Summary: Remote login vs NIS+/NFS

From: Jason Bufford <>
Date: Fri Aug 20 2004 - 00:19:51 EDT
Thanks to Terry Moore & Clif Smith for responding to my question.

I was not able to find a reference saying what the expected network
usage of a remote desktop session would be, and short of me doing
some testing with snoop (which to be honest I dont have time for) I
dont have any numbers to compare.

What we have decided to do is go with option 2, not because of bandwidth 
issues, but more with configuration control. Currently all of our sites 
are configured very similarly and I dont want to deviate from our 
baseline just for this one location.

We will instead try to get those sites to get more bandwidth so we can 
maintain CM and allow them the features that they want.


 >Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 01:11:18 -0500
 >> From: Jason Bufford <>
 >> To:
 >> Subject: Remote login vs NIS+/NFS
 >> Solaris 8 4/01 & 12/02 on Blade 100/150s.
 >> My WAN has 3 physically separate sites on 1 campus with MAYBE 10 users
 >> per site. The network connecting the sites is fair, maybe T1 speed.
 >> Currently, they are 3 separate NIS+ domains (,
 >> and and users from site1 cannot login to
 >> a terminal at site2 or site3 (or site2 users at site1 & site3, etc).
 >> The users on this campus would like to be able to roam between the 3
 >> sites, use only 1 login and have access to all of their files at all 3
 >> sites.
 >> My coworker and I proposed that we install a file server (280r) at
 >> site1, move all of the user's files from the servers at sites 2&3 to the
 >> file server at site1, share their files out to all of the clients at
 >> sites 1,2&3 via automounting NFS and combine the 3 NIS+ domains into 1
 >> (they would all be Call this scenario 1.
 >> We have been asked to also look at allowing the users to use the Remote
 >> Login feature from the Solaris login screen to accomplish what the users
 >> want: user from site1 goes to site2 and uses Remote Login to connect to
 >> a site1 box & logs in with his site1 account. With this scenario
 >> (Scenario 2) we would not need a file server and we could maintain the
 >> 3 separate NIS+ domains.
 >> I believe that the 1st scenario (1 file server, 1 domain) would use the
 >> least network resources. I dont know this for sure, but it seems to me
 >> that the NIS+/NFS traffic in Scenario 1 would be much less than the
 >> Remote Login traffic in Scenario 2.
 >> Is there any documentation showing how much network traffic is generated
 >> by Remote Login via NIS+/NFS? I could use snoop to get a general feel
 >> for the amount of traffic, but we really could use numbers or even
 >> testimonies from other SysAdmins who have tried both.
 >> Also, if anyone can think of a better way to implement what out users
 >> want, please feel free to email me. I will definitely summarize.
 >> Thanks!
 >> _______________________________________________
 >> sunmanagers mailing list
sunmanagers mailing list
Received on Fri Aug 20 00:19:46 2004

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Thu Mar 03 2016 - 06:43:36 EST