3rd party AFP

ExtremeZIP is the way to go.
--
Matt Lee, CCA/ACMT/ACPT/ACDT
Senior IT Analyst / Desktop Architecture Team / Apple S.M.E / JAMF Casper Administrator
Fox Networks Group

Neagle who is the Sys admin dude over at Disney I think uses Linux servers with NFS shares and kerberos to get around the security issues with NFS and they apparently work great. Just something I read off his blog and off the mac enterprise list.

I'll have to check it outŠ I was mainly wondering if anyone is using the
solutions I talked about below. I know most use either Apple hardware or
ExtremeZipŠ I'd rather keep this in my realm of support since I'm an
Apple/Unix guy. It already pains me that Extensis UTS won't run on linux.

Thank you,
Ken

ExtremeZIP is just a Service FYI.

--
Matt Lee, CCA/ACMT/ACPT/ACDT
Senior IT Analyst / Desktop Architecture Team / Apple S.M.E / JAMF Casper Administrator
Fox Networks Group

I was using NetApp filers for several years, though recently left that
position - migrated all Apple hardware-hosted data off Xserve RAIDs to
NetApp. We had mostly 10.4 clients at the time, so really needed to add
ADmitMac to the mix - CIFS only, no AFP. With 10.6/10.7 there may be no need
for that anymore. NetApp supports NFS as well. The solution worked well,
except for managing ADmitMac on several hundred clients... but very reliable
if you are looking for redundant, centralized storage.

Jon

FYI ExtremeZI-P and NetApp are trying to get something going together last time I heard.

--
Matt Lee, CCA/ACMT/ACPT/ACDT
Senior IT Analyst / Desktop Architecture Team / Apple S.M.E / JAMF Casper Administrator
Fox Networks Group

Thanks, We have the IBM-Branded Netapp hereŠ this would be our ideal
solution in my opinion. We need to first determine weather we will be able
to purchase small filer appliances for our remote sites, or if the
combination of their available bandwidth and a WAN Accelerator would allow
us to host files off-site.

We were looking at WAN accelerators initially too, and ended up going with
smaller filers for remote sites. I wasn't really involved in those
discussions, but probably 4-5 remote sites and 1 central location - but all
sites are fairly close geographically. All in all, solid performance from
NetApp. Definitely a step up from several Xserve G5s with limited space!
Again, managing ADmitMac was the real headache - but it was needed on
10.4.x.

If ExtremeZ-IP and NetApp get together, that could be cool. Though 10.6 (and
10.7 I guess) work pretty well with CIFS/SMB natively. Our biggest concern
was Apple double files and sharing with Win clients.

We're using NetApp devices for a couple of distribution points. No
On 7/25/11 3:42 PM, "Matthew Lee" <Matt.Lee at fox.com> wrote:
problems to report. NetApp devices currently have no AFP support, which
may be why Matt's mentioning Group Logic and NetApp trying to get together.

We also use ExtremeZ-IP in several sites and have used it for several
years. I have nothing but praise for its ease of use, stability and
support staff.

If we already have a NetApp in a site then that's what we'd use unless we
also already have an ExtremeZ-IP server. We wouldn't put in ExtremeZ-IP
just for a distribution point.

--

William Smith
Technical Analyst
Merrill Communications LLC
(651) 632-1492

+1 for Linux, kerberos and nfs