On 5 December 2017 at 18:16, Arnt Gulbrandsen <arnt@???>
wrote:

> Yevgeny Kosarzhevsky writes:
>
>> I don't see that it will give lower security than any other FS in this
>> case.
>>
>
> Rick is trying to say: NFS has a poor reputation for accidental security
> misconfigurations. Something about the way NFS is configured leads even
> careful, clueful people to make configuration mistakes.
>
> NFS doesn't force you to make a mistake. Not at all. It just has a
> reputation for being a bit of a trouble magnet.
>
> Don't Xen and its friends offer read-only device exports from the host? So
> the the guest kernel can read a device from the host, but not modify it?
>

What is the reason to use it instead of NFS, especially if you run multiple
hardware units? It will also need special utilities and won't work without
some guest additions.
Any good reason to refuse NFS in favor of those?

--
Regards,
Yevgeny