Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 16 Jun 2022 13:56:19 +0000
From:      Rick Macklem <rmacklem@uoguelph.ca>
To:        Miroslav Lachman <000.fbsd@quip.cz>, David Chisnall <theraven@FreeBSD.org>, "freebsd-current@freebsd.org" <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re: Deprecating smbfs(5) and removing it before FreeBSD 14
Message-ID:  <YQBPR0101MB97421A073FFAD01BD5BB5B4BDDAC9@YQBPR0101MB9742.CANPRD01.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM>
In-Reply-To: <254a0b5e-72d9-f93e-0c49-82b50a35db41@quip.cz>
References:  <CAPyFy2CJKxMQQKwD3N=MTe-P4KodN77e3YCEh4z0Ssf9sXWEcQ@mail.gmail.com> <6f99f9bc-8831-aefe-4f73-72f50f8f347b@aetern.org> <79402464-f9e6-5f56-645e-cfd49640032e@quip.cz> <YQXPR0101MB0968A28AAE84DF855AF5125CDD8A9@YQXPR0101MB0968.CANPRD01.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM> <7db04ed9-39eb-7163-ce92-9a52c5f7d302@quip.cz> <YQXPR0101MB096856C46CC68E39E1F8EFFCDD4F9@YQXPR0101MB0968.CANPRD01.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM> <54704b99-7b89-76a4-0368-79bee391926d@quip.cz> <YQXPR0101MB09681E68BAF66F8D8160D6C2DD599@YQXPR0101MB0968.CANPRD01.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM> <bf549f03-1947-fafb-c872-e78ea28ce32a@aetern.org> <YQXPR0101MB0968BAB76CAEEB3A945512DCDD599@YQXPR0101MB0968.CANPRD01.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM> <CAMXt9NYbUn5fkmRory1ggfUMbgqJJyJz8sFqY=oqpThq5Hc_zg@mail.gmail.com> <YQXPR0101MB0968BAB98AEFF583CA68534ADD5C9@YQXPR0101MB0968.CANPRD01.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM> <489849ca-a404-fb54-81d1-d62ea18c5832@FreeBSD.org> <YQXPR0101MB09680B9CB403BC1D65D8905ADD5E9@YQXPR0101MB0968.CANPRD01.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM> <254a0b5e-72d9-f93e-0c49-82b50a35db41@quip.cz>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Miroslav Lachman <000.fbsd@quip.cz> wrote:=0A=
> On 24/01/2022 16:13, Rick Macklem wrote:=0A=
>=0A=
[...]=0A=
>=0A=
> > So, I think Mark and Yuri are correct and looking at up to date=0A=
> > Illumos sources is the next step.=0A=
> > (As I mentioned, porting the Apple sources is beyond what I am=0A=
> >   willing to attempt.)=0A=
> >=0A=
> > rick=0A=
>=0A=
> Hello Rick,=0A=
> I would like to ask you I there is some progress with porting newer=0A=
> SMBFS / CIFS version to FreeBSD? Did you find Illumos sources as a=0A=
> possibility where to start porting?=0A=
Yes. I have the stuff off Illumos-gate, which I think is pretty up-to-date=
=0A=
and I agree that it should be easier than the Apple stuff to port into=0A=
FreeBSD.  I don't think it is "straightforward" as someone involved=0A=
with Illumos said, due to the big differences in VFS/locking, but...=0A=
=0A=
Having said the above, I have not done much yet. I've been cleaning up=0A=
NFS stuff, although I am nearly done with that now.=0A=
I do plan on starting to work on it soon, but have no idea if/when I=0A=
will have something that might be useful for others.=0A=
=0A=
> We have more and more problems with current state of mount_smbfs. I=0A=
> would be really glad if "somebody" can do the heroic work of=0A=
> implementing SMBv2 in FreeBSD.=0A=
> Maybe it's time to start some fundraising for sponsoring this work?=0A=
Well, funding isn't an issue for me (I'm just a retired guy who does this=
=0A=
stuff as a hobby). However, if there is someone else who is capable of=0A=
doing it if they are funded, I have no problem with that.=0A=
I could either help them, or simply stick with working on NFS and leave=0A=
SMBv23 to them.=0A=
=0A=
Sorry, but I cannot report real progress on this as yet, rick=0A=
=0A=
Kind regards=0A=
Miroslav Lachman=0A=
=0A=
=0A=
> ________________________________________=0A=
> From: owner-freebsd-current@freebsd.org <owner-freebsd-current@freebsd.or=
g> on behalf of David Chisnall <theraven@FreeBSD.org>=0A=
> Sent: Monday, January 24, 2022 5:16 AM=0A=
> To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org=0A=
> Subject: Re: Deprecating smbfs(5) and removing it before FreeBSD 14=0A=
>=0A=
> CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the University of Guelph. =
Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and =
know the content is safe. If in doubt, forward suspicious emails to IThelp@=
uoguelph.ca=0A=
>=0A=
>=0A=
> On 22/01/2022 23:20, Rick Macklem wrote:=0A=
>> Mark Saad <nonesuch@longcount.org> wrote:=0A=
>> [stuff snipped]=0A=
>>> So I am looking at the Apple and Solaris code, provided by rick. I am n=
ot=0A=
>>> sure if the illumos code provides SMB2 support. They based the solaris=
=0A=
>>> code on Apple SMB-217.x which is from OSX 10.4 . Which I am sure=0A=
>>> predates smb2 .=0A=
>>>=0A=
>>> https://github.com/apple-oss-distributions/smb/tree/smb-217.19=0A=
>>>=0A=
>>> If I am following this correctly we need to look at Apple's smb client=
=0A=
>>> from OSX 10.9  which is where I start to see bits about smb2=0A=
>>>=0A=
>>> https://github.com/apple-oss-distributions/smb/tree/smb-697.95.1/kernel=
/netsmb=0A=
>>>=0A=
>>> This is also where this stuff starts to look less and less like FreeBSD=
 .=0A=
>>> Let me ask some of the illumos people I know to see if there is=0A=
>>> anything they can point to.=0A=
>> Yes. Please do so. I saw the "old" calls fo things like open and the=0A=
>> new ntcreate version, so I assumed that was the newer SMB.=0A=
>> If it is not, there is no reason to port it.=0A=
>>=0A=
>> The new Apple code is a monster. 10x the lines of C and a lot of=0A=
>> weird stuff that looks Apple specific.=0A=
>>=0A=
>> It might actually be easier to write SMBv2 from the spec than port=0A=
>> the Apple stuff.=0A=
>> --> I'll try and look at whatever Microsoft publishes w.r.t. SMBv2/3.=0A=
>>=0A=
>> Thanks for looking at this, rick=0A=
>=0A=
> The docs are public:=0A=
>=0A=
> https://docs.microsoft.com/en-gb/openspecs/windows_protocols/ms-smb2/5606=
ad47-5ee0-437a-817e-70c366052962=0A=
>=0A=
>=0A=
> Note that the spec is 480 pages, it is not a trivial protocol to=0A=
> implement from scratch.=0A=
>=0A=
> David=0A=
>=0A=
>=0A=
=0A=



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?YQBPR0101MB97421A073FFAD01BD5BB5B4BDDAC9>