+ shares on boot from fstab. > > Somebody reported speed with fusefs-smbnetfs less than 1Mbps. > > Also I found somebody trying to use gvfs to access samba shares on headless > > servers but again it was something I don't want in production. It gvfs is > > also userspace for browsing not for permanent mounting on defined mount > > points. > > Illumos has more modern SMB support in kernel. FreeBSD already uses > Illumos CDDL-licensed code via zfs and perhaps experience with the zfs > port would help with reusing Illumos code. I don't know if starting > with the Illumos SMB CDDL-licensed code fits with the objectives of > the FreeBSD project. Obviously, it would be a lot of work. > > Bob > -- > Bob Friesenhahn > bfriesen@simple.dallas.tx.us, http://www.simplesystems.org/users/bfriesen/ > GraphicsMagick Maintainer, http://www.GraphicsMagick.org/ > Public Key, http://www.simplesystems.org/users/bfriesen/public-key.txt > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-fs@freebsd.org mailing list > https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-fs > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-fs-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" From owner-freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Thu Dec 19 20:49:11 2019 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1C29A1EAEBF for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2019 20:49:11 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from SRS0=/0C1=2J=quip.cz=000.fbsd@elsa.codelab.cz) Received: from elsa.codelab.cz (elsa.codelab.cz [94.124.105.4]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 47f3rk6zcWz46bJ; Thu, 19 Dec 2019 20:49:10 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from SRS0=/0C1=2J=quip.cz=000.fbsd@elsa.codelab.cz) Received: from elsa.codelab.cz (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by elsa.codelab.cz (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF24728426; Thu, 19 Dec 2019 21:49:08 +0100 (CET) Received: from illbsd.quip.test (ip-62-24-92-232.net.upcbroadband.cz [62.24.92.232]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by elsa.codelab.cz (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 93EA228423; Thu, 19 Dec 2019 21:49:07 +0100 (CET) Subject: Re: SMBv1 Deprecation / SMBv2 support in FreeBSD To: Alan Somers Cc: freebsd-fs References: <9b556cbe-f9f3-ab15-6fcd-71397d18c126@freebsd.org> <20170623104654.07e5a3e0@ernst.home> <45b0864b-680c-8fe0-f5a5-353b6373d069@freebsd.org> <20170624045543.GY39245@kduck.kaduk.org> <201912191647.xBJGleRa028173@higson.cam.lispworks.com> From: Miroslav Lachman <000.fbsd@quip.cz> Message-ID: <8abe794b-90ff-d577-3b75-75a02a411712@quip.cz> Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2019 21:49:07 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/52.0 SeaMonkey/2.49.3 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 47f3rk6zcWz46bJ X-Spamd-Bar: ----- Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; none X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-6.00 / 15.00]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-1.00)[-0.999,0]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-1.000,0]; REPLY(-4.00)[] X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2019 20:49:11 -0000 Alan Somers wrote on 2019/12/19 21:26: [...] > I think you should give it a shot.  I rewrote the FUSE kernel module for > FreeBSD 12.1.  Some of the changes, like to cacheing, could have big > effects on smb performance.  And cem made some changes in 2018 to the > I/O size which led to big improvements in other file systems' > performance, too.  At the very least a benchmark would be interesting. I know you made many changes in FUSE unfortunately our production servers are on 11.3. They will be upgraded later in Q2 2020. I believe FUSE works much better now but smbnetfs is still kind of complicated to use globally from fstab instead of per user. I will try to find some 12.1 machine and try to benchmark it with smbnetfs in January. I will let you know. Kind regards Miroslav Lachman From owner-freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Thu Dec 19 22:12:44 2019 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DB39A1EC4C7 for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2019 22:12:44 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from cse.cem@gmail.com) Received: from mail-ot1-f53.google.com (mail-ot1-f53.google.com [209.85.210.53]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "GTS CA 1O1" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 47f5j75wL0z49bJ; Thu, 19 Dec 2019 22:12:43 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from cse.cem@gmail.com) Received: by mail-ot1-f53.google.com with SMTP id w1so9103842otg.3; Thu, 19 Dec 2019 14:12:43 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:reply-to :from:date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=T/Wj4zuX3Lzil5XqzMZpUEFMwMJLXydmRtqcGGFDkIQ=; b=l9bhqvGldG51cZnu7XVoCvmgdkxI7JiTrBKJNf6fRJxdq1CprTWzag7HPNzQFH4/TV GHNgp11+clZcFsBRsU732KJAkGgcTPGH37vp6yjF4gy0Bk5MfX7MMWwgpqLeHC4vyYsL w7ySrDUqo3VQQJhkS89Us8RYOudzlfh4QqmBEqCE9w1sm4rm55NaokvKL2arfumEoaUe 6qUO9oeyFnLBHnTqUVF2qA/dQiQKSjvxdtNaRhn+l8l/cR+4vSB8AhzZr01c8+a/xfgC v7Hg66SU4QhXW0HI/FfC6HdeoymSwL3RGRCaVD9U///BISzR12enL2NMi+wY8/cU+u9F +KOQ== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAVOX+TCpL9HRugzrswJL9gSpwrfnZTOCwyxyKP0wdBYBBb9Rqc4 wQ+MufIkA/sOSBrKsjzbHE/QoVfw X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqw72wYqHmtork849bX3dtvwq1VWroz6m6QzIGTp/SSQd82k7cOQf349IMvK47ZYT7tf6Wh6Nw== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6830:1248:: with SMTP id s8mr11222421otp.202.1576793562169; Thu, 19 Dec 2019 14:12:42 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-ot1-f48.google.com (mail-ot1-f48.google.com. [209.85.210.48]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id a19sm33865oto.60.2019.12.19.14.12.41 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 19 Dec 2019 14:12:41 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-ot1-f48.google.com with SMTP id p8so9071918oth.10; Thu, 19 Dec 2019 14:12:41 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 2002:a9d:7593:: with SMTP id s19mr10528265otk.219.1576793561756; Thu, 19 Dec 2019 14:12:41 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <9b556cbe-f9f3-ab15-6fcd-71397d18c126@freebsd.org> <20170623104654.07e5a3e0@ernst.home> <45b0864b-680c-8fe0-f5a5-353b6373d069@freebsd.org> <20170624045543.GY39245@kduck.kaduk.org> <201912191647.xBJGleRa028173@higson.cam.lispworks.com> <8abe794b-90ff-d577-3b75-75a02a411712@quip.cz> In-Reply-To: <8abe794b-90ff-d577-3b75-75a02a411712@quip.cz> Reply-To: cem@freebsd.org From: Conrad Meyer Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2019 14:12:30 -0800 X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: Message-ID: Subject: Re: SMBv1 Deprecation / SMBv2 support in FreeBSD To: Miroslav Lachman <000.fbsd@quip.cz> Cc: Alan Somers , freebsd-fs X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 47f5j75wL0z49bJ X-Spamd-Bar: -- Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=none; dmarc=none; spf=pass (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of csecem@gmail.com designates 209.85.210.53 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=csecem@gmail.com X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-2.22 / 15.00]; RCVD_VIA_SMTP_AUTH(0.00)[]; HAS_REPLYTO(0.00)[cem@freebsd.org]; RWL_MAILSPIKE_GOOD(0.00)[53.210.85.209.rep.mailspike.net : 127.0.0.18]; R_SPF_ALLOW(-0.20)[+ip4:209.85.128.0/17]; REPLYTO_ADDR_EQ_FROM(0.00)[]; URI_COUNT_ODD(1.00)[3]; RCVD_COUNT_THREE(0.00)[4]; TO_DN_ALL(0.00)[]; FORGED_SENDER(0.30)[cem@freebsd.org,csecem@gmail.com]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+,1:+,2:~]; R_DKIM_NA(0.00)[]; FREEMAIL_ENVFROM(0.00)[gmail.com]; ASN(0.00)[asn:15169, ipnet:209.85.128.0/17, country:US]; TAGGED_FROM(0.00)[]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-1.00)[-1.000,0]; FROM_NEQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[cem@freebsd.org,csecem@gmail.com]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; RCPT_COUNT_THREE(0.00)[3]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-0.999,0]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[multipart/alternative,text/plain]; DMARC_NA(0.00)[freebsd.org]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_SOME(0.00)[]; RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE(0.00)[53.210.85.209.list.dnswl.org : 127.0.5.0]; IP_SCORE(-1.22)[ip: (-1.03), ipnet: 209.85.128.0/17(-3.12), asn: 15169(-1.90), country: US(-0.05)]; RCVD_TLS_ALL(0.00)[] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.29 X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2019 22:12:44 -0000 Any smb2/3 port definitely isn=E2=80=99t landing in 11.3, so there=E2=80=99= s similar constraints there (in addition to being vaporware). :-) On Thu, Dec 19, 2019 at 12:49 Miroslav Lachman <000.fbsd@quip.cz> wrote: > Alan Somers wrote on 2019/12/19 21:26: > > [...] > > > I think you should give it a shot. I rewrote the FUSE kernel module fo= r > > FreeBSD 12.1. Some of the changes, like to cacheing, could have big > > effects on smb performance. And cem made some changes in 2018 to the > > I/O size which led to big improvements in other file systems' > > performance, too. At the very least a benchmark would be interesting. > > I know you made many changes in FUSE unfortunately our production > servers are on 11.3. They will be upgraded later in Q2 2020. > I believe FUSE works much better now but smbnetfs is still kind of > complicated to use globally from fstab instead of per user. > I will try to find some 12.1 machine and try to benchmark it with > smbnetfs in January. I will let you know. > > Kind regards > Miroslav Lachman > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-fs@freebsd.org mailing list > https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-fs > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-fs-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" >