From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: steve <steve-dZ4O0aZtNmBWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org>
Subject: Re: Kerberized mount.cifs with SMB>1?
Date: Sun, 19 Oct 2014 22:42:27 +0200
Message-ID: <54442233.4090801@steve-ss.com>
References: <53F4ABCD.5040909@rug.nl> <1408545832.2071.6.camel@hh16.hh3.site> <53F4D7FC.8020405@rug.nl> <544417CA.3000609@rug.nl> <54441E2A.6020809@steve-ss.com> <54441F79.7040804@rug.nl>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: linux-cifs-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
To: Jurjen Bokma <j.bokma-39IHFo8E5E0@public.gmane.org>
Return-path: <linux-cifs-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org>
In-Reply-To: <54441F79.7040804-39IHFo8E5E0@public.gmane.org>
Sender: linux-cifs-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
List-ID: <linux-cifs.vger.kernel.org>

On 19/10/14 22:30, Jurjen Bokma wrote:

> So I would very much like to use SMB3 to get to the Windows file
> servers. Kerberized SMB1 worked like a charm. Speed/bandwidth is not
> really the issue here.
>
Yeah, of course. Never knew there was any security involved. Worrying.