Remote login vs NIS+/NFS
From: Jason Bufford (fiat124_at_satx.rr.com)
Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 01:11:18 -0500 To: email@example.com
Solaris 8 4/01 & 12/02 on Blade 100/150s.
My WAN has 3 physically separate sites on 1 campus with MAYBE 10 users
per site. The network connecting the sites is fair, maybe T1 speed.
Currently, they are 3 separate NIS+ domains (site1.wan.com,
site2.wan.com and site3.wan.com) and users from site1 cannot login to
a terminal at site2 or site3 (or site2 users at site1 & site3, etc).
The users on this campus would like to be able to roam between the 3
sites, use only 1 login and have access to all of their files at all 3
My coworker and I proposed that we install a file server (280r) at
site1, move all of the user's files from the servers at sites 2&3 to the
file server at site1, share their files out to all of the clients at
sites 1,2&3 via automounting NFS and combine the 3 NIS+ domains into 1
(they would all be site1.wan.com). Call this scenario 1.
We have been asked to also look at allowing the users to use the Remote
Login feature from the Solaris login screen to accomplish what the users
want: user from site1 goes to site2 and uses Remote Login to connect to
a site1 box & logs in with his site1 account. With this scenario
(Scenario 2) we would not need a file server and we could maintain the
3 separate NIS+ domains.
I believe that the 1st scenario (1 file server, 1 domain) would use the
least network resources. I dont know this for sure, but it seems to me
that the NIS+/NFS traffic in Scenario 1 would be much less than the
Remote Login traffic in Scenario 2.
Is there any documentation showing how much network traffic is generated
by Remote Login via NIS+/NFS? I could use snoop to get a general feel
for the amount of traffic, but we really could use numbers or even
testimonies from other SysAdmins who have tried both.
Also, if anyone can think of a better way to implement what out users
want, please feel free to email me. I will definitely summarize.
sunmanagers mailing list