#Netatalk valid users how to
#Netatalk valid users software
#Netatalk valid users professional

Usually I hate that when people write a chain of commands that they are not sure of, because they have not tried a second time from scratch, but I do not have the time to do that. I have created my own timemachine backup server, it just backing up the first time as I write. No server is going to support 5000 Time Machine archives. I'm willing to be that the vast majority of netatalk (or AFP for that matter) is for Time Machine.

#Netatalk valid users professional

NAS devices are much more common but who knows what version of netatalk they run?Īnyone running a large Mwc network would be well advised to use a professional server like Mountain Lion Server with genuine Time Machine support.

#Netatalk valid users software

After all, what's the point since 99% of all that Linux software runs fine on a Mac and most of it comes preinstalled in Mountain Lion. Very few Mac users would have a Linux machine anyway. You may be able to buy a copy of netatalk and put it on your Linux box but a NAS device will be much more difficult to update. Most of the problems with it come from NAS devices that used neither current nor 'official' licensed versions of netatalk. Netatlk has passed through many hands over the years. There were some rumblings in the open-source community when netalk decided to define its own interpretation of open source ( e-netatalk-community/ ). I'll have to admit that I haven't paid too much attention to netatalk since it corrupted a lot of my data a few years ago. That offers a certain degree of fault isolation. It uses a process per session model, like Samba does. It runs on OSens with offer capabilities not found in OS X (eg ZFS). Anybody with OS X AppleFileserver serving 5000 concurrent connections? So if you want to bash Netatalk, please at least make sure you hit the right spots: no Spotligt, no server-side-file-tracking. But at the time OS X 10.7 was released in 2011 (?) Netatalk already supported this now mandatory UAM since 2 years. I don't remember which OS X version we were all using at that time, but it was certainly no problem then and the addition of this feature was left unnoticed. Netatalk added support for DHX2 UAM in 2.0.4 which was released in 2009. It was not until OS X 10.7 that this was made the mandatory UAM (user authentication module). It was introduced in AFP 3.1 which came along with OS X 10.2. The 'security protocol' Lion mandates when authenticating an AFP session is called DHX2. Let just introduce some fact instead of spreading fud. I am using the word 'new' in a relative sense because Apple introduced that protocol in 2002. When Lion 'broke' netatalk, the cause was a new security protocol that Netatalk didn't support. There is no guarantee that such a thing even exists.

#Netatalk valid users how to

Then you are going to have to track down a version that works with Mountain Lion and figure out how to update it.