From: "L. A. Walsh" <linux-cifs@tlinx.org>
To: "Aurélien Aptel" <aaptel@suse.com>
Cc: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com>,
namjae.jeon@samsung.com, linux-cifs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: cifsd: introduce <SMB2n3> kernel server
Date: Tue, 06 Apr 2021 15:55:47 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <606CE6F3.3010701@tlinx.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87h7kj4t4c.fsf@suse.com>
On 2021/04/06 03:14, Aurélien Aptel wrote:
> "L. A. Walsh" <linux-cifs@tlinx.org> writes:
>
>> On 2021/03/18 06:12, Dan Carpenter wrote:
>>
>>> [ cifsd: introduce SMB3 kernel server"
>>>
>> Is it to be Linux policy that it will give in-kernel
>> support for only for smb3, or is it planned to move the rest of the proto
>> into the kernel as well? It sorta seems like earlier parts of the protocol,
>> still dominant on home networks, though it seems linux not supporting
>> all of linux's smb devices, from smb2.1 and before.
>>
>
> smb1 (aka cifs) is unsecure, out of support and being actively
> deprecated for over 10 years. Microsoft is uninstalling the smb1 server
> on Windows updates. That's how hard they want to kill it. Samba is
> planning to drop smb1 too eventually.
>
Dropping Smb1 support for linux-serving would seem to be a reasonable
step, since I would be hard-pressed to find a client that still
only talked Smb1 (clients from XP-era).
I am more concerned about the more secure smb2 & smb2.1 dialects.
I have heard there is a security difference even between 2 & 2.1,
though, I don't often see a breakout between 2.0(only)+2.1, with both
seeming to be lumped in under Smb2.
So lets say dropping smb1 isn't an issue...
>
>
>> Isn't the base of an smb3 server the same functions
>> of an smb2.x server with the new smb3 extensions?
>>
>
> AFAICT Namjae's ksmbd support smb2 and above.
>
---
Then would it be a problem if it is called something like
"smb2n3" so it can be readily understood to support both?
It's just a small comfort issue, since 'smb3' really doesn't
seem to be very convincing about its smb2-support.
> Cheers,
>
Likewise!
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-04-06 22:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-03-18 13:12 [bug report] cifsd: introduce SMB3 kernel server Dan Carpenter
[not found] ` <CAH2r5msOBAho=1W-eY0paj+4P1J+tuw-vFaRGg8oY50dXu6MHQ@mail.gmail.com>
2021-03-19 8:11 ` Dan Carpenter
2021-03-19 13:12 ` Christoph Hellwig
2021-03-19 15:07 ` Steve French
2021-03-19 15:21 ` Christoph Hellwig
2021-03-19 15:27 ` Steve French
2021-04-06 8:37 ` L. A. Walsh
2021-04-06 10:14 ` Aurélien Aptel
2021-04-06 22:55 ` L. A. Walsh [this message]
2021-04-06 23:32 ` cifsd: introduce <SMB2n3> " Namjae Jeon
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=606CE6F3.3010701@tlinx.org \
--to=linux-cifs@tlinx.org \
--cc=aaptel@suse.com \
--cc=dan.carpenter@oracle.com \
--cc=linux-cifs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=namjae.jeon@samsung.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).