Happy Christmas Eve to all! I believe there is a bug in Samba's handling of server roles that allows the user to make incompatible choices that are silently ignored. I've received a report from a user who was using the following settings successfully under 2.2:
[globals]
workgroup = FOO
security = share
wins support = yes
domain master = yes
; implicit
; domain logons = no
Under 3.0, registration of the #1b DMB name is handled by this chunk of
code in nmbd/nmbd_become_dmb.c:add_domain_names() --
/* Do the "internet group" - <1c> names. */
if (lp_domain_logons())
add_logon_names();
/* Do the domain master names. */
if(lp_server_role() == ROLE_DOMAIN_PDC)
{
if(we_are_a_wins_client())
{
become_domain_master_browser_wins(lp_workgroup());
}
...
}
From params/loadparm.c, lp_server_role() is only set to ROLE_DOMAIN_PDC
if security = server | domain | ads | user, AND domain logons = yes.
Aside from being a bit strange to allow a server-security machine be a
DMB if a share-security machine can't be, the 'domain master = yes'
setting silently becomes a complete no-op as a result of this code.
Any thoughts on how this might be better handled? Should a setting of
'domain master = yes' automatically promote 'domain logons = yes',
perhaps? Should the code be rearranged so that domain master = yes
always results in a server role of ROLE_DOMAIN_PDC? Or should the check
in add_domain_names() be changed to lp_domain_master() instead of
lp_server_role()?
Cheers,
--
Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer
msg05075/pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature
