Brent Callaghan
brent.callaghan@Eng.Sun.com
Reading "A File System for the Web" makes me curious about your impression of CIFS, the counterpoint to WebNFS. Does it have the same limitations as WebNFS?
Jeff Tanner
jeffta@ccintnet.wrq.com
CIFS, the Common Internet File System, is a modification of Microsoft's Server Message Block (SMB) protocol that can
be used over the Internet from a Web browser. One major difference between CIFS and WebNFS is that with CIFS, both the server and client maintain state information; with NFS, only the client maintains state.
If the TCP connection supporting a CIFS session fails, then the CIFS session will likewise fail, and data may be lost. NFS RPC is independent of the TCP connection carrying it, so the TCP session can simply be reestablished with no more harm than a connection delay.
In a LAN environment, where connectionless transports are acceptable and often perform better than TCP, CIFS should be resistant to temporary network disturbances. CIFS also supports features that NFS lacks, such as network printing, streaming devices, and built-in file locking.
Internet hype aside, the big money for software vendors is in the intranet (i.e., LAN) market. Since PCs are the majority LAN client, and many already use Microsoft's SMB protocols, CIFS should do well in that area. In the Interne
t environment, WebNFS should be more robust in the face of unreliable modem connections and dynamic IP-address assignments. For more on CIFS, see
http://samba.anu.edu.au/cifs/
WebNFS at the Limit
