Dfs vs. DFS

Have you wondered why Microsoft's distributed file system product isabbreviated and referenced as "Dfs" instead of "DFS"? Well,a product that owns the trademark designation for "DFS" is already onthe market, and even more interesting, that product also provides distributedfile system technology. The non-Microsoft DFS technology was developed years agoas part of the Open Software Foundation's (OSF's) distributed computingenvironment (DCE) specifications. As you may recall, OSF developed DCE toaddress interoperability between different UNIX operating systems, and betweenUNIX and non-UNIX operating systems. OSF later merged with X/Open to become TheOpen Group.

One of the many aspects of DCE is how file sharing occurs in a networkenvironment. OSF originally considered Sun Microsystem's specification for theNFS, but it found NFS lacking in certain areas. OSF then looked at the AndrewFile System (AFS), an NFS alternative developed at Carnegie Mellon Universityand commercialized by Transarc Corporation. To make a long story short, OSFfound AFS lacking as well; OSF then worked with Transarc to define a follow-onspecification to AFS called the Distributed File System (DFS).

DFS became part of the DCE specifications, but Transarc retained ownershipof the name and the non-exclusive right to develop and market commercial DFSproducts. Transarc was so successful in developing and marketing its lines ofAFS and DFS products that it attracted the attention of IBM, which acquiredTransarc several years ago. Acquisition notwithstanding, Transarc continues tooperate as an independent organization, and as it stands today, Transarc offersDFS products for both UNIX and NT environments.

So what relationship does Microsoft's Dfs have to DCE/Transarc's DFS? None.Zero. Zip. Zilch. Microsoft Dfs was not designed with the same goal in mind, andit does not interoperate with DFS. They are two totally different products thathave very similar names.