Debian FTP Serving Windows Files

[CovertCow]

I was thinking about starting a small backup business that would allow people to back up their data (on Windows computers) and access it from anywhere (Will die soon when MS's .NET incorporates that feature into its next operating system). I would run a couple of debian servers on RAID 5s, then putting the contents on cd and mailing the cds to safe keeping (can't afford tapes :v( ).

I have 2 main questions about how to go about this:

1) Should I format the raid 5 to NTFS so that the files are on a similar system as the people that would access them, or should I mount it as a Linux partition? I would prefer to do it using Linux Partitions, but if that means that the customers can't access their data, I'm sunk.

2) I'm sure people have done this before and I would really appreciate tips as to how to do this efficiently.

Thanks.

 

[SUOrangeman]

If it is FTP (or any other network-based file transfer), the file systems on either end won't matter. Heck, you could probably utilize SAMBA as well, allowing folks to mount their "backup file area" directly from their Windows box(es).

-SUO

 

[kellygirlbeads]

Last I heard, the linux ntfs driver was experimental, and didn't support writing. Has this changed? (I admit, it's been about 3 years since I used the driver - but last I heard, nobody was trying to reverse engineer this for fear of legal action)

 

[Barnaby W. Füi]

if you're sharing the data over ftp or NFS/SMB/whatever, then the filesystem on the hard disk doesnt matter compatability wise. i'd personally recommend ext3 for reliability (vs. ext2 or reiserFS), and considering it's basically just ext2 with a journal file, it's very well proven.

and linux NTFS write support is still dangerous. reading is no problem, but writing to the partition risks data corruption (i have converted the win2k partition on this machine back to fat32 for write ability in linux)

 

[Nothinman]

Like has been said you can't use NTFS because write support is still pre-alpha (but it is being worked on by a new group of people). I would personally recommend XFS , it's fast, stable and you get ACL support which can be very usefull in complex situations.

 

[LNXman]

For what you are trying to accomplish, I would format the RAID 5 with NTFS to maintain NT permission structure, HOWEVER, DO NOT use LINUX, or any other derivate (even if using SAMBA) to manage the permissions on it. SAMBA works with NTFS, BUT may wipe out other permissions besides OWNER,GROUP, EVERYONE, when you try to manage permissions. So be careful when you start this type of business, because you may wipe out some permission information.
Sadly, until NTFS support for LINUX is no longer experimental, you may want to consider having an NT machine manage your RAID 5.

If you intend to use other FS's like ext3, reiser, etc, they will not hold all other NTFS permissions besides OWNER,GROUP, EVERYONE right of the bat. So you may want to avoid using these as well. I have had my share playing with this particular problem, and something always get corrupt in the long run. An example would be where the data exists, but NO ONE can access it, or manage it. BLECK!! Usually caused by a non-email-reading individual who was not supposed to use their UNIX account to change permissions. That's when you rely on the backup of the backup . . .Hehehehe.

Anyhow, I would suggest to play around with all possible scenarios before going into this type of business so that you can understand how it is going to work, how it behaves, and understand what to expect.

GL

 

[Nothinman]

With XFS you can manage ACLs via Samba just as if they were NTFS ACLs.

 

[LNXman]

That is true, but if you are planning on using XFS, then you have to make sure that the backup utility you are going to implement works with XFS, which as far as I know, almost none work yet with respect to backing up ACLs. At least the none commercial ones that I know, but then again I could be wrong. I am almost due to re-check on that progress.
Anyhow, that is why it would be a good idea to play with all tools before using it for a business, so that you know what to expect, what kind of support/tools you have available and then decide whether it is good enough to use in a production. A back up business is a serious business, especially if your business is third party to others. Kudos to CovertCow if he gets it going.

 

[Nothinman]

What's wrong with xfsdump? And I believe Amanda (maybe, might be another one that lets you choose your dump program) detects and uses xfsdump when necessary already.

 

[LNXman]

True again, but if he decides to use NTFS for the format, that will not do him any good, since xfs tools only work with the xfs filesystem. Maybe the best thing to say is:
If using XFS, you can use the xfs tools to backup/restore, however, be aware that if you try to restore from xfs to NTFS using the xfs tools, it may not work. I believe this is what the developers were working on before. Then again, like I said, I have not tested the FS for a while, so maybe it does work already.
I am sure CovertCow will let us know.

 

[CovertCow]

I'm way behind you guys in knowledge about this stuff. I hadn't even heard of xfs before you brought it up. I wouldn't start this business if I wasn't being supported financially by my parents (not in the business venture, but by having a home and food). This is more of an exercise in getting myself to learn linux and get the experience of starting up a business than anything else. I already have almost all of the hardware, so I thought I would put it to work. I just got the debian webserver going, running apache and php. Still trying to get mysql and sendmail working.

When you said that it was NTFS or the filesystem that manages permissions, I know this is true, but couldn't I do permissions using the FTP server software like in NT based systems?

Thanks everyone for your input!

 

[Nothinman]

Nearly all the permissions will be in the filesystem, doing it in the daemon just adds complication for no good reason. You can do some things in the ftp's config file, but you'll want to mostly rely on the filesystem permissions to keep things simple.

 

[CovertCow]

I installed proftpd and am messing with the config file. I see what you mean. I'm used to the windows ftps that let the ftp do all the permissions.

Thanks for clearing that up for me.