BTW, my own opinions abut NFS can be seen in my "NFS Must Die!" talk here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZVF_djcccKc&ab_channel=TomLyon

Not that NFS *was* bad - but it *is* bad (for non-casual use).
Like the C language, it was great for its time.  Not so much anymore.



On Wed, Aug 13, 2025 at 9:24 AM Peter Weinberger (温博格) via TUHS <
tuhs@tuhs.org> wrote:

> It was a research proof-of-princple. (i.e.. partly principled and
> partly really hacky. My list of its issues was pretty long.)
>
> (If A mounted B's file system somewhere, and B mounted A's, then the
> directory tree was infinite. That's mathematics, not a bug.)
>
> On Wed, Aug 13, 2025 at 11:56 AM Larry McVoy <lm@mcvoy.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Aug 13, 2025 at 10:18:34AM -0400, Dan Cross wrote:
> > > On Wed, Aug 13, 2025 at 10:00???AM Douglas McIlroy
> > > <douglas.mcilroy@dartmouth.edu> wrote:
> > > > I was always sorry that Peter Weinberger's RFS never made it outside
> > > > Bell Labs. It allowed networking between separately administered
> > > > systems by mapping UIDs.
> > >
> > > I believe it did?  If I recall correctly, it was available with System
> > > V, though perhaps I am misremembering.
> >
> > Sunos had it, my office mate ported it.  I was unimpressed, it worked
> well
> > between the same archs but was riddled with byte order problems and
> > ioctl calls that were not portable.
>