[rescue] Happy New Year! RIP, Sun/Solaris...

[Joshua Boyd]

On Wed, Jan 05, 2011 at 11:17:05AM -0500, Phil Stracchino wrote:
> Of course, I keep hearing all kinds of references to CIFS being sort of
> SMB++, but I've yet to see any clear explanation of how CIFS differs
> from SMB, let alone what's supposed to make it better.

I think that MS when back and said that a certain subset of SMBv1
constitutes CIFS, then the rest of SMBv1 constitutes the SMB extention
to CIFS.

And then MS tossed all of that with SMBv2, to my understanding. 

v2 sounds way better, but Linux doesn't seem to properly support it yet,
I doubt OSX does, and XP never will.