Results 1 to 3 of 3
I know that SSHFS is the way to mount the file and directory on remote server. It has many advantages such as security, convenience, fast and so on. I wonder ...
Enjoy an ad free experience by logging in. Not a member yet? Register.
| |
- 10-13-2010 #1Just Joined!
- Join Date
- Sep 2010
- Posts
- 14
Is there any alternative to SSHFS?
I know that SSHFS is the way to mount the file and directory on remote server. It has many advantages such as security, convenience, fast and so on. I wonder if there is disadvantage of SSHFS and the alternative to it? I am looking forward to your reply. Thank you.
- 10-14-2010 #2Linux Enthusiast
- Join Date
- Jan 2005
- Location
- Saint Paul, MN
- Posts
- 620
If all you want is file sharing (on an internal trusted network) you can look at Network File System (NFS), Andrew File System (AFS), Coda File System, and of course the old DECNET currently known as CIFS (see Samba).
- 10-14-2010 #3Linux Engineer
- Join Date
- Oct 2005
- Location
- Italy
- Posts
- 773
Or davfs, (s)ftpfs, .. it just depends on what you need.
For example is davfs really fast for small files and can be secured with https and even shared over different places at it is being passed through a web server. But it has no support for credentials except the ones applied by a webserver and no uid/gid information.
ftpfs works even for bigger files really fast but is not regarded secure at all.
PS: try to transfer a 4gb dvd with sshfs over a gigabit lan. you won't get the speed you would like to have.
Reply With Quote 
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
