nfs or cifs?

[archrival]

I currently have a linux based file server/domain controller/router, previously I was using cifs to mount the samba share I use on my various Windows boxes when it dawned on me that I have no need for samba on my linux desktop (I could use NFS and CUPS, no domain authentication required on that machine). I switched over to use NFS on the server for /home/samba (my data directory) and /usr/portage (no need to sync twice!) and I was wondering if nfs really is the way to go in this situation, I figure it is, but I figured I'd ask the experts. Are there any situations where nfs wouldn't be a good choice? NFS seems faster, but maybe I want it to.

[Kaboosh]

There's only one major downside I find with NFS - it is a kernel-level process and causes processes to hang (sometimes zombie) if the exported folder that they're accessing is unavailable

It's also not very good unless you have a centralized security protocol like NIS or NIS+ otherwise it relies on the client to verify that a user (including root) is in fact that user...

If you do decide to go with NFS - also use the kernel automounter...they go well together.