Xref: utzoo comp.unix.questions:6197 comp.unix.wizards:7294 comp.arch:4026
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!cmcl2!brl-adm!brl-smoke!gwyn
From: gwyn@brl-smoke.ARPA (Doug Gwyn )
Newsgroups: comp.unix.questions,comp.unix.wizards,comp.arch
Subject: Re: RFS vs. NFS
Message-ID: <7533@brl-smoke.ARPA>
Date: 23 Mar 88 22:13:25 GMT
References: <326@ivory.SanDiego.NCR.COM> <7765@apple.Apple.Com>
Reply-To: gwyn@brl.arpa (Doug Gwyn (VLD/VMB) <gwyn>)
Organization: Ballistic Research Lab (BRL), APG, MD.
Lines: 11

In article <7765@apple.Apple.Com> jk@apple.UUCP (John Kullmann) writes:
>The key difference between NFS and RFS is:
>	Everyone wants and uses NFS and no one wants or uses RFS.

Funny, I thought the difference was that RFS is NFS done right.

NFS has a decisive marketing head start, but technically it has
several problems, the worst among them being UID mapping (yellow
pages).  I don't like the lock/stat daemons but presumably they
at least work; the UID mapping is too restrictive (confined to
a single subnet, requiring user-mode library changes, etc.).