[8711] in Info-AFS_Redistribution
Re: [OpenAFS] campus usage info request
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Russ Allbery)
Thu Jun 7 18:19:32 2001
To: <info-afs@transarc.com>, <openafs-info@openafs.org>
In-Reply-To: Michael Pelletier's message of "Thu, 7 Jun 2001 14:37:43 -0700 (PDT)"
From: Russ Allbery <rra@stanford.edu>
Date: 07 Jun 2001 15:12:30 -0700
Message-ID: <yld78gvt0x.fsf@windlord.stanford.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Michael Pelletier <mvpel@alteon.com> writes:
> What are the key differences between Open AFS and IBM/Transarc AFS at
> this point in time?
So far as I know, not that much; OpenAFS now supports several more
platforms that Transarc AFS doesn't, doesn't have support for a few
platforms (maybe only HP-UX?) that Transarc AFS does have support for, and
has a few bug fixes and some feature improvements not in Transarc AFS.
> Support issues aside, why would one choose one over the other?
Mostly additional platform support. Transarc AFS arguably has more
extensive internal testing, which might be a reason to consider it over
OpenAFS at this point in time (particularly for the server end), but I
expect this may change with time.
--
Russ Allbery (rra@stanford.edu) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
