[Gllug] Anybody with experience of Bacula

[Mike Brodbelt]

On Mon, 2005-01-24 at 13:14 +0000, Bruce Richardson wrote:
 
> > The biggest one is the no-partitions-bigger-than-a-tape constraint, 
> 
> That's a big one.  The bacula concept of volumes, which can be spread
> over an arbitrary number of $storage_medium_units, is very attractive.

Yes, that's a nice feature. It's rather irritating that I can easily
tell Amanda to split a dump into multiple files, but it can't then split
those files across multiple tapes.

> The other is the lack of support for encryption in amanda, which makes
> it an insecure backup tool.

Bacula doesn't appear to support it either from my reading - it just
makes it easier to encrypt the network comms with stunnel or similar due
to a TCP only approach.

> The fact that the actual backup traffic
> goes over UDP makes it very difficult to work around this.

http://cns.utoronto.ca/~pkern/stuff/amanda-patch/

That patch set gives Amanda network encyption that's cleaner than
Bacula's, IMO. Still no encrption on the backup media though. Built in
encryption is on the future development list for Amanda, so should
arrive in due course, but the above setup sounds good, though I've not
used it personally.

Mike.

-- 
Gllug mailing list  -  Gllug at gllug.org.uk
http://lists.gllug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/gllug