Network file server - what are my options?

seamus

Right, getting broadband in a few weeks, and making a wireless setup for my machine and my brother's laptop, consisting of our two machines and a wireless router.

I have a third machine in pieces downstairs, that's a PII (233MHz) with small HDDs and no OS, at the moment.

So I'm thinking of setting that up as a File server for music, movies, warez, etc. Originally the idea was that I'd share out my external HDD (which currently houses said warez), for use over our network. But this seems unreasonable now, in that my machine is quite noisy, and leaving it on in my bedroom with the doors closed for any length of time heats up the room something serious. Basically, I don't want to leave my machine on in my bedroom all the time. I much rather having another machine hidden downstairs in a corner, no monitor, no keyboard, no mouse, just whirring away, serving out files to those who need them.

So, any suggestions? Obviously, I'll stick in a 40GB drive (until I fill it) and stick a Linux distro on it, but what services do I need running? I'm used to a windows network in work, so ideally, I'd like the same setup, i.e. you Go into "My Network Places" and the machines pop up, or I go into Run... and type \\computername and I get a list of the resources I can access...

Thanking muchly

Webmonkey

Why don't you keep it simple and just use a windows environment for the server. I wouldn't go to the trouble setting up linux for just that many pcs. Share a folder then.

seamus

Originally posted by Webmonkey
Why don't you keep it simple and just use a windows environment for the server. I wouldn't go to the trouble setting up linux for just that many pcs. Share a folder then.

Mainly because it wouldn't take anything but Win98SE, which I wouldn't consider ideal for the purpose. On top of that, I'm a lazy get, so with Linux installed, I can just telnet into the box to make any changes, then reboot it, whereas with Win98, I'd have to go down, hook up the monitor and keyboard, and tinker about with it.

Webmonkey

Well You could also just install Real VNC http://www.realvnc.com/

But seriously...Windows 98 Would be ok for file sharing, it not like it has to do major network stuff...

viboy

You will need a samba server (smbd) running - check out www.samba.org for more details or man smbd.

To configure look for the file /etc/smb/smb.conf and add your new share. You can add the machine to a windows domain also.

seamus

Originally posted by viboy
You will need a samba server (smbd) running - check out www.samba.org for more details or man smbd.

To configure look for the file /etc/smb/smb.conf and add your new share. You can add the machine to a windows domain also.

Cool, cheers.
I was close to considering sticking a PIII in it and installing XP pro + VNC

oscarBravo

Originally posted by seamus
with Linux installed, I can just telnet into the box to make any changes, then reboot it

There are very, very few changes you can make with Linux that require a reboot, apart from installing a new kernel. Almost all changes simply require the relevant services to be restarted.

Originally posted by Webmonkey
Windows 98 Would be ok for file sharing, it not like it has to do major network stuff...

It would be nuts to use Windows 98 in a situation like this, where Linux would be a better solution in every possible way.

Seamus, viboy is right - Samba is your man. You can even set it up as a domain controller.

Gavin

no need to go mad with a domain server for a home lan. I'd say the handiest option is to find a linux/freebsd boot cd that has samba/ftpd on it. You usually then use a floppy disk to store the configuration details, and boot off the cd each time. Really handy, no need to go through the pain of installing linux.

Gav

leeroybrown

Firstly, Telnet is insecure, bad, evil and should be destroyed by a big blow from a big stick with a big nail on the bigger end of it. Use SSH, even on a private network.

Linux and Samba with an IPTables firewall (you could use Shorewall or some other easy IPTables generator). It shouldn't take you much longer to set up a minimal Linux install with all the necessary stuff than it would to install Win98. It's also a few orders of magnitude better and more secure as a server than 98 would be.

You could also use your router to port forward 22 (SSH) incoming to this server, thus giving you a 100% secure (nothing is ever 100% secure when publicly accessible but an sshd is as close as you can get) way to log into your file server if you ever need access to files, etc from outside your house.

oscarBravo

I guess it depends on where you draw the line between pain and fun - I love Linux, and every new install is a new learning experience. The boot CD/config floppy doesn't sound like the world's most robust solution, tbh.

Have a look at ClarkConnect home edition - it's a firewall, router, cacheing proxy, spam filter, web server, file/print server... lovely piece of kit, and pretty straightforward to install.

Gavin

Most robust ? You want a good secure system ? Make the floppy read only. Anyone gets into it, you restart the system and you have a guaranteed clean system. You'll need to sort out how they got in then of course, but you will still have a clean system to work with.

ssh is grand yeah, but this is a private network. There's no need to go crazy. There is also absolutely no need for a firewall on the machine if it is not going to be routing internet data, which he does not say it will.

All this extra **** is just not needed. On a private home network, all he wants is a simple smb server, either via samba or windows.

Gav

oscarBravo

Originally posted by Verb
Most robust ? You want a good secure system ? Make the floppy read only. Anyone gets into it, you restart the system and you have a guaranteed clean system. You'll need to sort out how they got in then of course, but you will still have a clean system to work with.

I can see how that would make sense for a minimal LEAF-type system, but for a machine that by definition will have a hard disk with at least one partition mounted read-write, I don't see what you've gained. I also don't trust floppies; they've let me down more often than any other type of hardware or storage medium for as long as I've used computers.

ssh is grand yeah, but this is a private network. There's no need to go crazy. There is also absolutely no need for a firewall on the machine if it is not going to be routing internet data, which he does not say it will.

We're just throwing out ideas. I doubt anything's carved in stone about his planned network, and there's so much more you can do with a Linux box than share files.

As for ssh versus telnet, there's nothing wrong with a paranoid mindset where computer security is concerned. If more people exhibited a little more paranoia, we wouldn't have as many worms and spam zombies cluttering the 'net.

All this extra **** is just not needed. On a private home network, all he wants is a simple smb server, either via samba or windows.

It's not about what he needs, its about what he can do. We're offering some pointers as to what's possible with a simple Linux box. At the end of the day, Seamus will decide what he wants to do.

I have a private home network. My main Linux server does Samba filesharing. It also runs PHP, Apache and MySQL, so I can practice web development in an ultra-quick environment. It runs an IMAP mail server, allowing internal mail between client PCs, and also allowing me to read all my mail from any PC in the house. It runs procmail, which sorts my mail into folders before my mail client ever sees it. It runs Leafnode, which makes usenet a very high-speed experience.

You could argue that I don't need all this extra **** - but I'd hate to do without it. And it was fun setting it all up.

seamus

Thanks guys, loads of good stuff there.

I'd definitely be of the tinkerer-breaker type so although SSH and other stuff may be overkill on a home network, it's something I'd have some fun messing about with. It would be telnet to start with, I'd start using ssh if I decided I'd use port forwarding on the firewall for super nerdy stuff when I'm not at home.

leeroybrown

TBH, most modern linux distributions will come with SSH pre-installed. It's no harder than telnet to install, setup or use.

seamus

Originally posted by leeroybrown
TBH, most modern linux distributions will come with SSH pre-installed. It's no harder than telnet to install, setup or use.

Ah ok. My last foray into secure connections was a painful affair involving Windows, SSL certs, and looking for a warez copy of MS Visual C++.

ressem

For a home network,

Putty ssh client on the windows side.
SSH service. Installing from fedora rpm will run the ssh-keygen for you. Not too hard to forward X.


SMB service
SWAT service web interface for Samba is pretty decent for samba user/password and share management, while getting used to samba. Switch on and off when needed.

Iptables with a basic config to prevent access to/from the world, to be neat.

---

And all that netbios/workgroup stuff when using windows as a fileserver without wins/dns or DC tends to get in the way and slow things down.

tomk

Originally posted by ressem
SWAT service web interface for Samba is pretty decent for samba user/password and share management, while getting used to samba.

I used to use Samba, and tbh I found SWAT more trouble than it's worth - could have been just me, I suppose. Once I got down into the config file and edited it directly, I got everything working fine.

You might like to consider an alternative approach either. I've since dumped Samba in favour of NFS, and I use Windows SFU to provide the NFS client on my remaining M$ box. A much better solution, IMO.