Loic Jaquemet a écrit 412 commentaires

j'ai oublier : !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! et looooooooooolloooooooooooll ;;;;)))))))))))0

bah kessketattend !!!
alle ! zou au boulot !!!!

kesski sont feignant ces developpeurs du libre ....;)))

En plus, le posteur 'evenja' . Ca m'a l'air d'etre un petit peu un coup de pub (sans rien derriere ?)

Puis le concept est pas revoluttionnaire .. cf la licence de VIM .

http://www.bridgethink.com/html/strategie.html(...)

phase 1

- Ouverture du site Internet.
[..]
Le 5 Novembre 2002 lors de la conférence ?Open Source? à Genève
- Mise à disposition du code de evenja/evendoor (uniquement l?algorythme).

Fin décembre 2002
- Premier versement à l?oeuvre humanitaire.


mdr ...
phase I ouverture du code source , m'enfin pas vraiment les sources , seulement l'algoryyythme ...

et puis quelqu'un a deja entendu parler de even* ?
je le sens pas tout ca ....
m'enfin , si ca marche , tant mieux .

muhahhahahahahha

quelqu'un sais comment ca marche ?

http://kevan.org/brain.cgi?JaL(...)
c'est fe avec du flash ou quoi ?

Mon avis est que oui c'est authoriser ..

Loic Dachary presume aussi que oui ...

Mais faut que je _telephone_ si je veux une reponse sure..

un DNS en round robin , avec un acces a la base de donnees par ip nerim et le tour et joue .

pb .. ca pue comme solution ...

Fait de la pub, ca revitalisera l'idee et donc les mainteneur ...

c'est une reponse de la DCSSI ?
Loic Dachary m'indique dans un mail , que a priori, oui c'est authorise, mais pour etre sur faut les contacter ...
vite , le telephone ...

Mes propres recherches ...

Zut je pourrais pas etre la ;(

Je note ....

C'est vraiment gros ... ;(

Moi j'ai bien aime le concept a-la-rsync de lbfs .. dommage qu'il soit pas tres avance ..

le must serai un sfs-lbfs ( qui est en cours si ma memoire ne vacille pas trop ..)

mes notes a moi :


IBM afs v 3.6 || openAfs || Arla Project
----------------------------------------
Andrew FileSytem initially developped at Carnegie Mellow University ( CMU ),
then by TransArc, then IBM.
IBM forked the developpement tree in 2000 to give birth to OpenAfs, open-source
, free and widely used (IPL licence).
Recently, the ArlA project implements Afs Protocol under GPL licence.
At this time the client-side is supported, the server-side is undergoing
heavy developpement.

* AFS supports a maximum file size of 2 GB.
* RPC based.
* AFS supports a maximum volume size of 8 GB. In AFS version 3.5 and earlier,
the limit is 2 GB. There is no limit on partition size other than the one
imposed by the operating system.
* less CPU usage than NFS 2-4 times less. definetly faster. great scalability.
* RedHat 6.x & kernel 2.2.x, likely 2.4.x as well .
* kerberos-like or kerberos-based security.
* client caching , server replication
* 'encrypted' file system & authentification...
* a fileserver can be an authserver..
* used in many Universities ... designed to support 5,000-10,000 clients.

IBM:
* NFS/AFS translator to keep volumes accessible by nono-afs client.
* underliying rcp , rsh ?
http://oss.software.ibm.com/developerworks/opensource/afs/docs/html(...)
* rsh , inetd rcp, etc... remplacement...
* tons of documentation

* Arla is a free implementation . client-side, working on server-side.

* Andrew II fs.

* Solaris client&server
* Linux Client&server


Coda
----
Coda is a project also managed in CMU. it's aim is to be "better" than Afs
in disconnected and weakly connected mode.

* from Afs2.
* RPC based.
* no compagny support ..
* security -> weak build-in or kerberos patch. weak == XOR scrambling, but
the challenge protocol is secure.
* namespace, volume-sharing, not directory.
* Coda is a forked of version of AFS that support disconnected and weakly
connected mode better then AFS.

client point of view :
* disconnected operations , caching ...
* open() means copy() - based on file replication/caching.
* small 10-200 Mo caching recommended. It seems that coda's users have
larger cache area.
* file to cache selectionnable ( hoarding ).
* kernel support needed . very little patch, user-land application ( Venus ).
* on update conflicts, user might need to resolve it manually..

server pov:
* replication
* consistency & transactions

* DFS sysadm seems to prefers Coda to Afs.
* Coda seems not to be scalable :
The documentation says the RVM metadata needs to be 4% of the total
shared size and it needs to be backed by virtual memory for that same
quantity.

* Linux client&server
* Solaris client , no server


Ficus, Rumor & ROAR
-------------------
* designed at UCLA for large scale DFS.
* peer-to-peer structure.
* optimistic consistency approach.
* intelligent resolvation of update conflicts.
* Rumor user-space implementation is beta stage.
* intelligent hoarding.
* Really accurate for mobile and disconnected DFS.

Sistina GFS 5.1
---------------
* used for cluster's filesystem on fast LAN.
* not useable on WAN networks.

DAFS ( www.dafscollaborative.org )
----
* file sharing on SAN . Not for WAN .

Sprite fs, part of SpriteOS
---------------------------
* no caching on write-shared files.
* spritely NFS ?
* less CPU-eater than NFS.
* superseeded by afs.

xFS - A Wide Area Mass Storage File System
------------------------------------------
* wwwos93.ps
* multi hierarchical & caching
* -> IBM XFS ? no network issue and LAN-applicated.

Amoeba
-------
* Amoeba is a DOS, so there is a DFS in it..
* micro-kernel and stuff..

Odyssey
-------
* application-aware.
* need the application to be compliant.


SFS @ sfs.net
---
* secure, encrypted...
* basicaly , it's a encrypted NFS.
* relies on nfsv3.
* easy to install.
* a lack of pam modules ?

SFS @ http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~pgut001/sfs/(...)
---
* secure, encrypted...
* windows & Dos

Lustre
---------
* Another LAN-cluster dfs.


LBFS - A Low-bandwidth Network File System
--------------------------------------------
* Whole file Caching
* NFS-like protocol. Over-NFS implementation.
* Chunk SHA-1 calculation and comparaison.
* Very _LOW_ bandwith utilisation.
* SFS encryption support
* Not for disconnected operations.
* High disk load.
* Need a Berkeley DB.
* Probably high CPU load .
* Less bandwith use than NFS,AFS...
* Faster execution time.
* Designed for Wan access.
* 2 implementations
a) with the xfs-arla client - caching, chunking but no authentification
b) with the SFS client - authentification but no chunking,
-small- freebsd nfs kernel patch, no linux patch .

InterMezzo
--------------
* pretty much like Coda.
* AFS -> COda -> Intermezzo
* Aiming disconnected ops.
* GPL
* Module-Compilated in Redhat 7.3
* More efficient than Coda is.

=====

bah les interets evident :

- mise en place rapide par dessus des installation NFS deja existante
- securite infaillible ( muhahha )

Va galerer a installer un OpenAFS ....de plus si tu prenfs (open)AFS, autamt passer direct a un vrai systeme qui gere le disconnected , genre intermezzo ou Coda ...

perso, je trouve ca totalement normal .
les insultes ca peut ne pas s'arreter a juste : fils de p*t*.
ca peut devenir un problemes de diffamation.
sans compter l'aspect respect de l'enseignant.

mount -t iso9660 monfichier.iso ~/mon/rep/secret/ -o rw

ca devrait etre un truc du genre non ?

Linux Beowulf ?

Sinon ya le patch Mosix .

de toute les grandes distrib ne sont pas cluster-oriented .. donc moi , perso , je prendrai une debian , un patch du kernel , un apt-get des outils et zou c parti .

je viens de voir la liste des journaux ...

icmptunnel ...

y doit y avoir 40 000 versions..

http://www.detached.net/icmptunnel.tar.gz(...)

>The primary goals for OpenGL 2.0 are to add support for pixel and fragment shaders, improve memory management and give applications more control over the rendering pipeline.

supporté par DirectX 9 .. cf la geforce 4 ...

bref ... microsoft c que des copieurs de standards deja écrits .. na

C'est toujours le cas ... meme en france ...
Allez voir du coté des Halles a paris ...

C'est pas du tout ca .

Les acteurs parlent de l'E-business en y faisant reference comme a un jeu ( de basket ).

cf les pubs precedente.

Linux aime le jeu, le defi .. etc ...