Samba Shared Folders over a WAN link

[Ow Mun Heng]

On Tue, 2004-06-15 at 14:25, Alan Horn wrote:
> On Fri, 11 Jun 2004, Ow Mun Heng wrote:
> 
> >
> > https would add additional Overhead though. It's not mentioned, does
> > cavader actually mounts that as a shared drive/folder?
> 
> It's true that https would add the overhead of SSL. If you don't care 
> about your data being intercepted and read by others, don't use https. I 
> would classify that as 'A Bad Idea' however. The overhead of SSL is not 
> significant with modern CPUs, and the bandwidth percentage is not that big 
> a deal either. If you're in _exceptionally_ low bandwidth situations (e.g. 
> mobile phone/9600/14400 baud territory) then you would need to assess that 
> more closely.

true.. Well right now, using samba is also w/o encryption. I just
managed to find out how "fast" it is.

I just did a port forwarding with Compression using SSH they way satish
mentioned, and used tcptrack to measure the connection speed as I copy a
file from my local drive to the mount point

I see transfer of like 4KB/s. Now, that's bad. SCP can get me like
100+KB/s



> Cadaver is a webdav client for unix command line. It functions similarly 
> to a command line FTP client in look and feel. It doesn't mount the 
> filesystem as a shared drive/folder.
Then how does one access the file system? If it's just like FTP then
It's not gonna be v useful.

Right now, I'm on a Linux Box connecting to another LInux Samba File
server

> However, you were talking about _windows_ earlier, no ? If you're mounting 
> filesystems on a unix box there are far wider (and richer) choices 
> available to you.

There are?? I tried NFS/SMB/SSH w Samba.

If using windows, I might be able to get away using remote folders. (I think) 
Have not researched enough into it