Hi Hongwei,
Ah ok, sorry the wording was not clear to me I might miss understood it,
it's referring to the next command and I thought it was referring the
current one.
Matthieu.
On 24/08/2011 23:00, Hongwei Sun wrote:
Matthieu,
It seems that this is not a typo. The COMM_COMMAND is the command to be sent as the
result of the processing of CMD_NEED_JOIN. It should be CMD_START_JOIN as indicated in
the sentence above. If you look at the next section for " COMM_COMMAND Is
CMD_START_JOIN" , you will see the similar thing.
Please let me know if this answers your question. If you see a behavior
on wire that is contradictory to the documentation , please share the trace.
Thanks!
Hongwei
-----Original Message-----
From: cifs-protocol-boun...@cifs.org [mailto:cifs-protocol-boun...@cifs.org] On
Behalf Of Matthieu Patou
Sent: Wednesday, August 24, 2011 6:08 AM
To: Interoperability Documentation Help; p...@tridgell.net;
cifs-proto...@samba.org
Subject: [cifs-protocol] typo in ms-frs1.pdf ?
Hello Dochelp,
In paragraph 3.3.4.4.2 COMM_COMMAND Is CMD_NEED_JOIN
It is said that:
"The downstream partner sent CMD_NEED_JOIN to inform the upstream partner that
a Join operation is needed (section 3.3.4.6). The upstream partner MUST respond with
a CMD_START_JOIN packet.
COMM_COMMAND MUST be CMD_START_JOIN (0x122)."
I think there is a typo and the line should be COMM_COMMAND MUST be
CMD_NEED_JOIN (0x121), traces between 2 Windows DCs seems to confirm.
Can you confirm too ?
Matthieu.
--
Matthieu Patou
Samba Team http://samba.org
Private repo http://git.samba.org/?p=mat/samba.git;a=summary
_______________________________________________
cifs-protocol mailing list
cifs-protocol@cifs.org
https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/cifs-protocol
--
Matthieu Patou
Samba Team http://samba.org
Private repo http://git.samba.org/?p=mat/samba.git;a=summary
_______________________________________________
cifs-protocol mailing list
cifs-protocol@cifs.org
https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/cifs-protocol