[Info-vax] Pathworks or one of its descendants on x86

[Stephen Hoffman]

On 2018-02-20 12:37:47 +0000, Kerry Main said:
> For something like Samba, the native file system and TCPIP stack are 
> critical components of the overall solution.

Um, can anybody name a modern general-purpose operating system that 
doesn't have both a file system and an IP network stack?  Even embedded 
operating systems all have both a file system and IP networking, though 
some might allow subsetting.

> Lets not forget that an entirely new, more modern TCPIP stack and file 
> system will also be part of the upcoming OpenVMS X86-64 equation, so 
> comparing OpenVMS Samba X86-64 performance to the past is not likely 
> much of a comparison.
> 
> New OpenVMS file system notes:
> <http://www.hp-connect.se/SIG/New_File_System_VMS_Boot%20Camp_2016.pdf>

We'll see what the IP stack and file system performance will be when it 
all arrives.   If I'm worried and in a hurry for better performance, 
I'll toss an SSD underneath it all.  Yeah, that'd require VAFS for one 
of those newfangled 30 TB SSDs due to the capacity limits inherent in 
ODS-5.

> As someone else stated, PathWorks is NT4 technology, so hardly worth 
> looking at for the future. That's the equivalent of looking at 386 or 
> 486 PC technology for hardware deployment.

PATHWORKS Server was deprecated an aeon or three ago, and it's very 
insecure.  It was replaced with Advanced Server.   Which is insecure.   
The OpenVMS Samba port is the replacement for the Advanced Server 
package, though the available Samba port for OpenVMS is an old port of 
Samba and is itself also very insecure.

All three of these are SMB / SMB1 / SMB 1.0 / CIFS-era packages, 
insecure, and none of these will pass a typical security audit, and 
newer systems will have to be reconfigured and security downgraded to 
allow connections into an SMB1 era server.

The Microsoft business manager for SMB (Ned Pyle) very strongly 
recommends against the continued use of any SMB 1.0 / CIFS-era clients 
or servers.

Current Samba is far more secure and SMB 3.1.1 (current) and with its 
own Active Directory (AD) implementation now available, though Samba 
switched from GPLv2 to GPLv3, and which usually which constrains its 
incorporation into the base system of a closed-source operating system. 
 There are alternative SMB stacks available from third-party providers.

The production release of OpenVMS for x86-64 isn't due out until ~2020, 
based on the current VSI roadmap.    I expect we'll learn more about 
this area and about the particular version(s) involved in any 
open-source ports, and more about many other areas over the next year 
or two.  This as VSI gets away from the base system and more cycles 
with the layered products and open source packages, and gets some time 
to test the performance of the various changes to OpenVMS, networking, 
and the layered products.

As a potential workaround for a requirement for a file share that's 
compatible with other operating system platforms, WebDAV might get you 
where you want, and Apache on OpenVMS does offer that capability.   NFS 
is another option, as well.

Related:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Server_Message_Block
https://medium.com/@petergombos/lm-ntlm-net-ntlmv2-oh-my-a9b235c58ed4
https://blogs.technet.microsoft.com/filecab/2016/09/16/stop-using-smb1/


-- 
Pure Personal Opinion | HoffmanLabs LLC