[CALUG] NAS / SAN / external hard-drive

Rajiv Gunja opn.src.rocks at gmail.com
Sun Feb 25 00:03:09 EST 2007 

I agree with you all. Infrant or SS4000 is way better in terms of
functionality, protocol support and ease of use compared to ADS ($53 NAS).

By the way the ADS enclosure support ONLY Ext2/3 formatting of the
hard-drive. It runs a embeded Linux on it. According to their website, we
are to install Ext2IFS if we want to see/read/write to it using Windows.
This is not an issue, currently my main desktop and media reposotory is a
Linux PC (Xandros 4).

For now, I think I will go with ADS, since it is so cheap and I really need
some place to backup all my music (16 GB of English Music and 13 GB of
Indian Music, and a whole lot of Audio Books). 30 GB iPod is maxed out and I
am tired of burning DVDs every month backing up my Data/music.

Unlike other NAS this supports only smb, ftp and http. Plus, having any NAS
run a ftp server is asking for trouble. Being a security nut that I am, I
dont think my NAS is going to see any outside world anytime.

By th way, I upgraded my SMC 802.11b router to SMC 802.11n (b/g) last week.
The firewall is sweet. It has awesome controls on ports and has a good list
of gaming/appln ports already built into it, so you dont have to remember
the ports. LAN and WLAN speeds are great.

-GGR
Rajiv G Gunja


-- 


Rajiv G Gunja
System Analyst / Engg
SUN / AIX / HPUX / Linux Admin
IM: AOL / Yahoo / MSN : ggvrsn
Skype: rajiv_gunja




On 2/24/07, Matt Fisher <f1sh at verizon.net> wrote:
>
>
>
> >>(e.g. SMB/NFS) configuration errors or vulnerabilities could result
> in allowing more than originally intended.
>
> Word. I'd rather have to figure out a fixed blade knife than a
> leatherman.  Of course, that doesn't help in terms of real security (ie
> skilled bug finders) unless the nas implemented audited software.  They
> should never be accessible beyond your LAN anyhow though, and you know
> I'm a big fan of just relying on, say, an IDS or something.
>
> >>Too often us linux folk format a USB drive ...
>
> That's a good point in a very heterogenous environment. I, of course, am
> the token Windows guy and don't really have to worry about that :)
>
> >>(e.g. sending one to your parents and telling them to use it as a backup
>
> any diff than sending them an external drive ?
>
> >>My Infrant ReadyNAS (I have the X6)
>
> Yeah I checked them both out when you first clued me in on them, but
> they're too pricey for me.  Not arguing their value, just my budget.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Sean Wilkerson wrote:
> > The $53 NAS 10/100 won't allow for as fast transfer speed as a USB drive
> > enclosure (USB 2 at 440mb).
> >
> > It would be very easy to setup shares on the NAS, which you can grant
> > access to without having to give access to a machine which may or may
> > not have data you want to share.  Yes, I understand you could restrict
> > access to the directories/files you want, but once you grant access
> > (e.g. SMB/NFS) configuration errors or vulnerabilities could result in
> > allowing more than originally intended.
> >
> > They are equally as portable, imho.  Though the $53 NAS will work
> > cross-platform more easily.  Too often us linux folk format a USB drive
> > with EXT3 or reiser because it is best for us, but if the time comes we
> > need to share that with the win32 types, there are problems.  ViceVersa,
> > an NTFS drive enclosure requires slightly different access on a *NIX box
> > than an EXT3-formatted drive.
> >
> > Okay, so I guess
> > portability --> NAS
> > speed --> USB
> > Security --> NAS (from this perspective)
> >
> > Plus a $53 NAS is cool and there might be uses you never thought of yet
> > (e.g. sending one to your parents and telling them to use it as a backup
> > server.  My Infrant ReadyNAS (I have the X6) that I bought diskless 18
> > months ago, is great but was $600 for the chassis and then whatever
> > drives you put in it.  The ReadyNAS rocks, btw.
> >
> > Sean
> >
> > Matt Fisher wrote:
> >
> >> *If one already have a machine that stays on all the time, does a
> single
> >> drive NAS offer any advantage over just attaching and sharing an
> >> external  drive ?
> >>
> >> Granted, I realize 59$ isn't much more than you'd pay for a drive
> >> enclosure in the first place.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> *Rajiv Gunja wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>> Dont get me wrong, $1,700 is a lot of money, as it is the price of a
> >>> round trip air-fare to India. I was reseaching on the net and found a
> >>> lot of NAS out there, whose cost starts from $55 to $550 without
> >>> hard-drive and of course with varying protocol and services support.
> >>> The ones that caught my eye were ADS Tech (single drive, 400 GB max
> >>> NAS ), SS4000-E from Intel (4 drives, RAID 0,1,5,10 without drives),
> >>> *Infrant ReadyNAS X6 and ** Thecus N4100. Of these I really liked
> >>> SS4000-E and ADS. Since I have already spent my quota for this year
> >>> ($8000 on a visit to India for a Month and eye candy LCD monitor), I
> >>> might have to go with ADS for now. ADS is NAS with single drive and is
> >>> available for $53 from NewEgg and a seagate 320 GB @ $89 from NewEgg
> too.
> >>>
> >>> I had planned on building FreeNAS for a long time, but thinking of
> >>> another PC sitting there in an already PC cluttered desk was not
> >>> acceptable by me or my wife.
> >>>
> >>> -Rajiv G Gunja
> >>>
> >>> *
> >>> On 2/20/07, *Eldon Ziegler* <eldonz at atlanticdb.com
> >>> <mailto:eldonz at atlanticdb.com>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>     I suppose it depends on what you have in mind by cheap. I've been
> >>>     buying
> >>>     from these guys and they have a terabyte for $1,737.
> >>>
> >>>
> http://www.visionman.com/build.php?systype=12&fsb=23&ccc_pics=true&osCsid=0b802c743970522745d9bc1cc2741496
> >>>     <
> http://www.visionman.com/build.php?systype=12&fsb=23&ccc_pics=true&osCsid=0b802c743970522745d9bc1cc2741496
> >
> >>>
> >>>     On Tue, 2007-02-20 at 09:10 -0500, Rajiv Gunja wrote:
> >>>     > Anyone know of a good, yet cheap (affordable) externally
> attached
> >>>     > storage, I would love to have it as a NAS and if it is RAID-1
> >>>     capable,
> >>>     > even better. I looked into building my own NAS (OpenNAS), but
> seems
> >>>     > like the commercial ones cost almost the same as building our
> >>>     own NAS.
> >>>     > Thoughts, views, insight, comments most welcome.
> >>>     > Thanks
> >>>     >
> >>>     > -GGR
> >>>     >
> >>>     > --
> >>>     >
> >>>     >
> >>>     > Rajiv G Gunja
> >>>     > System Analyst / Engg
> >>>     > SUN / AIX / HPUX / Linux Admin
> >>>     > IM: AOL / Yahoo / MSN : ggvrsn
> >>>     > Skype: rajiv_gunja
> >>>     > _______________________________________________
> >>>     > CALUG mailing list
> >>>     > CALUG at unknownlamer.org <mailto:CALUG at unknownlamer.org>
> >>>     > http://unknownlamer.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/calug
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Rajiv G Gunja
> >>> System Analyst / Engg
> >>> SUN / AIX / HPUX / Linux Admin
> >>> IM: AOL / Yahoo / MSN : ggvrsn
> >>> Skype: rajiv_gunja
> >>>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> CALUG mailing list
> >>> CALUG at unknownlamer.org
> >>> http://unknownlamer.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/calug
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> CALUG mailing list
> >> CALUG at unknownlamer.org
> >> http://unknownlamer.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/calug
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > CALUG mailing list
> > CALUG at unknownlamer.org
> > http://unknownlamer.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/calug
> >
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> CALUG mailing list
> CALUG at unknownlamer.org
> http://unknownlamer.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/calug
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.unknownlamer.org/pipermail/calug/attachments/20070225/ed360c73/attachment.htm

More information about the CALUG mailing list