cifs client timeouts and hard/soft mounts

[Christopher R. Hertel]

Volker Lendecke wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 06, 2010 at 12:54:30PM -0600, Christopher R. Hertel wrote:
>> There are a lot of companies out there that do WAN acceleration and each of
>> them do things differently, so there is no good answer to your quite
>> rational question.  Some of the vendors are very focused on "just like the
>> real thing" behavior while others are willing to compromise behavior in
>> favor of acceleration.
>>
>> The best-known product in this market would be Riverbed.  BlueCoat is
>> another, I think.
> 
> Sorry, but if a WAN accelerator does not have the smarts to
> see that if a client sends smbechos, it is in trouble, then
> that WAN accelerator is just broken. It does not necessarily
> need to send these echos across the WAN link, but it must
> trigger its own server liveliness check at this point.

I agree.

That's why these companies hire me, though.  They have *no clue* when it
comes to CIFS and they run into brick walls at full speed.

When it comes down to it, though, anyone with smarts and half a clue would
avoid SMB/CIFS if at all possible.  Most of what we do with Samba and the
CIFS client is mitigate stupidity.  :)

...and we're good at it too!

Chris -)-----

-- 
"Implementing CIFS - the Common Internet FileSystem" ISBN: 013047116X
Samba Team -- http://www.samba.org/     -)-----   Christopher R. Hertel
jCIFS Team -- http://jcifs.samba.org/   -)-----   ubiqx development, uninq.
ubiqx Team -- http://www.ubiqx.org/     -)-----   crh at ubiqx.mn.org
OnLineBook -- http://ubiqx.org/cifs/    -)-----   crh at ubiqx.org