linux as a workstation

[Sean]

bwah?? IPX broadcasts, samba broadcasts, from everything I have read
Appletalk is less resource intensive then either of the other two
protocals.

They made this change about 3 years ago, and it _doesn't_
affect older clients, IE you need to be running system 8.1+ or else you
will encounter the problems, I thought they added encryption to it, and
you can use it on a network with only IP available. Cisco supports zones
and routing of the protocal.

Apple is _only_ trying to phase out their own protocal because they are
trying to kill the rumours about it being network intensive and slow,
which are partly due to older machinery, and M$ NT and Novell which
intentionally slowed it down so you would use other protocals.

Actually if you need to use Appletalk with an NT server you need to buy,
errf i forgot the product but someone makes an Appletalk server package
that is like 5 times as fast as NT's native stuff.



On Thu, 16 Aug 2001 Paul_Melson@keykertusa.com wrote:

> >you can also look at afpfs/netatalk which does Appletalk file sharing, it
> >is easy to setup, fast and I believe there are gui tools to do this.
>
> On behalf of your network admin/consultant, I implore you not to put
> Appletalk/netatalk on your network unless you have to have it (eg. to
> connect to older MacOS systems).  It's a broadcasting, SAP-ing nightmare
> of a protocol.  It's insecure and has a very low performance threshold,
> such that if you have a network of 30+ machines, you will lose bandwidth
> to overhead.  Sure the implementation is easy, and there are no addresses
> or routes to configure, but there is a valid reason that even Apple is
> trying to phase out their own protocol. :-)
>
> PaulM
> _______________________________________________
> linux-user mailing list
> linux-user@egr.msu.edu
> http://www.egr.msu.edu/mailman/listinfo/linux-user
>