remote fileserver mountable as filesystem. how ? - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / general

author: free_electron
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 26, 2014, 03:10:06 am
content: i know this is not exactly stuff for eevblog but i got no clue where to ask this.here is what i want :- a fileserver that is stored somewhere. don't care where.- connected to the internet with a static IP address- password protectected with user accounts.- automatic backup with daily and weekly snapshots.- manageable ( meaning i can set up folders create users and assign permissions to folders for users. )- mountable as a drive . No 3rd part software , no ftp , no synctoys. on windows : my computer -> map network drive -> done. from anywhere in the world <-tricky bithere is the problem: i have a set of files i (and other people) want to work on no matter where we are in the world.just like having a network mounted NAS at home i want an internet mounted NAS. all nas devices can point toward internet but they all use a web based interface to transfer files or ftp or some sync method. that is NOT what i want. i need mounting as a drive letter. if a file is saved it needs to go directly to the remote machine without local copy. (local copy means syncing is in order ... no syncing ! )i tried stuff like dropbox, google drive and others and they don't work for me. google drive just fucked up royally by deleting a bunch of master files during a sync. apparently when you move stuff into the folder without the drive app running the sync goes haywire...i don't want to install 3rd party software either and no workarounds with ftp , synctoys or anything. i do not trust synchronisation. if sync goes wrong you lose the latest version (different timezones etc )all i want is go to my file explorer : map network drive : point it to an ip address and kablam. done. just like i mount a local nasso that, when i open a fie in a program and click 'save' it is directly written to the remote storage. no local copies needed.i looked for a few hours on google but can;t find really a solution.

author: Unknown
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: September 26, 2014, 03:30:05 am
content: Windows will allow you to map a drive to a network location over the internet (via SMB, FTP or HTTP), but I would strongly recommend that you don't have SMB shares open to the internet. You're risking the security of your data.Ideally what you should look at is a VPN based solution and map your drives over a secure network.

author: free_electron
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 26, 2014, 03:32:22 am
content: i found vpn but what hosting provider supports that. i tried godaddy and others and its njet ..i don't want to run my own server. it's gotta sit a some hosting provider, be backed up , duplicated and have 99.999% uptime ..

author: Unknown
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: September 26, 2014, 03:34:34 am
content: Quote from: free_electron on September 26, 2014, 03:32:22 amThat I can't help you with off the top of my head. I don't use external providers for anything other than domain hosting. You'd have to do your own homework there. I run all my own servers.

author: apelly
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: September 26, 2014, 04:13:26 am
content: I assume you use windows.You are looking for WebDAV.For the client the setup is similar to your outline.There are open source options, but I think would prefer something paid/with support.Microsoft sharepoint is an option.

author: Lightages
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: September 26, 2014, 04:40:20 am
content: I used this a long time in the past and it worked well:http://www.netdrive.net/Also just found this too.https://www.eldos.com/sftp-net-drive/download-release.php

author: timb
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 26, 2014, 06:25:50 am
content: free_electron; send me a PM and I'll hook you up with exactly what you're looking for!I spent 15 years in IT setting up and managing custom servers for companies, might as well put some of my knowledge back to use!Sent from my Smartphone

author: free_electron
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 26, 2014, 09:26:32 am
content: Quote from: Lightages on September 26, 2014, 04:40:20 ami found netdrive as well. but i am opposed to having to use a third party tool. the problem is some clients are on macos , some on linux, some on windows. i really need to be able to simply map a network drive.just like in my home i can see my nas boxes automatically in the network browsers of my windows and mac machines and they become an extension of the file system. no 3rd party software needed.icloud, google drive , skydrive etc don't work right. you have no 'direct' access to the actual file system. you always need to save locally and then depend on the file sync. It needs to be transparent for any software or operating system we use: it needs to behave like a real drive / folder does, just like when you mount a share as a drive letter. Just in this case the share does not sit on the local lan but on the internet.An encrypted link would be nice. VPN comes to mind. but that is another can of worms....WebDAV seems to be a solution. i did not know that existed. ( i'm not a computer guru ). Looks like it is a standard too.Now to find a provider that has webdav in his offerings and has an easy management console to set up folders / users and assign permissions.-edit- hmmm webdav does nto seem to be what i am looking for. it does not seem to have file permissions or user permissions. once you login to the webdav you have full control over everything there. that is not what i want.the scenario is that we are a group of people that will each have their own user folder. there will be projects folders. only people assigned to that project have write permissions there, otheres are read only. etc. so it really needs to behave like a local file server inside a company network would. including all the permission settings.growl... why are such simple things so damn hard.i am trying to get a group of people ,spread over different locations, work together just like as they were sitting in the same building / office and have a local fileserver. VPN tunnels seem to be made for that. but i got no clue if this can be set up at a provider ... i know amazon EC2 allows VPS virtual private servers where you can deploy a server image yadda yadda.. i don't want to do that for various reasons :1 - i don't want to be responsable for configging the server. all i need is an internet facing nas box: plug and play.2 - you pay by the hour of that thing running .. woops... too expensive.

author: ovnr
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: September 26, 2014, 05:34:14 pm
content: Apache's DAV implementation should do what you want. You can set up per-directory access limits (users or user groups) without too much trouble. You can probably just drop .htaccess files into each project dir to set up user groups.(Disclaimer: I haven't actuallytriedit. Should work tho.)

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 26, 2014, 05:54:23 pm
content: Quote from: free_electron on September 26, 2014, 09:26:32 amYou are going the wrong way with this. What you need is a version control system. When working with multiple people on the same project you can't simply share files. You need a way to tell who changed what, merge files and go back to previous versions etc.

author: geppa.dee
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: September 26, 2014, 06:17:07 pm
content: What you're describing is SMB over VPN. No other way around it (that I know of). I don't know about hosters providing directly that but you can sure do better than hourly paying Amazon. I use Linode.com for a bunch of virtual servers and even their lowest offering would serve you well and cost you very little. Someone would have to config the VPS for you initially though. Not something that can't be done in a couple of hours...OTOH... you're sure that's what you want? What if you have that "drive" mounted and a file (or two) from it opened and... you loose the internet connection? In the local LAN... that's unlikely but over the internet... not so much.IMO, nctnico's suggestion for version control with local checkouts if far better...No way to loose data anyway you put it.

author: miguelvp
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 27, 2014, 04:09:32 am
content: Old school nfs (network file system) or sshfs (SSH file system)?nfs is usually blocked by firewalls/routers/etc sshfs is not.Not sure if there is a way to do this in windows though

author: Psi
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 27, 2014, 11:34:21 am
content: Dedicated vpn boxes at all locations to link the sites.done. done.

author: free_electron
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 27, 2014, 02:15:11 pm
content: Quote from: nctnico on September 26, 2014, 05:54:23 pmVersion control system is useless. They are binary files... Not sourcecode. Cad drawings, mechanical ,electrical . Each person has a task assigned and owns filesets. I deliver the pcb files, and a step file. Our mechanical dude runs solidworks . We exhange drawings. It's not sourcecode. There are no two person working on the same file. Ownership is cut and dried.Smd through vpn seems the solution. Dedicated vpn boxes.. Thats gonna cost money. Money we dont have .. Running in startup mode you know .. Pre investor ...-edit- found an interesting document from ciscohttp://www.cisco.com/c/dam/en/us/td/docs/routers/csbr/app_notes/rv0xx_g2gvpn_an_OL-26286.pdfMesh vpn. Then we don't need a central server. Or, i can simply get a static ip address, slap a NAS with dual drives on my network and off we go. No server needed.Looks like vpn routers are not that expensive... Hmm homework to do ...

author: ovnr
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: September 27, 2014, 03:00:48 pm
content: Version control systems work perfectly well for binary data as long as you don't have any merge conflicts. If you can get everyone to use it, there should be no problems. Plus you get, you know, version control.It'd also besignificantlyeasier to set up and deal with than a shared drive - and likely cheaper, all you need is a VPS somewhere or a managed account from someone else. VPSes start at $5-$10/month; you can even get a dedicated server for like $30/month these days. (I've got one - unlimited 100mbit line, 1TB disk, acceptable performance. I pay $29.95/month.)

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 27, 2014, 04:56:55 pm
content: Indeed. Version control systems also work perfectly for binary data. Deleted something from a drawing? Check-out the previous version and copy&paste.

author: free_electron
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 27, 2014, 05:53:40 pm
content: Quote from: nctnico on September 27, 2014, 04:56:55 pmmaybe i'm retarded when it comes to these things but explain me how a version control system would work betwween for example 2 schematic files. i can't see how it can tell me: you removed R3 and added C5 . not unless it understands the internal structure of those schematic files.that kind of stuff works for sourcecode : added a line here, removed two lines there. scroll side by side. for binary files all it can do is tell you they were different. it cannot tell you what was changed. not unless it knows internal file layout. and even then ...unless it can do the above ( tell me what parts were removed and or altered) it is useless for that kind of work. (altium creates ECO (engineering change order) files telling me what was changed. whenever i create a mod of a schematic a revision number is slapped on. ECO's are saved . so i can go back. no need for extra software to do that. i can simply browse the eco's. and pick up the file associated.same for pcb .once a design is a release candidate then RC is added to the file namefor exampleFubar-1fubar-2fubar-3fubar-4fubar-4-rc1fubar-4-rc2fubar-4-releasefubar-5fubar-6fubar-6-rc1fubar-6-releaseand so onthe releases are frozen in time fubar-5 would be the successor to fubar-4-release. it;s very simple

author: edavid
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 27, 2014, 06:49:53 pm
content: Quote from: free_electron on September 27, 2014, 05:53:40 pmIt can't give you change information.QuoteYes, everyone knows this.QuoteThis is where you are wrong. It can still take the place of a distributed filesystem/shared drive, but will be much easier to set up, more reliable, and have better performance. And, you get versioning for free.

author: miguelvp
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 27, 2014, 07:18:20 pm
content: If it's source control (or binaries for that matter) perforce has a free 20 seat version with unlimited size and no time constrains.Just google perforce 20 seatOne thing is that you have to check out the files before working on it unless your software has built in source control and perforce support.After you are done you can revert unchanged files with a single right click on the change list, add comments on the work done and check it in.You can compare any file with any previous versions, hook your favourite file compare software (beyond compare is pretty good) or use the built in one.You can revert changes, label versions, branch to other projects from a common one, well a lot of things but it might take you a bit to ramp up to understand how it work, but they have plenty of tutorials and more are available in the interwebs.

author: free_electron
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 27, 2014, 08:00:43 pm
content: Quote from: edavid on September 27, 2014, 06:49:53 pmmaybe my understanding of a version control tool is wrong , but : if it can't do that then it is useless.We had a version control system called Rational Clearcase used for collaborative code design. it could show you exactly who had changed what line of coade, what that line was at any given point in time, what lines were added/removed between versions etc. so for sourcecode this is a great system.but for any other kind of filetype : useless because it does not understand what is there. all it can tell you is the files are different. big whoop. a diff command under dos can do that .. don't need the overhead of another tool to learn .Quoteexplain this with an example. i have trouble grasping this concept. ( see above. )here is my experience with this kind of stuff : we tried using google driv.e that supposedly has versioing built in. good effing luck. you got no cluse waht version you are opening, it messs up syncing and keeps converting my .pcbdoc or schdoc files to .doc extention when downloading them beacuse bloody google drive things any file ending in doc is a word document... they can't even properly parse file extensions. all they look for is the last 3 characters.. they should parse for the characters after the last dot in the filename. So i am very reluctant to go that path again ... too much hassleanyway, we are deviating. the idea is to run SMB over the internet (wan) through vpn. i don't want intermediate storage, syncing or any other crap. it has to be transparent for the programs we use. so it needs to be visible as a filesystem. Hit save and the master copy on the fileserver is updated in realtime.

author: edavid
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 27, 2014, 08:14:59 pm
content: Quote from: free_electron on September 27, 2014, 08:00:43 pmThat was the wrong tool, too bad you had a bad experience, but forget it. Look at git instead, or maybe someone else has a different suggestion.QuoteI know that's the idea, unfortunately it's a bad idea. It seems attractive, but it will never be transparent, because the Internet is in the way. Take a step back and look at the real problem, which is distributed project development. This is not exactly new. The best solution that's available now is a version control system.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 27, 2014, 08:16:10 pm
content: Quote from: free_electron on September 27, 2014, 05:53:40 pmThis is why you enter a remark during the commit. This would say: removed R3, added C5 to improve stability yadda yadda.With sources / text files a version control system can show the difference between the source code but that usually is of little value if the reason why is unknown. The commit remark should contain information on why (fix which issue) and how the change was made or whether it is just an intermediate commit to save work.

author: mrflibble
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 27, 2014, 08:45:31 pm
content: Quote from: free_electron on September 27, 2014, 08:00:43 pmHoly fucking shit. I seriously laughed out loud.Please don't do that, you are going to hate yourself.SMB over vpn. Just google around a bit for issues regarding that. Smb isn't the best of protocols for the problem you are trying to solve. Honestly a version control system really sounds like a decent fit. Even with the binaries in the mix. For example Altium works nicely with subversion. You get your diffs same as you are used to now, AND you get easy to read commit history from you and other people. Find a specific version before you started messing up some pcb area? No more difficult than what you are used to now.And you can make tags for major revisions. Want revision XYZ of board? Just do a subversion checkout of that revision tag. Personally I find that easier to use than the local file based method. That and it's automatically backed up. But then again, I would assume your altium projects are also on a network share with backup. Would be a bit silly not to.Git works with altium files just as well, except AFAIK Altium does not have builtin git support. So you'd use a git client in addition to altium.

author: miguelvp
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 27, 2014, 08:50:53 pm
content: A simple example on my pretty virgin P4V install. (Edit: this is the free 20 seats one, unlimited size and no time expiration or anything like that)Note that when collaborating if people make changes on a file you are working on as well it does allow you to resolve changes, but if they are binary you might want to exclusive check them out so no one can alter them and they have to wait until you are done so then can start adding their changes after your's are in the depot.But usually everything I do is text based so.This is the PSoC KitProg project that I modified just a couple of i/o pins and change the version number so it's compatible with current cypress tools.First I did check in the full project as I downloaded it and intended for Creator V2.0.Then I proceeded to clean temp files that really don't belong on source control.Then I fired up Creator 3.0 and allowed the program to upgrade my modules, I added notes on modules I didn't let the software upgrade.Then I changed the programming pins.And last I upgraded the version of KitProg because current cypress tools expect 2.08 and will refuse to use my custom 2.03 even if they are compatible.You can open a changelist and it will show you what files changed.And you can diff them as wellMany other things too. And even if I use this locally, the depot can be in the cloud. Hopefully your datacenter will make backups or you will have to do that, just incremental backups will work and doing full ones every now and then.If many branches and users, you can do revision graphs to see how a piece of code changed all the way to it's original inception.Edit 2:Also Perforce has an API so you can do your own extensions if you are so inclined to.http://www.perforce.com/product/components/apis20 seat download page:http://www.perforce.com/downloads/Perforce/20-UserSupports Unix, Windows, Linux, and Macs.And it's Git compatible to some degree, haven't used that yet but pretty much it can show your depot as a Git, or is it the other way around? not sure but you can read the details here:http://www.perforce.com/git-fusionAlso it has peer review capabilities via their Perforce Swarm.

author: ovnr
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: September 27, 2014, 08:56:00 pm
content: Quote from: free_electron on September 27, 2014, 08:00:43 pmBut you want a method to distribute project files, not a VCS. If the VCS doesn't provide changelogs like you'd want it to, so what? It's not like you'd have that if there was a shared drive either.The only difference for your application is that changes won't appear magically; you'd have to manually refresh it, as well as manually check it into the repository. Plus it stores backups of all previous versions, so if you go "Gah! I deleted these parts last week from the schematic, and now it turns it they were needed. Wonder what values they were?", you can just check out the old version and look it up. Don't get sidetracked by trying to get merges working or anything.And the reason it gets sidetracked is because a shared drive over the internets is a pretty horrible idea (on top of shared drives being a pretty horrible idea even on a local network, at least when it comes to project management...). If we dive right into the root of the problem: You have a set of people who collaborate on a project, and thus need to have up-to-date copies of all project data. The logical conclusion is not "I know, I'll set up a shared drive and party like it's 1999!", but "I'll pick a decent collaboration tool".Also, if you've never run a VPN, it can be absolutelyfascinating. The amount of problems they can generate is hilarious.

author: mrflibble
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 27, 2014, 09:09:18 pm
content: Quote from: ovnr on September 27, 2014, 08:56:00 pmNo kidding. What I was wondering, don't you have people working over there that solve this sort of problem for a living? It's not exactly rocket science, but it's has enough snags that any random dude making guesses about what is a good idea (case in point: our local friendly problem owner) can spend quite some time before getting it right. Or the other alternative, give it three goes, fsck 'm all up, and then revert to old school local files because "that is what I know".

author: free_electron
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 27, 2014, 10:24:53 pm
content: Quote from: mrflibble on September 27, 2014, 09:09:18 pmnope. this is a startup that does hardware. no web / it geeks in the puddle ... i myself am clueless about this as well.Everywhere i worked so far we had a filer with user storage and shared folders. so this looked like the way to go.everyone has his home acount on the filer that is read/write for the owner only and read only for everyone else.Version control stuff for sorcecode was done using clearcase. All other design work was done using shared folders.

author: mrflibble
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 27, 2014, 10:39:25 pm
content: Well, all I can say is smb over vpn over semi-random internet pipes is going to be an interesting experience. But what the hell, give it a try and see if the level of performance & reliability is what you are looking for.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 28, 2014, 12:59:04 am
content: Even over a local network SMB works mediocre at best (compare to the speed you get using FTP!). SMB over a VPN is asking for problems. Besides that a VPN comes with it's own set of problems. Because a VPN is a network adapter Windows may decide to use a different nameserver (for starters) or route network traffic in unexpected ways.An alternative way could be setting up a terminal server which people use with Microsoft remote desktop. In that case everybody works on the same computer on which the files are shared.

author: miguelvp
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 28, 2014, 01:09:56 am
content: In case it was missed:sshfshttps://www.digitalocean.com/community/tutorials/how-to-use-sshfs-to-mount-remote-file-systems-over-sshEdit: I never used it so I don't know how reliable it is.

author: ovnr
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: September 28, 2014, 02:03:53 am
content: Quote from: nctnico on September 28, 2014, 12:59:04 amlol no. So SMB latency and shittiness isn't enough, you want the whole experience to be laggy and prone tocompletelydropping out as opposed to having open/save fail in hilarious ways?miguelvp's suggestion of sshfs looks somewhat promising if you absolutely must use a remote filesystem.

author: apelly
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: September 28, 2014, 05:33:31 am
content: Remote file systems are a sack of crap. That's the nature of the game.However, you haven't commented on Microsoft Sharepoint. It is their system for enterprise collaboration. They can provide hosting. It will be pricey.Cheaper is ownCloud on a VPS. But that presents maintenance issues.On the one hand you want a full service host, on the other you are short of capital and skills. I don't think you should attempt this yourself unless you have access to appropriate geeks. It will not work well, and you will never know if it's secure.Version control on binary files is almost useless, so you need version control in your application. Hardly anything has that.You are looking for a simple solution to a hard problem. Good luck.Disclaimer: Microsoft suck balls, and can stick their software up their fat ass as far as I'm concerned. They may have this niche in the bag however. Especially if your OS is Windows.

author: Psi
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 28, 2014, 06:58:18 am
content: Quote from: free_electron on September 27, 2014, 02:15:11 pm1) Find any old useless computer that is worthless, eg Pentium 3 or AMD Athlon.2) Insert 2 cheap old network cards (eg RTL8139)3) Install router software, (eg monowall or smoothwall )4) Log into the webgui and enable VPN mode and setup VPN connections.Price range: Very cheap (free if you can find old computers and netcards)Once the VPN is setup you can access SMB shares across it as if the PCs were all on the same network. (.. well, you would probably use different subnets for each site so broadcast traffic is blocked, but yeah)

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 28, 2014, 11:05:37 am
content: Quote from: ovnr on September 28, 2014, 02:03:53 amIf you have an ADSL or similar/better internet connection then remote desktop works OK. I have been using that for a similar situation free_electron is in: to work on the same project with other people in a shared environment. With remote desktop you can also attach your local hard drive as a share so you can exchange data between the remote server and your own PC. The only crappy thing about remote desktop is the way the profiles are handled.I thought of sshfs but I'm not sure there is a WIndows client for that and even then it would take setting up users on the Linux/Unix side.edit: typo

author: Psi
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 28, 2014, 11:18:42 am
content: Quote from: nctnico on September 28, 2014, 11:05:37 amyes, there is a few working windows clients that will make a drive letter from a sshfs/sftp server. I seem to remember one worked ok and the other worked but had major issues to do with large files. Cant remember which was which."win-sshfs" is one of them

author: free_electron
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 28, 2014, 09:03:29 pm
content: it's not like we will be sending massive amounts of data over continuously. these fileset is a few hundred megs distributed between 5 users.i found a couple of VPN routers from cisco for 80$ (used). everyone in the group has 150 megabit cable connections (comcast)i'm going to set up a vpn , hook up a Seagate or WD nas appliance with redundant disks and see how it works. this will be the cheapest solution for now. no servers needed, no hosting needed , i have a static ip address , no it guru needed and it is secure.thanks for all the input. wow that stuff really is a can of worms. i thought media 2014 stuff like that would be easier. simply go to some cloud storage provider tell em i want 500 gig , here are the users, here are the privileges and mount it as a drive letter. that simply doesn;t seem to be there. maybe a hole in the market.

author: Jeroen3
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 28, 2014, 09:08:04 pm
content: Why don't you get a few synology's, put one on each site, ans set to the constantly synchronize?

author: free_electron
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 28, 2014, 09:30:17 pm
content: Quote from: Jeroen3 on September 28, 2014, 09:08:04 pmsync programs are flawed. most of em can't even handle files coming from different time zones ...i create a file on the west coast. someone on the east coast edits it. Last time of edit is now 3 hours ahead of me. i alter it back on west coast. ... sync program fucks up considers mine outdated as me editing it rolls the clock back on last file edit time.i've seen all kinds of weird stuff happen. syncing programs work fine if you are in the same time zone. across the world ? trouble ... i've seen it happen. don't trust em anymore, not for that kind of work.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 28, 2014, 09:44:02 pm
content: Quote from: free_electron on September 28, 2014, 09:03:29 pmI really suggest to go the remote desktop route. There a lots of providers who offer Windows terminal server out of the box. If you all have good internet connections this is by far the best & easiest solution for what you are trying to achieve.

author: free_electron
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 28, 2014, 10:00:19 pm
content: Quote from: nctnico on September 28, 2014, 09:44:02 pmi don't think that would work. we'd have to install software on the server.. good luck running altium or solidworks over a remote terminal especially with setus requireing dual or triple head monitors.... like is said : this ain't a bunch of code slingers that only need vi ...

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 28, 2014, 11:02:19 pm
content: Multiple monitors is not a problem. It is supported by remote desktop. You should give it a try before dismissing it on forehand because I'm really sure a terminal server is by far the easiest solution for you. The internet bandwidth you stated is more than enough to use Altium remotely. I have designed chips using Xwindows over ISDN (64kbit).

author: free_electron
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 28, 2014, 11:11:09 pm
content: Quote from: nctnico on September 28, 2014, 11:02:19 pm3d ? that'll get chopy i guess. no need to complicate stuff or frustrate people with lagging response times. fileserver is all i need.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 28, 2014, 11:32:57 pm
content: 3D is also supported. Using a graphic desktop remotely is 30 year old technology so all the problems have been ironed out long ago. By the time you have setup a fileserver and remote access over a VPN you can have the terminal server up and running 10 times over.

author: Monkeh
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 28, 2014, 11:59:03 pm
content: Quote from: nctnico on September 28, 2014, 11:32:57 pmAll the problems except the substantial latency.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 29, 2014, 12:19:00 am
content: Where did you get that idea from? Internet has been optimised for low latency a long time ago due to online gaming, video conferencing, etc.

author: Monkeh
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 29, 2014, 12:20:36 am
content: Quote from: nctnico on September 29, 2014, 12:19:00 amUhm, I got it from reality, using both text shells and various types of remote desktop (including RDP) on machines both in my country and internationally. It simply is not the same as working locally. A LAN is another matter entirely (sub-ms latency compared to say, around 30ms to go to France, 100ms bare minimum to get to the US..)

author: miguelvp
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 29, 2014, 12:25:45 am
content: If you are in the US you can try how quick NVidia's GRID virtual GPUs perform, this is not X windows, pretty much they encode the video in H.264 or something similar, within the GPU early enough that the latency is reduced greatly.I haven't tried it yet because I want to make full use of my time evaluating it, I would recommend you download the manual within the page and read it before starting your 24 hour test drive.http://test-drive-grid.com/Yup, the cloud delivering on demand GPUs for your more demanding visualization applications.But it's too pricey for now. Specially if you pair it up with a module that NVidia is trying monitor manufacturers to adopt that will decode the stream faster eating away even more latency.Carmack when talking about the Oculus rift a year before he decided to join them, was collaborating to some extent with them and on his GDC interview (I bet available in YouTube or at least in game developers website) stated that you can send data faster from the US to Europe than from your PC to your eye due to all the processing time TVs take (Of course monitors don't have that latency, well maybe some DHCP processing).Say you run a software program at 60Hz, you have 16.6ms between frames, 33.333ms at 30Hz. I can send packets in less than 7ms to/from a server if the server is well connected to Tier 1 backbones. So the perceived latency will be almost non measurable unless you are a professional gamer that can tell because they trained their muscle memory to react at high frame rates and a little latency will be noticeable because their input sequences won't work due to the lag.But this is way better than your typical windows remote desktops.Still I would give win-sshfp a try or if you use Linux/OSx I think they have native sshfp support as described in the link I posted earlier.

author: Monkeh
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 29, 2014, 12:28:33 am
content: Quote from: miguelvp on September 29, 2014, 12:25:45 amIt'll be far more measurable if you're on a realistic connection and aren't practically sat on top of the datacentre.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 29, 2014, 12:43:21 am
content: Quote from: miguelvp on September 29, 2014, 12:25:45 amProper remote desktop (IOW not screen graphics copying like VNC) doesn't work that way. What gets send over the line are higher level graphics commands. Put a rectangle here, draw a polygon there, etc.

author: miguelvp
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 29, 2014, 12:44:55 am
content: Quote from: Monkeh on September 29, 2014, 12:28:33 amToo bad their linked videos don't work, but check this lag just from your system to your eyes:http://www.avsforum.com/forum/166-lcd-flat-panel-displays/1131464-input-lag-wars-post-your-input-lag-results-your-lcd-display-here-reference.htmlLG 37LH4000 50 ms 50 ms (LH40)Samsung 40 LED 6000 130 ms 50 ms (B6000)Samsung 46 LED 6000 70 ms 50 ms (B6000)Samsung LE40B750 110 ms 50 ms (B750)Samsung LE40B650 100 ms 50 ms (B650)Samsung 46 LED 7000 100 ms 60 ms (B7000)Samsung 40 LED 7000 110 ms 70 ms (B7000)Samsung LE46B650 100 ms 70 ms (B650)Samsung 40 LED 8000 90 ms 60 ms (B8000)Sharp LC52XS1 110 ms 80 ms (super expensive TV lol)Sony KDL-32W5500 50 ms 50 ms (?? no us eq.)Sony KDL-40ZX1* 120 ms 70 ms (another super expensive TV)I have 60ms latency to speedzilla in France, but less than 10 to US serversStill I can send data to France faster than to a TV hooked to my computer.

author: miguelvp
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 29, 2014, 12:47:53 am
content: Quote from: nctnico on September 29, 2014, 12:43:21 amI know how X Windows works (have used it plenty 25+years back), with H.264 video compression you can do better than that and you only need a hardware decoder on the receiving end specially with 3d graphics, Send the textures and vertex points via high level graphics commands will be way too expensive compared to streaming video

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 29, 2014, 10:04:41 am
content: But 3D CAD is not streaming video. A 3D drawing consists of vertices and textures. Send those over once and the only thing that needs to be send is the position and rotation of te viewport for the local GPU to render the image.

author: miguelvp
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 29, 2014, 02:35:29 pm
content: Quote from: nctnico on September 29, 2014, 10:04:41 amPlus materials, shaders, UV coordinates, light and light types etc.If it's a complex scene sending all that will take forever. That's why streaming the video of the output of the application is faster, you keep everything on the server and it takes your inputs to interact with the application and it sends the streaming video back.I know you can't take the NVidia Grid test drive but there is no lag as far as I've seen in videos, I should take the test drive myself one of these days.But it won't help the OP since they are expensive I think, and renting VMs will cost more than having the system at your desk.

author: revilo951
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: October 08, 2014, 04:31:02 am
content: Have you considered Bittorent Sync?Has some neat advantages... (free, free, free, no 3rd party, cross platform, etc)

author: David Hess
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 08, 2014, 06:00:12 pm
content: I have used SMB 1.0 over an IPSEC VPN in the past and it worked well enough. Throughput was limited by the endpoint links which were SDSL, ADSL, or cable so the performance limitations of SMB 1.0 over a relatively high latency link were not really apparent.If I did it today, I would use OpenVPN tunnels over UDP and of course avoid SMB 1.0.

author: jeremy
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 08, 2014, 07:04:45 pm
content: I work remotely on a Linux server with 500ms latency. The approach I use is sshfs and/or vpn. But I don't use windows to access it and I edit all my files locally + use an rsync like tool which is hooked to inotify. Most days I can't even tell that the server is on the other side of the world.I think it would not be in microsoft's business interest to solve the exact problem you describe for cheap, because they have already solved it for a lot of money in SharePoint (as has been mentioned previously). I think you may have a vendor lock-in problem

author: mrflibble
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 23, 2014, 08:21:27 am
content: Quote from: free_electron on September 26, 2014, 03:10:06 amWhat did you end up using?

author: free_electron
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 23, 2015, 08:07:52 am
content: right. time to revisit this. we got our own building now so we need a solution.version control system : yes we will use that , but it does not solve the root problem.WARNING: we are NOT IT people, nor do we have an interest in becoming IT experts. I need a turnkey solution that requires no learning curve and is easy to work with. Suggestions as 'take an old computer and install linux, tghen do yaddayadaa' will be shot down in flames with extreme prejudice .. we don't want homebrew kludges. if there is an appliance i can buy for 1000$ or 2000$ i will do so. if it can be solved by simply installing a small program on our user computers and that needs 50$ per license i will do so. money is no objection (within reason). The key is ; it has to do EXACTLY what we want. nevermind what reasons we have for what we want, it is too complicated (very longwinded) to explain.Secnario :There is a NAS box in a building somewhere in the world. The people working in that building are on the same LAN so there is no problem. They can mount shares as drive letters.This building has an internet connection using a DYNAMIC ip. We do not have a static IP and want to try to avoid that as you pay through the nose for that ...If i work inside the building i use either a desktop or a laptop, or my own private laptop. i simply connect to the LAN and done.If i work outside the building (remote location using a corporate machine, my own machine, or a rental computer) i want to able to mount a share on our NAS as a drive letter on the machine i am currently on. Caveat : this mounting is NOT allowed to disturb any other network connections already present. so VPN is a no-go ! the problem with VPN is that, when i connect to the remote machine, i lose access to my local stuff. i can't print to my printers, i can't see my own home NAS anymore. so that is a no-go.So really all i want is to be able to map a drive letter to a remote volume that does NOT sit on my LAN but resides at some IP address 'out there'.After doing some homework it looks like WebDAV is the way to go. install a piece of software like NEtdrive and then simply deploy something like a WD Sentinel or a WD MYcloud DL4100 NAs should do it as these NAS boxes have a WebDAV server on board.Question is :are there other solutions ?Again : please don't question why we need a driveletter , why we don't want to use a version control system etc . we have our reasons. (in short : we have a bunch of files that are 'read only' to the users, but updated by software on the fly. As soon as a file alters the users get the new version. this is seamless. So we don't want/need local working copies. this is not code development. these are CAD databases. the database file is opened, in read mode, by multiple users. The database is a 'live entity'. The way to do this is simply store the DB on a file system , map a drive letter and open that remote file. so that is what i seek : a way to mount a remote drive , just as if it sat in my local lan , WITHOUT losing access to my local lan ( so VPN is ruled out as that blocks )

author: Psi
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 23, 2015, 08:21:44 am
content: QuoteA lot of ISPs will physically kick dynamic IP connections from time to time to force a reconnect and new IP.So, if you go with a dynamic IP at the NAS box end, remote users are going to get kicked off in the middle of doing something at some point and it will take anywhere from 1-30min for the new DYNDNS/NOIP update to get your new IP accessible to the offsite peopleI can't think of a better solution that fits your requirements other than webdav.But the lack of a better solution does not make webdav a good option for opening business files directly across the internet.Windows apps are not really designed to handle the lag and other strange effects tend to occur.Some IT problems cannot be solved by throwing money at them, you need to throw some smart IT people instead

author: Monkeh
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 23, 2015, 12:39:47 pm
content: Quote from: free_electron on April 23, 2015, 08:07:52 amYou're ruling out the correct solution based on an experience with incorrectly configured software. VPNs can work just fine for this application. I can suggest Sonicwall, although I am no fan of their products, I can tell you with 100% certainty you can do this without interrupting local access.Sadly, there is no such thing as an off the shelf 'click and go' solution, youwillhave to configure it, including puzzling out DDNS (and I have no idea if Sonicwalls will do that). A static IP would potentially be worth the expense..

author: free_electron
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 23, 2015, 03:26:55 pm
content: the problem with VPN is that the vpn server does not run on the NAS box. VPN is fine if you have a windows based server. we don't want a server. we want a hands-off NAS. A box that sits in a corner and we don't have to mess with. create a share, throw in some folders, add some users , set permissions and off we go. no other management needed. set up two of them and let them replicate amongst each other for backupI can't find any complete guide with a solution. it's all bits and pieces. this is frustrating. anno 2015 this is still so difficult to do ? every computer has a unique mac address. why can't i simply tell the operating system : that mac address there has a samba session running. connect. then i type my username and password and i'm done. traffic is encrypted and the remote machine behaves just like it sits right next to me. i'm having a hard time to understand why this is not possible ? i dont need to see the entire network in the remote building. i only need to see 1 thing : the shared drive.The WD NAS boxes come close and you can even use windows explorer to browse the volume remotely , but it does not map the volume as a drive letter which makes it so that a standard program cannot browse there. another problem is they need java ... i avoid that like the plague ...I am looking at Hamachi now. But this is again a less than optimal solution as it requires a 'pc' to be on all the time in order to get access to what is in the building. i want to avoid that. pc's are highly unreliable. ( not only from a virus / intrusion perspective. we would need to buy a true server machine designed for 24/7 uptime with redundant power supplies, preferrably have two that mirror each other for backup ... yikes.... )

author: mrflibble
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 23, 2015, 03:28:45 pm
content: Webdav + netdrive is not a superbad solution per se, but it's not exactly first choice either. Webdav + <blob of software primarily designed to work on local files> is more likely to have unexpected issues than VPN + <blob of software primarily designed to work on local files>. From a technical view point a VPN is a better match.Besides, if you manage to mess up your VPN config how do you fancy your chances getting webdav to work properly, given that VPN is a better tool for the job? It's perfectly fine to have two left hands when it comes to IT, as long as you know your limitations when it comes to judging solution fitness. Don't say "VPN does not work!", but say "I could not get VPN to work!".Flip side is of course that as a customer you can reasonably expect some sort of user friendliness when it comes to configuration, so maybe then the question becomes"What is a reasonable okay-ish solution that more or less does what we want AND AND AND has a bulletproof install + config with large friendly letters". If that becomes the question, well then I dunno.But maybe someone else does...Alternatively you could find your local medium sized IT company, give them the list of what you want, have them do the setup + testing and pay the bill. The main challenge there is the testing of your software stack. I can imagine you know better what the important things to test are in Altium / CAD package than that local IT person. That, and licenses for the test machine. That and the budget was $1k-$2k. Mmmh, the more I think about it someone inside the organization will still have to do it due to those constraints. Well, you're boned. You will have to read the manual. Starting with the chapter"How do I setup without losing local drives", because any decent VPN has the ability to provide access to both local & remote drives.As for dynamic IP: call ISP, ask for static IP, listen toabout how you need a premium waffle link, then shout HOW MUCH!?!, all I want is a static ip, not 99.99999999% uptime, then suffer more, then threaten to go to other ISP that is not that insane and if you did that convincingly you now have a static ip.

author: Monkeh
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 23, 2015, 03:32:21 pm
content: Quote from: free_electron on April 23, 2015, 03:26:55 pmSo do that, and add a VPN capable router to let you access it. You don't need a server.QuoteBecause the internet doesn't work that way. Sorry.Seriously, get a Sonicwall or the like. Use whatever NAS you want behind it.

author: mrflibble
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 23, 2015, 03:34:03 pm
content: Quote from: free_electron on April 23, 2015, 03:26:55 pmSo get two boxes. One box is your nas. The other is a small box that does all the useful stuff that you need but is not provided by the NAS box.At least that way you can configure the internet facing box to be not full of holes. Or use whatever infrastructure you already have but currently don't know about yet, and use that. As a company you will want to havesomegeneric solution for VPN connections, so use that.

author: bitwelder
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 23, 2015, 05:09:24 pm
content: You could deploy a NAS like those made by Synology (which I know better, another good brand is QNAP). The UI is pretty nice and quite simple to configure, and you can have also a VPN server running on the box itself (and a VCS system, etc. etc.)Here is a link to an demo accessible online:https://www.synology.com/en-us/dsm/live_demoand here is the manualhttps://global.download.synology.com/download/Document/UserGuide/DSM/5.1/Syno_UsersGuide_NAServer_enu.pdfif you want to understand its capabilities (and whether it's too complicated to use for your team).To be honest, I wouldn't dare to expose drive mounts to the public internet, so I'd recommend to keep their access safe behind a VPN.

author: mrflibble
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 23, 2015, 05:40:44 pm
content: Quote from: free_electron on April 23, 2015, 03:26:55 pmIncidentally, replication is not the same as backup. Replication also replicates user errors such as accidentally-wipe-this-entire-project. But maybe you already have taken that into account and your chosen NAS has some decent backup functionality.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 23, 2015, 06:14:52 pm
content: Quote from: free_electron on April 23, 2015, 08:07:52 amUse Dropbox. It is a local synchronised folder on your computer. Does replication, backups and version control.

author: suicidaleggroll
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 23, 2015, 06:20:26 pm
content: How about ExpanDrive:http://www.expandrive.com/It supports a lot of cloud services that you don't need (can just be ignored), but one thing it can do is connect to a server via SSH (SFTP) and map it to a drive letter. I just tried it out on my Win 7 VM at work and was able to map my home directory on my Linux server at home to a "Z:" drive within about 10 seconds.I'm sure your NAS box supports SSH/SFTP connections? Just forward the necessary port (22 if default, or pick a custom one if you want) to the NAS and you're done.I also highly suggest you get a static IP from your provider. It can't be that much...I think we only pay $5/mo for a static IP with Comcast Business.

author: free_electron
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 23, 2015, 07:39:57 pm
content: Quote from: nctnico on April 23, 2015, 06:14:52 pmNO ! We do NOT want file replication ! That is the root problem we want to solve. The files are 'live' .Think of it this way : this is a database. You dont make a copy of the data in the database, you connect to it. This is what we want to do with a filesystem.We dont need version control, we dont want replication. The files sit there, open in read mode. If a file updates i see it live. Just like if data in a database changes i see that live in the query.

author: free_electron
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 23, 2015, 07:47:30 pm
content: Ok , so i looks like i need another look at vpnPeople suggest routers with vpn on board. Model numbers ? I found a bunch but they are invariably machines that were reflashed an openwrt installed. Thats a no-go. I want something from a 'real' manufacturer that has not been altered by 3rd party.Suppose we find sich a beast, and we get a static ip. What client software do we need ? And how tonset it so it does not clash with the users local lan ?I have a laptop from work. I connect from home use Juno Pulse (juniper networks). Works like a charm, but i cant see anything on my local lan. That is what i want to avoid. Other problem is that , once on vpn, the web access goes through the vpn. I dont want the remote users traffic to bounce through the corporate gateway.So how is this solved ? Theres got to be a quick setup guide somewhere for such things. I just cant find it.

author: Kevman
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: April 23, 2015, 08:40:46 pm
content: Quote from: free_electron on April 23, 2015, 03:26:55 pmSure, keeping the location tables of 10 billion MAC addresses up to date on millions of Internet routers in real time wouldn't have a lot of overhead.Sometimes things are difficult because theyare difficult problems to solve.They only appear simple because the people that take care of it are good at what they do and hide the complexity, leading to people taking them for granted.

author: kingofkya
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: April 23, 2015, 08:46:45 pm
content: Install this and be done with it you can use webdav to connect to it and that is built into windows just map a drive and put in the http address. Just needs a basic lamp stack (linux webserver) to work nearly any webhosting provider can run owncloud.https://owncloud.com/And there is a open version too so you can be cheap if you need to.And it has a nice easy gui so you can download files in a pinch if needed as if it was dropbox/googledrive etc.See the windows gui section:https://doc.owncloud.org/server/6.0/user_manual/files/files.htmland the permissions for sharing between users.https://forum.owncloud.org/viewtopic.php?f=23&t=10961https://doc.owncloud.org/server/6.0/admin_manual/sharing_api/index.html

author: kingofkya
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: April 23, 2015, 09:02:25 pm
content: OH i see soem one alredy sugested owncloud.Anyways another alternative is.https://www.getsync.com/They just added file permissions and it s p2p but it does need to be downloaded, but its extremely simple. Reminds me of foldeshare.com before microsoft ruined it.VPN...ugh its a pain in the ass 90% of the time. IF you do go that route check out openvpn.com its like $10 a year per user. If you don't have a solid ssl and networking background don't even try to use the open version.

author: Monkeh
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 23, 2015, 09:06:46 pm
content: Quote from: free_electron on April 23, 2015, 07:47:30 pmYour Juniper stuff is misconfigured.I am not an expert on them, and have only used the client side (they provide the software, it's no problem, just beware you CANNOT download it without an account, so you'll have to distribute copies to users yourself), but I am presently connected to a Sonicwall provided VPN. My web-bound traffic does not pass through it, I am fully able to access all my local shares, and I have full access to the remote network as well.Something like this is probably sufficient, but I will ask my guy later what he suggests:http://www.sonicwall.com/us/en/products/TZ-205.htmlI'm sad to say there's no 'quick setup guide'. You will have to read, understand, and configure it appropriately. Sorry, but 'click and go' is not a reality.How many users are you looking at?

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 23, 2015, 10:31:21 pm
content: Quote from: free_electron on April 23, 2015, 07:39:57 pmDropbox does that. Try it!

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 23, 2015, 10:34:40 pm
content: Quote from: free_electron on April 23, 2015, 03:26:55 pmNo, MAC addresses are not unique! When a manufacturer gets to the end of their assigned range they start from 0 in their range (again). Usually not a problem because the chance two devices with the same MAC address ending up in the same network segment is very small. But it does happen.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 23, 2015, 10:38:49 pm
content: Quote from: Monkeh on April 23, 2015, 09:06:46 pmUsing a VPN that way needs careful routing of IP traffic and configuring a smart DNS server on the other side of the VPN to tell where certain network traffic should go. Windows is pretty poor at routing IP so using a VPN is more or less like unplugging the local network.

author: Monkeh
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 23, 2015, 10:41:39 pm
content: Quote from: nctnico on April 23, 2015, 10:38:49 pmNo, it doesn't need a smart DNS server, it just needs fundamental networking knowledge. Seriously, it's not hard, and even Winblows can grok the difference between two subnets.

author: free_electron
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 24, 2015, 04:19:24 am
content: Quote from: kingofkya on April 23, 2015, 08:46:45 pmwe dont have servers. we dont have linux we dont want any of that. what we have is a NAS. plain and simple.Dropbox is also a no-go. we don;t want our files hosted by a 3r party.So to reiterate : here is what we wantsomewhere in the world there is a building with an internet access and a local lan. inside this lan there are corporate provided computers and a NAS.when working in the building every computer sees the NAS and the printers and the internet.the corporate machines do NOT store any data locally. everyone has a share on the NAS and all is saved there. there are personal folders, project folders, SVN folders yadda yadda blabla. all is well.when people go home and are on their network with their printers and doodads they need a way to connect to this NAS box so they can get to their own files , the project files they work on etc. they don't need to see the remote printers, they don't need to see the remote computers. only this NAS drive should be visible with the same permissions as if they were working in the building.so far i understand this can be done using a VPN router. my experience with VPN is that, once the tunnel goes open you lose access to the local stuff. so if people open a web browser at home, that goes through the tunnel , and uses the internet access of the remote site. we don't want that. we also don't want that people can't use their local printer. So far i understood this can be solved by making sure the individual clusters of networks have their own subnet. that is impractical. everyone uses 192.168.1.x at home , asking every of our users to alter that is intrusive. so we don't want that.in short:no serversno file replicationno loss of functionalityall we need is a way to map a remote share , through the internet, as a drive letter, over a secure connection. pretty simple .. no ?

author: Psi
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 24, 2015, 06:22:14 am
content: Have you had a look at the upmarket drayteck routersI seem to remember some accepting a USB HDD and doing windows file sharing with settable users and permissionsThey can do site-site VPNs too. Not sure how many sites they can link at once but it might be worth a call to find out what they can offerI wouldn't recommend their cheap routers but they do some good business ones.

author: Galenbo
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 24, 2015, 07:27:53 am
content: Quote from: free_electron on April 24, 2015, 04:19:24 amEvery solution that is simple:-is simple because it is very limited and dedicated. Does X and Y, will never do Z. Throw it away if you want Z. A bycicle is useless if you want a boat.-is simple because the very complex system is designed in a way that it leads to a limited set of chosen operating modes. I just want warm water. Don't care about your pumps, filtering, boiler, fuses, tubes, distribution. Just, one day, don't expect milk or hot air.It looks like the way you want to go is a combination of different existing, engineered solutions. They all have +20 limitations and exceptions.If you combine 5 devices (nas, router, pc, vpn, printer) what's it again in combinations and permutations? Something like a rise of propability of 5^20 that you run into a combination of those initially unimportant uncompatibilities and exceptions.Mounting as a drive letter is simple for the user, but behind it, there's a very complex system running, with a lot connected to it. You know this. A local network drive letter is already a stange but useful expansion to the initial use of it. Don't try to push it too far. Don't expect to not run into a set of new problems.

author: Monkeh
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 24, 2015, 12:13:51 pm
content: Quote from: free_electron on April 24, 2015, 04:19:24 amThis can be solved by correct routing setup. Users don't need to alter a thing at home. There's only a potential problem if you choose to use the same IP range at the office as $USER_LOCATION (home, other place of work, sat in a coffee shop..). This can be fairly easily avoided by choosing an uncommon range. 172.27.42.0/24 is unlikely to be encountered in practice.. You've also got the whole range of 10.0.0.0/8 to choose from, which gives you quite a few chances..

author: free_electron
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 24, 2015, 01:49:05 pm
content: Aha, i misunderstood. So only the 'corporate network' needs a weird subnet. I can live with that.Some of you probably are wondering why i am so 'difficult' : i don't want our users to have to make any changes to their systems. The reason : because they will ask how, and i am not an IT guru. I am not willing to offer that support.So it really has to be made as simple as possible, both for the user and for me (corporate).Hence : i buy two or three NAS boxes i already have experience with. These will mirror each other for redundancy. These machines already do file journaling so i can go back in time (backup). Number three sits in a geographically different location so if the building burns down we got a spare.We dont produce lots of 'critical' data. A few hundred megabyte. Each nas has four drives of 3 tera each. That's lots of journaling ...That system works. Has been working for a long time. Production data is handled like the above. Users homefolders are not journaled and are size limited.We have been using google drive , github and some other online things. Some of that will remain but we want to kick google drive. That thing is a royal pain in the wahoonie. It alters file extentions , thinks schdoc files are word documents and other annoyances.The request is, for people that want to work from home , or remote , that they can connect to the corp network (in this case : the NAS ) without disturbing their setup.In the future , as we grow, we may seek a dedicated IT solution. Right now, we cant afford even a person that spends 50% of his time on that. We can afford to buy 2K hardware and software to solve this problem 'temporarily' (read : until we are larger and can implement our own server and dedicated IT guru. )Another solution could be to go to weirsdstuff warehouse and buy a couple of used servers. They sell those for like 200$ dual xeons with four drive bays (blades), but i fear that will take a lot of my time to learn how to do that and i dont really have time nor interest in that. Neither do the other guys.So there : that's the 'why' of what i am trying to do.

author: Monkeh
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 24, 2015, 01:59:11 pm
content: I would strongly suggest getting in touch with Sonicwall, Mikrotik, Sophos, or the like, and discussing your requirements. It will be easier for you and you'll get support.

author: suicidaleggroll
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 24, 2015, 02:13:50 pm
content: *cough*Quote from: suicidaleggroll on April 23, 2015, 06:20:26 pmDownload the free 7 day trial, see if it works for you. If not, it would help to know why, because it seems like it offers exactly what you're looking for.

author: bingo600
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 24, 2015, 03:02:21 pm
content: OpenVPN also works on M$/Bingo

author: Monkeh
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 24, 2015, 03:03:25 pm
content: Quote from: bingo600 on April 24, 2015, 03:02:21 pmThat requires someone to sit down and learn how to use it..

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 25, 2015, 02:50:44 pm
content: Quote from: suicidaleggroll on April 24, 2015, 02:13:50 pmThis sounds exactly like what Fuse is doing under Linux: Map a remote disk on a local mountpoint. All in all it sounds like it is worth a try for FE.

author: matts-uk
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: April 26, 2015, 11:02:11 am
content: Quote from: free_electron on April 24, 2015, 01:49:05 pmThere are different flavours of VPN, with different protocols, suited to different scenarios.The corporates prefer the 'mandatory' protocols which were designed for bridging LAN 2 LAN. - Partly because they are more secure, partly because of Cisco's marketing (in my opinion). Those protocols (IPSec, L2TP) are embedded at Layer 3 and require a good understanding of L3 routing to set up. There is nothing weird about it but you do need to understand how L3 routing works. Typically, the more problematic area is the encryption negotiation.Smaller businesses are usually willing to compromise security for ease of use. In this case, an 'ad-hoc' point to point protocol may be a more appropriate choice (PPTP). The client end appears similar to a modem connection, and is no more difficult to configure. You still need to know how a network, works, to set up the server end. There is a perfectly good PPTP client included with most versions of Windows since Win98/NT4 - It may be all versions but those pesky 'Home' flavours sometimes catch me out. OSX has it's own native PPTP client and of course you can download a package for every flavour of Nix I have come across.QuoteI am not sure about difficult but you are making a meal of it, in my opinion. What you are trying to achieve is specific, more than it is difficult.I have set up PPTP VPNs for dozens of different clients. The first one ~1998, was a pretty steep learning curve but had I not negotiated it, I would never have reached the objective. Such is par for the course with network solutions. Connecting a billion computers, spread across the planet, using protocols developed 40 years ago, is not exactly simple. You need to understand what protocols do what, how they work, how they fit together, the choices you must make or, it just don't work (!)The client end of a VPN can be made simple to use - A few clicks, in the right order, written on a couple sheets of A4 with some screen shots. The connection can be made completely transparent but that takes a lot more effort, as automation scripts which match the specific network infrastructure, need to be written and tested.At the server end you need a number of different infrastructure components to all be working together. If any one component is missing, wrongly configured or downright faulty, then no, it won't behave in the seamless way you want.Quote50%, LOL. I provide '3rd line' server and network assistance to over a dozen small businesses. My contract cost is based on having to assist for one hour, per server, per month. Which still leaves me enough time to derive a decent income from project work. To be fair, keeping the intervention time down is based on getting the server configuration 'right' and avoiding unnecessary or unreliable features.QuoteYou should not need to spend 2K. You do need a bit of expertise.QuoteStop thinking of servers as being huge, multi-processor, multi-terrabyte, do it all boxes. You are not trying to build a data-centre like Google.A NAS is a server. Your workstation is a server. My Raspberry Pi is a server. My router is a server. They all have enough grunt to provide a VPN for a small business. Essentially, what you need for a seamless VPN is; a VPN endpoint, IP address distribution, split horizon name resolution and an authentication scheme. The amount of disk space you need is trivial and the CPU will go no faster than the upload bandwidth you have available.By far the easiest and quickest solution is a Windows 2003 Server. Everything you need to configure, is in the box, is well tested, well documented, with a decent management GUI. You also get Remote Desktop, so you can manage remotely. As most of the clients are Windows, you avoid the risk of inter-op issues, which can be the bane of VPN solutions. Later versions of Windows server add a bunch of unnecessary complication which get in the way.Another of my preferred solutions are the Intel based, business class, Synology NAS boxes (like the 713+ and 1513+). Synology are slightly ahead of QNAP on the GUI front (in my experience). Importantly, some of the components you need for a seamless VPN, can only be configured on the QNAP by editing conf files by hand. NAS box VPN solutions fall down on ease of use, compared to a Win2K3 server, as the components are not so well integrated.Draytek 8000 series routers have always been strong in the low cost VPN endpoint department. Draytek are a little bit like the Rigol of routers, you get a stupid amount of features for the money. However, similar to Rigol, firmware is poorly documented and lacks regression testing between versions - Draytek refer to it as 'dynamic.' The 8000s were lacking the split horizon DNS support needed for a seamless VPN but it got added in the last firmware release. The Draytek may be the hardest to get working, due to the dire documentation and needing services which are not in the box.As you are already invested into a NAS. If you can find a used copy of Win2K3 server and a decent workstation for a few hundred bucks, that's what I would do. Use Win2K3 to run the PPTP endpoint and the network infrastructure services, while your NAS continues to look after the file sharing. For authentication, Active Directory can provide a single sign on, which your NAS should be able to plug into.Otherwise, the Draytek but you will still need a DNS server for the private side of the split horizon and will probably end up with a separate set of user accounts. The 8000 series are supposed to support plugging into an LDAP directory but it's one of those features I have yet to see working reliably.QuoteSay you get it working. Have you ever experienced using a mapped drive across a VPN? At the protocol level, file sharing is nothing like a database transaction. I could tell you why that is but this post is long enough.In simple words. Samba/WFS across a VPN, is typically a ponderously slow user experience. I will put up with it, as not driving hundreds of miles in the car is key to my business model. Many home workers find it too frustrating to work with routinely. Hence the raft of investment into file sync and remote desktop solutions.SSHFS, (Fuse etc) is even slower and less reliable.Finally, keep in mind internet connections typically have less upload bandwidth than download bandwidth. Home workers, with 80Mbps of download fibre, dedicated to just their use, often set their expectations accordingly. If you only have 40Mbps of upload, you may struggle to meet one of those users expectations, let alone five connected concurrently.

author: TopLoser
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 05, 2015, 11:31:21 pm
content: Seagate NAS with SDrive software?http://www.seagate.com/gb/en/tech-insights/remote-access-with-sdrive-master-ti/Gives you drive letter access to shared remote files.

author: Zucca
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 06, 2015, 12:52:03 pm
content: FreeNAShttp://www.makeuseof.com/tag/set-freenas-server-access-files/http://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/759064-how-to-setup-freenas-to-acess-files-using-internet/then in the Win boxes users use something like:Code:ftp://myserver.homeip.net:88to connect to the remote NAS... you can use it even in the open file menu of your ECAD (well... I hope since it works with Office for example, seehere)no the best solution for several reasons... but it should do the job...

author: free_electron
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 07, 2015, 12:37:41 am
content: so here is how i solved the problem.i had a Cisco WRVS4400N router with VPN on board laying around. set that up. installed cisco vpn software onthe laptops and done.only problem : vpn is slow on that router. and only 5 users.so i;m probably going to upgrade the router to a Nighthawk. Install OpenVPN on the remote machines and done.