renzev@lemmy.world to linuxmemes@lemmy.worldEnglish · 1 年前You just gotta think differentlemmy.worldimagemessage-square196fedilinkarrow-up11.17K
arrow-up11.17KimageYou just gotta think differentlemmy.worldrenzev@lemmy.world to linuxmemes@lemmy.worldEnglish · 1 年前message-square196fedilink
minus-squarecmnybo@discuss.tchncs.delinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up21·1 年前SSHFS is secure and works well over the internet. If you only want to access it over the LAN, then NFS is a much better option.
minus-squareqjkxbmwvz@startrek.websitelinkfedilinkarrow-up1·1 年前For some (most?) of us, we don’t have ssh access open to the world, so everything is over a VPN. So I can just use NFS over WireGuard which afaik is fairly secure, if you trust your endpoints, and works great over the Internet.
minus-squarecmnybo@discuss.tchncs.delinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up3·1 年前I’ve never had good luck with NFS on a high latency connection. SSHFS still works fine even if the server is on the other side of the planet.
minus-squaredan@upvote.aulinkfedilinkarrow-up1·1 年前NFS should work well enough on high latency connections - it was designed back when it was fairly uncommon to connect to a server over dial-up. It’s definitely possible that SFTP is more optimized than NFS though.
SSHFS is secure and works well over the internet. If you only want to access it over the LAN, then NFS is a much better option.
For some (most?) of us, we don’t have ssh access open to the world, so everything is over a VPN. So I can just use NFS over WireGuard which afaik is fairly secure, if you trust your endpoints, and works great over the Internet.
I’ve never had good luck with NFS on a high latency connection. SSHFS still works fine even if the server is on the other side of the planet.
NFS should work well enough on high latency connections - it was designed back when it was fairly uncommon to connect to a server over dial-up.
It’s definitely possible that SFTP is more optimized than NFS though.