Date: Sun, 5 Jul 2015 09:03:09 -0700 From: Freddie Cash <fjwcash@gmail.com> To: FreeBSD Filesystems <freebsd-fs@freebsd.org> Subject: Fwd: Re: A question about ZFS built-in SMB Message-ID: <CAOjFWZ5wBisVf7kWZkhXA8_iW1TVGYS-RD5Ff2DuFLzyO8TU0g@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <CAOjFWZ5SPST7tY2CO%2B2FpR81r9vOyd1hPiOE2uG%2Bqa58LcyhGA@mail.gmail.com> References: <5599496C.6010702@sneakertech.com> <CAOjFWZ5SPST7tY2CO%2B2FpR81r9vOyd1hPiOE2uG%2Bqa58LcyhGA@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Forgot to include the list in the reply. ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: "Freddie Cash" <fjwcash@gmail.com> Date: Jul 5, 2015 8:55 AM Subject: Re: A question about ZFS built-in SMB To: "Quartz" <quartz@sneakertech.com> Cc: On Jul 5, 2015 8:13 AM, "Quartz" <quartz@sneakertech.com> wrote: > > Assuming the following: > > - A server running FreeBSD 10.1 > > - A ZFS pool with no restrictions on how it can be set up > > - Clients running Windows XP/Vista/7/8 > > - The need for a "public share" with two main directories, which we'll call 'stuff' and 'dropbox'. Anonymous guest users have read/write access to 'dropbox', and read-only access to 'stuff' as well as being restricted in which files and directories they can even see there. Admin-class users have full permissions and visibility to both directories. > > > > Is installing Samba still a requirement, or is ZFS's built-in SMB sharing complete and robust enough now to be able to handle everything natively? (Alternatively, is SMB itself even still a requirement or are there other options these days (that don't require installing software or custom configs on the clients))? SMB support is only built-in on Solaris derivatives. You need Samba on everything else.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAOjFWZ5wBisVf7kWZkhXA8_iW1TVGYS-RD5Ff2DuFLzyO8TU0g>