From: Jeff Garzik Subject: Re: A new NFSv4 server... Date: Fri, 04 Jan 2008 19:43:57 -0500 Message-ID: <477ED2CD.9010200@garzik.org> References: <200801041528.KAA18776@snowhite.cis.uoguelph.ca> <20080104172142.GD17112@fieldses.org> <477E8E1C.9090205@garzik.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Cc: linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org, nfsv4@linux-nfs.org To: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Peter_=C5strand?= Return-path: Received: from srv5.dvmed.net ([207.36.208.214]:36483 "EHLO mail.dvmed.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753332AbYAEAoA (ORCPT ); Fri, 4 Jan 2008 19:44:00 -0500 In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Peter =C5strand wrote: > On Fri, 4 Jan 2008, Jeff Garzik wrote: >=20 >>> Ditto. I think it'd be great to have a variety of client and serve= r >>> implementations available over the net, but I've had no luck talkin= g >>> anybody else into it. >> I think blanket public access wouldn't be as effective as passworded= access to >> a cluster, much like how people get accounts on kernel.org (which is= an >> excellent model for shared-interest services). >> >> On the test cluster, I would want to be able to really stress my sof= tware, >> which to any normal firewall or casual observer would look like a Do= S attempt. >=20 > I'm not afraid of stress-tests that looks like DoS attempts. What wor= ries=20 > me is that a writable export will be used for sharing warez or someth= ing=20 > like that.=20 I would think that LAN testing would have more value than WAN testing=20 anyway. So just close off the firewall, except for ssh bastion host or= =20 similar. Jeff