It come me to mind that recentely we changed the code to check the packet is really an smb packet by checking the header field for the SMB. string, so I suppose samba will not support RAW calls anymore too.
Simo. On Tue, 2002-09-10 at 06:49, Christopher R. Hertel wrote: > Just a quick sanity check, if any of you have the time. In my book I'm > trying to describe the MaxBufferSize and MaxRawSize fields in the NegProt > response. I neither want or need to go into great depth, but I do need to > be as close to correct in my descriptions as SMB allows. If anyone has > any constructive criticism on the notes below please send it along. > > Looking forward to your replies. > > Chris -)----- > > > MaxBufferSize > > MaxBufferSize is the size (in bytes) of the largest message that the > server can receive. Keep in mind that the transport layer will > fragment and defragment packets as necessary. It is, therefore, > possible to send very large SMBs and let the lower layers worry about > ensuring safe, fast, reliable delivery. > > How big can an SMB message be? > > In the NT LM 0.12 dialect, the MaxBufferSize field is an unsigned > longword. As described much earlier on, however, the Length field in > the NBT SESSION MESSAGE is 17-bits wide and the naked transport header > has a 24-bit Length field. So the session headers place slightly more > reasonable limits on the maximum size of a single SMB message. > > MaxRawSize > > This is the maximum size of a raw data buffer. > > The X/Open doc describes the READ RAW and WRITE RAW SMBs, which were > introduced with the Extended 1.0 version of SMB (the MICROSOFT > NETWORKS 3.0 and LANMAN1.0 dialects). These were a speed hack. For a > large read or write operation, the first message would be a proper > SMB, but subsequent messages would be sent in "raw" mode, with no SMB > or session header. The raw blocks could be as large as MaxRawSize > bytes in length. Once again, the transport layer was expected to take > care of fragmentation/defragmentation and the re-sending of any lost > packets. > > Raw mode is not used much any more. Among other things, it conflicts > with message signing because there the raw messages have no header in > which to put the MAC signature. Thus, the field is considered obsolete. > > > -- > Samba Team -- http://www.samba.org/ -)----- Christopher R. Hertel > jCIFS Team -- http://jcifs.samba.org/ -)----- ubiqx development, uninq. > ubiqx Team -- http://www.ubiqx.org/ -)----- [EMAIL PROTECTED] > OnLineBook -- http://ubiqx.org/cifs/ -)----- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Simo Sorce - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Xsec s.r.l. via Durando 10 Ed. G - 20158 - Milano tel. +39 02 2399 7130 - fax: +39 02 700 442 399
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
