From: Martin Spott Subject: Re: nfs over TCP stable? Date: 6 May 2003 06:57:40 GMT Sender: nfs-admin@lists.sourceforge.net Message-ID: References: <3EB44527.6090005@wanadoo.es> Return-path: Received: from sundancer.oche.de ([194.94.252.29]) by sc8-sf-list1.sourceforge.net with esmtp (Exim 3.31-VA-mm2 #1 (Debian)) id 19CwnJ-0004oL-00 for ; Tue, 06 May 2003 00:23:22 -0700 Received: from foehn.quickstep.oche.de (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by foehn.quickstep.oche.de (8.12.9/8.12.8) with ESMTP id h466vj0v020555 for ; Tue, 6 May 2003 08:57:46 +0200 (CEST) Received: (from news@localhost) by foehn.quickstep.oche.de (8.12.9/8.12.8/Submit) id h466vfrQ020554 for nfs@lists.sourceforge.net; Tue, 6 May 2003 08:57:41 +0200 (CEST) To: nfs@lists.sourceforge.net Errors-To: nfs-admin@lists.sourceforge.net List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Discussion of NFS under Linux development, interoperability, and testing. List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Xose Vazquez Perez wrote: > Red Hat 9-kernel 2.4.20-9 doesn't include nfs over TCP because they > said that "it doesn't work good enough in our testing....." Linux as an NFS client against Solaris8 works excellent for me with NFS V.3 over TCP (over ATM ;-) - at least with stock 2.4.20 and 2.5.67 kernel. Solaris as an NFS server even allows for 32 k read/write - which makes the whole stuff pretty fast for large files, Martin. -- Unix _IS_ user friendly - it's just selective about who its friends are ! -------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------------- This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek Welcome to geek heaven. http://thinkgeek.com/sf _______________________________________________ NFS maillist - NFS@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nfs