[Samba] RE: Microsoft hotfix MS04-011, breaks Samba password change.
Thanks Jeremy We are still using samba-2.2.8a and very happy with so far. I asked this before in general list but didn't get response, may be you guys when get a chance response With samba-3.0, how would I join domain, if I don't have windows domain rights. Till now, I used ./smbpasswd -j -r as unix root ( after creating domain machine acct in winodws domain) With Samba-3.0 , net join command I need to have windowns domain password ( I don't have access windows domain) So I as unix root if don't have windows domain admiinistrator password can not use samba-3.0? Really appreciate the response. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jeremy Allison Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 2004 11:31 AM To: Jason Balicki Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Microsoft hotfix MS04-011, breaks Samba password change. Hi all, I wanted to give an update on this as I know this MS Hotfix is critical and must be applied to protect against the (latest) Microsoft worm. I think I've found the problem in the code, and am currently testing a fix for this (not in the release to others to test stage yet). As soon as I'm reasonably confident I'll put a patch out there for others to test, and we'll probably do a new stable release to ensure this is fixed in the current codebase. Once we know how complex the fix is I'll look at adding it into the 2.2.x codebase and maybe releasing a 2.2.9 for all the people who are satisfied with Samba 2.2.8a and don't want to move to 3.0.x yet. I'm also very unhappy with Microsoft for releasing improperly tested hotfixes, but that's another story I'll probably be taking up with the Technical Comittee overseeing the DoJ Microsoft settlement and the EU as well. Cheers, Jeremy. -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
[Samba] samba proceses - question
Hi I noticed mulitiple samba procceses when i run smbstatus. ( samba 2.2.8a on solaris , clients win2k ) pids are different sometimes for the same uid ( with root pid being same), machine name is same again ( the client ) my understanding is, there should be one root process for smbd and then all user mappings are spawned process from the root, and irrespective how many shares a user is mapped from win2k clients, there should be one smbd process for each unix id. In my case this is not what am observing. I notice multiple user ids ( smbstatus) for same pid, and some times diff pid for same uid. Also i noticed lot of times some proceses are owned by 'root' while some by unix user id? is this normal. Thanks in advance for replies. -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
RE: [Samba] RE: Samba processes
Thanks John Wondering y some smbd client connections show up as userid though parent is root not all client connections are show up as root. Is there a way to know when a client connection from windows side will shoup as root or user id. Thanks again -Original Message- From: John H Terpstra [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, February 18, 2003 1:49 PM To: Javid Abdul-AJAVID1 Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Samba] RE: Samba processes On Tue, 18 Feb 2003, Javid Abdul-AJAVID1 wrote: Abdul, We saw your first posting. Please be patient. Both smbd and nmbd run as root. All user interaction with the file system is done as the user who initiated the process. Please refer to the source code to see what happens. Samba has to ba able to perform a number of tasks that can be done only as root. > > > -Original Message- > From: Javid Abdul-AJAVID1 [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tuesday, February 18, 2003 11:18 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Samba processes > > > > Hi > Am noticing smbd processes are running as root and occassionally I see > a child process as userid Yep. > > Just curios under what circumstances the smbd runs as user id process > ( unix id ) and running as root is a security risk? Please explain where the security risks are. We would appreciate your patches. - John T. -- John H Terpstra Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
[Samba] RE: Samba processes
-Original Message- From: Javid Abdul-AJAVID1 [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, February 18, 2003 11:18 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Samba processes Hi Am noticing smbd processes are running as root and occassionally I see a child process as userid Just curios under what circumstances the smbd runs as user id process ( unix id ) and running as root is a security risk? Thanks in advance -Abdul -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
[Samba] Samba processes
Hi Am noticing smbd processes are running as root and occassionally I see a child process as userid Just curios under what circumstances the smbd runs as user id process ( unix id ) and running as root is a security risk? Thanks in advance -Abdul -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
[Samba] RE: Error code 0
resending, if any one knows the appreciate a brief answer. thanks again -Original Message- From: Javid Abdul-AJAVID1 [mailto:AJAVID1@;motorola.com] Sent: Friday, November 08, 2002 9:18 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Error code 0 Hi I have samba authentication issue. Erorring is as follows: rejecting user, auth failed domain_client_validtea: unable to validate apssword for user --- in doman --- to domian controllaer ---. Error was code 0. Just wondering what could be code0. Is there a doc for smb error codes where i can get more info on the above error. samba in encrypted and in domain mode. User not changed anything. thanks in advance. -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
[Samba] Error code 0
Hi I have samba authentication issue. Erorring is as follows: rejecting user, auth failed domain_client_validtea: unable to validate apssword for user --- in doman --- to domian controllaer ---. Error was code 0. Just wondering what could be code0. Is there a doc for smb error codes where i can get more info on the above error. samba in encrypted and in domain mode. User not changed anything. thanks in advance. -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
RE: [Samba] XP Reg Hacks
thats for xp as client in samba domain ( samba as pdc ) -Original Message- From: Bradley W. Langhorst [mailto:brad@;langhorst.com] Sent: Tuesday, October 22, 2002 3:25 PM To: Gene Huft Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Samba] XP Reg Hacks On Tue, 2002-10-22 at 13:48, Gene Huft wrote: > Can anyone point me the way to any/all known XP Registry Hacks that are > used to support Samba? > I only know of one the signorseal reg fix which is included with the samba distribution. brad -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
RE: [Samba] Problem with Samba on Solaris 2.6
Hi am also running samba 2.2.5 on sol2.6 servers, but not facing this memory issue can you elaborate on fcntl scaling issue thanks -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:jra@;dp.samba.org] Sent: Monday, October 21, 2002 3:40 PM To: Richard Davies Cc: Walter Mautner; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Samba] Problem with Samba on Solaris 2.6 On Mon, Oct 21, 2002 at 09:37:00PM +0100, Richard Davies wrote: > Hi Jeremy > > > Sure this the correct bug id for solaris 2.6 as I can't find any > reference to it on the sun web site? According to an earlier mail this is correct. It's the fix for Solaris fcntl scaling problems. Jeremy. -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
RE: [Samba] Multiple Domains?
I thought someone suggested configuring smbd on a different port but am not sure , never did this but curious as i think only one root smbd runs and all are children -Original Message- From: Steve Morley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, October 16, 2002 4:33 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Samba] Multiple Domains? Hi Again, A bunch of people contacted me telling me to start up a second copy of SAMBA, but unfortunately, no one seems to know how to do it? When I try to launch a second copy of smb and nmb with pointers to the new smb.conf file, I get: >[2002/08/27 18:37:20, 0] lib/pidfile.c:pidfile_create(86) > ERROR: nmbd is already running. File /usr/local/samba/var/locks/nmbd.pid exist >s and process id 39187 is running. >[2002/08/27 18:41:14, 0] nmbd/nmbd.c:sig_term(65) > Got SIGTERM: going down... And I can't see any way to tell nmb to place the second .pid file elsewhere. Do I need to recompile a second copy of samba, using /usr/local/samba2 as the directory or something? TIA Steve -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
RE: [Samba] Mapped drives gets disconnected ?
did u find the solution am guessing it might network or check the logs what it says... -Original Message- From: Brian Ipsen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, October 08, 2002 1:11 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [Samba] Mapped drives gets disconnected ? Hi! I'm running a RedHat 7.2 server with Samba 2.2.3a - but recently I have a problem that mapped drives on Windows 2000 workstations get disconnected and have problems reconnecting (error message is something like "local device name already in use" when I try to browse the drive in Windows Explorer). Any idea what causes this problem ? Regards, /Brian -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
RE: [Samba] 2.2.5 and NIS question
why dont you use samba in domain mode, and users map it will be less maintenance right? -Original Message- From: Mac [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, October 08, 2002 9:04 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Samba] 2.2.5 and NIS question >From: Andrew Bartlett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: Re: [Samba] 2.2.5 and NIS question >Date: Mon, 07 Oct 2002 22:32:08 +1000 > >[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >> >> Each user has a login/password on the AIX (NIS-based) >> I just want to use this (very fine working) system to authenticate the >> users of the samba on the linux box > >The problem is, we can't do this with encypted passwords. Not entirely true. You can't do it with encrypted passwords easily. We currently run an encrypted password Samba server on our conventional NIS master machine. A little bit of scripting keeps the passwords in sync, and a bit more keeps account creations and deletions in sync too. So, the users have one password, which is stored in both NIS and SMB password files. We also run at least one Samba server with 'update encrypted = yes'. This requires plain-text capable clients, but allows us to capture the user's (NIS) password into SMB encrypted format. I've (roughly) written this up at:- http://www.nibsc.ac.uk/~dmccann/smb/ (The write-up doesn't mention the 'update encrypted' server, but that's only relevant to people migrating from NIS only to NIS and SMB. If you're starting NIS and SMB from scratch, it doesn't matter). Mac Assistant Systems Adminstrator @nibsc.ac.uk [EMAIL PROTECTED] Work: +44 1707 641000 x285 Everything else: +44 7956 237670 (anytime) -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
RE: [Samba] Windows 2000 sp2 -> sp3
what error are you getting -Original Message- From: Dmitry N. Salmin To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 10/6/02 1:40 AM Subject: [Samba] Windows 2000 sp2 -> sp3 Hello All. I was using Windows 2000 sp2 and Samba 2.2.3a. Windows 2000 users were also registered on my Samba server with the same passwords. Encryption was set to Off. In the Windows 2000 user profiles it was set to automatically map H: to \\sambaserver\homes. After installing sp3 it does not work anymore. Dmitry -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
RE: [Samba] Port 139 versus Port 445
am curious and need to configure this and test, any ideas how to make it work, i mean how do start 2 smbd parent process is it port based or something else samba technical group please comment on this if you get chance thanks in advance -Original Message- From: Joel Hammer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 5:47 PM To: Javid Abdul-AJAVID1; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Samba] Port 139 versus Port 445 I suspect that you can have two smbd's running. Each one will spawn other daemons as needed, I THINK. Joel On Thu, Oct 03, 2002 at 05:41:39PM -0500, Javid Abdul-AJAVID1 wrote: > I am just curious of running 2 smbds, as i think one parent smbd process > runs on 139 and all others are children > > -Original Message- > From: Joel Hammer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 5:32 PM > To: Jason Joines; [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [Samba] Port 139 versus Port 445 > > > Just making all this stuff up off the top of my head. > I have never done this, but you could try: > Running two smbd daemon, each listening to different ports. > Redirecting traffic from port 445 to 139 with some firewall rules. I > redirect > traffic with ipmasqadm, but there are surely others. > Running smbd with (x)inetd and have it listen to both ports. > Likely, the delay is because the W2K clients are waiting for a reply, > and finally timing out on port 445. Why not try something funky like > having telnet or apache listen on port 445. Maybe that will tell the client > right > away to try a different port, like 139. > Let us know how this works out, if you try any of this stuff. > Joel > > On Thu, Oct 03, 2002 at 03:04:41PM -0500, Jason Joines wrote: > > I've noticed that my W2K clients connect to Samba much more quickly > > if I run it on port 445 instead of 139. However, my WNT clients then > > won't connect at all. I read somewhere that it was possible to forward > > the requests on port 139 to port 445. Anyone know how to do this or how > > to listen to both ports simultaneously? > > > > Thanks, > > > > Jason Joines > > Open Source = Open Mind > > > > > > -- > > To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the > > instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba > -- > To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the > instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
RE: [Samba] Port 139 versus Port 445
I am just curious of running 2 smbds, as i think one parent smbd process runs on 139 and all others are children -Original Message- From: Joel Hammer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 5:32 PM To: Jason Joines; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Samba] Port 139 versus Port 445 Just making all this stuff up off the top of my head. I have never done this, but you could try: Running two smbd daemon, each listening to different ports. Redirecting traffic from port 445 to 139 with some firewall rules. I redirect traffic with ipmasqadm, but there are surely others. Running smbd with (x)inetd and have it listen to both ports. Likely, the delay is because the W2K clients are waiting for a reply, and finally timing out on port 445. Why not try something funky like having telnet or apache listen on port 445. Maybe that will tell the client right away to try a different port, like 139. Let us know how this works out, if you try any of this stuff. Joel On Thu, Oct 03, 2002 at 03:04:41PM -0500, Jason Joines wrote: > I've noticed that my W2K clients connect to Samba much more quickly > if I run it on port 445 instead of 139. However, my WNT clients then > won't connect at all. I read somewhere that it was possible to forward > the requests on port 139 to port 445. Anyone know how to do this or how > to listen to both ports simultaneously? > > Thanks, > > Jason Joines > Open Source = Open Mind > > > -- > To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the > instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
RE: [Samba] Port 139 versus Port 445
just a quick question, how do you run two smbd deamons on different ports -Original Message- From: Joel Hammer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 5:32 PM To: Jason Joines; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Samba] Port 139 versus Port 445 Just making all this stuff up off the top of my head. I have never done this, but you could try: Running two smbd daemon, each listening to different ports. Redirecting traffic from port 445 to 139 with some firewall rules. I redirect traffic with ipmasqadm, but there are surely others. Running smbd with (x)inetd and have it listen to both ports. Likely, the delay is because the W2K clients are waiting for a reply, and finally timing out on port 445. Why not try something funky like having telnet or apache listen on port 445. Maybe that will tell the client right away to try a different port, like 139. Let us know how this works out, if you try any of this stuff. Joel On Thu, Oct 03, 2002 at 03:04:41PM -0500, Jason Joines wrote: > I've noticed that my W2K clients connect to Samba much more quickly > if I run it on port 445 instead of 139. However, my WNT clients then > won't connect at all. I read somewhere that it was possible to forward > the requests on port 139 to port 445. Anyone know how to do this or how > to listen to both ports simultaneously? > > Thanks, > > Jason Joines > Open Source = Open Mind > > > -- > To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the > instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
RE: [Samba] Samba - Performance Issues
so are you using xcopy or copy dos command in your script?
-Original Message-
From: Vinay Kudithipudi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, October 02, 2002 1:21 PM
To: 'Javid Abdul-AJAVID1'; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [Samba] Samba - Performance Issues
Javid,
I am running a script which copies a 1Gb files to and from the shared
driver. Am then dividing the time taken by the size of the file. I know it
is very hacked up :), but it should at least give some approximations.
Thanks.
Vinay Kudithipudi
Associate Network Operations Engineer
Spirian Technologies Inc.
-Original Message-----
From: Javid Abdul-AJAVID1 [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, October 02, 2002 1:13 PM
To: 'Vinay Kudithipudi'; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [Samba] Samba - Performance Issues
how are u measuring read and write speeds?
-Original Message-
From: Vinay Kudithipudi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, October 02, 2002 12:57 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [Samba] Samba - Performance Issues
Hello Guys,
I am having some problems with configuring SAMBA with regards to
performance. We are running SAMBA 2.2.3a on Dual PIII 1Ghz machines with
512MB of RAM. The server is running on a default server installation of Red
Hat 7.2. We have a 500Gb RAID 5 drive using the Promise SX6000 Raid
controller.
Currently we are only getting a throughput of ~5MB/S for writes and
~13MB/S for reads. Comparing that to NFS which yealds ~15MB/S for reads and
~13MB/S for writes. This clearly rules out the Hardware bottleneck since XFS
is able to perform better on the same hardware. Here is the smb.conf I am
using currently
===SMB.CONF===
[global]
workgroup = MYGROUP
netbios name = {HOSTNAME}
wins server = {WINSSERVER}
server string = {HOSTNAME}
security = SHARE
encrypt passwords = Yes
log file = /var/log/samba/log.%m
max log size = 50
socket options = TCP_NODELAY SO_RCVBUF=8192 SO_SNDBUF=8192
dns proxy = No
oplocks = No
level2 oplocks = No
[homes]
comment = Home Directories
read only = No
browseable = No
[Data]
comment = Data Backup Directory
path = /home/gm/data
guest account =
valid users = spirian
read only = No
==
I was wondering if there is any documentation for fine tuning SAMBA. Any
help is appreciated. Thanks.
Vinay Kudithipudi
Associate Network Operations Engineer
Spirian Technologies Inc.
--
To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the
instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
--
To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the
instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
RE: [Samba] ClearCase and Samba
I think the difference between domain and server is listed in all most all books and you can find in archives also. how many clearcase clients access vobs and views via samba whats hardware and OS like on passwd server -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Wednesday, October 02, 2002 12:05 PMTo: Javid Abdul-AJAVID1Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: RE: [Samba] ClearCase and SambaWhat are the problems or concerns around DOMAIN vs SERVER? More specifically what impact does it have on the WINDOWS domain? # Samba config file created using SWAT # Date: 2002/09/20 12:51:09 # Global parameters [global] workgroup = INDY netbios name = SUNTST1 security = SERVER encrypt passwords = Yes map to guest = Bad User password server = ***.***.***.*** username map = /usr/local/samba/lib/username.map lanman auth = No log level = 3 log file = /usr/local/samba/log/samba.%m max open files = 3 wins server = ***.***.***.*** kernel oplocks = No remote announce = ***.***.***.*** create mask = 0775 security mask = 0775 directory mask = 0775 directory security mask = 0775 oplocks = No [viewstore] comment = Clearcase Viewstore path = /clearcase/viewstore read only = No [vobstore] comment = Clearcase Vobstore path = /clearcase/vobstore read only = No Mathew SpurgeonEli Lilly and CompanySoftware Engineering Support TeamPhone: (317) 276-7436Mobile: (317) 716-7789http://mcntstep03.d51.lilly.com/SEST[EMAIL PROTECTED] Javid Abdul-AJAVID1 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 10/02/2002 11:28 AM To: "'Bradley W. Langhorst'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [Samba] ClearCase and Sambayes, secuirty=server is not a good option, it keeps your auth connectioneven after auth is done, so thats the reason prob after a while passwordserer was rejecting users,you should monitor your windows password server as to what it is doing-Original Message-From: Bradley W. Langhorst [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Wednesday, October 02, 2002 11:13 AMTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: Re: [Samba] ClearCase and Sambasecurity=SERVER is fraught with troubles...have you considered using security=DOMAIN?On Wed, 2002-10-02 at 11:54, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:> In August we started having windows domain controller issues. Could it be> the number of users that are running ClearCase at a given point in time? > We have between 40 - 70 users accessing the VOBs at any given time. The > samba config file is setup not run security = SERVER. > > The error logs:> [2002/10/02 10:38:15, 2] passdb/pdb_smbpasswd.c:(170)> startsmbfilepwent_internal: unable to open file > /usr/local/samba/private/smbpa> sswd. Error was No such file or directory> [2002/10/02 10:38:15, 0] passdb/pdb_smbpasswd.c:(1367)> unable to open passdb database.> [2002/10/02 10:38:15, 1] smbd/password.c:(555)> Couldn't find user 'rm38144' in passdb.> [2002/10/02 10:38:15, 2] smbd/reply.c:(962)> NT Password did not match for user 'rm38144'!> [2002/10/02 10:38:15, 1] smbd/reply.c:(998)> Rejecting user 'rm38144': bad password> [2002/10/02 10:38:15, 3] smbd/error.c:(91)> error string = No such file or directory> [2002/10/02 10:38:15, 3] smbd/error.c:(103)> error packet at smbd/reply.c(1000) cmd=115 (SMBsesssetupX) > NT_STATUS_LOGON_FAI> LURE> [2002/10/02 10:38:15, 3] smbd/process.c:(860)> Transaction 397 of length 74> > I see that the NT Password did not match for user rm38144, however the NT > password and the UNIX password are the same. Could this be something with> the clearcase_albd account?> the interesting part of the transactionis higher in the log i thinksecurity=SERVER is tried first then falls through to smbpasswd if there is some problem.all I'm seeing is the part after falling through to smbpasswd (whichdoes not exist in your case)brad-- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read theinstructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba-- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read theinstructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
RE: [Samba] Samba - Performance Issues
how are u measuring read and write speeds?
-Original Message-
From: Vinay Kudithipudi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, October 02, 2002 12:57 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [Samba] Samba - Performance Issues
Hello Guys,
I am having some problems with configuring SAMBA with regards to
performance. We are running SAMBA 2.2.3a on Dual PIII 1Ghz machines with
512MB of RAM. The server is running on a default server installation of Red
Hat 7.2. We have a 500Gb RAID 5 drive using the Promise SX6000 Raid
controller.
Currently we are only getting a throughput of ~5MB/S for writes and
~13MB/S for reads. Comparing that to NFS which yealds ~15MB/S for reads and
~13MB/S for writes. This clearly rules out the Hardware bottleneck since XFS
is able to perform better on the same hardware. Here is the smb.conf I am
using currently
===SMB.CONF===
[global]
workgroup = MYGROUP
netbios name = {HOSTNAME}
wins server = {WINSSERVER}
server string = {HOSTNAME}
security = SHARE
encrypt passwords = Yes
log file = /var/log/samba/log.%m
max log size = 50
socket options = TCP_NODELAY SO_RCVBUF=8192 SO_SNDBUF=8192
dns proxy = No
oplocks = No
level2 oplocks = No
[homes]
comment = Home Directories
read only = No
browseable = No
[Data]
comment = Data Backup Directory
path = /home/gm/data
guest account =
valid users = spirian
read only = No
==
I was wondering if there is any documentation for fine tuning SAMBA. Any
help is appreciated. Thanks.
Vinay Kudithipudi
Associate Network Operations Engineer
Spirian Technologies Inc.
--
To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the
instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
--
To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the
instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
RE: [Samba] ClearCase and Samba
yes, secuirty=server is not a good option, it keeps your auth connection even after auth is done, so thats the reason prob after a while password serer was rejecting users, you should monitor your windows password server as to what it is doing -Original Message- From: Bradley W. Langhorst [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, October 02, 2002 11:13 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Samba] ClearCase and Samba security=SERVER is fraught with troubles... have you considered using security=DOMAIN? On Wed, 2002-10-02 at 11:54, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > In August we started having windows domain controller issues. Could it be > the number of users that are running ClearCase at a given point in time? > We have between 40 - 70 users accessing the VOBs at any given time. The > samba config file is setup not run security = SERVER. > > The error logs: > [2002/10/02 10:38:15, 2] passdb/pdb_smbpasswd.c:(170) > startsmbfilepwent_internal: unable to open file > /usr/local/samba/private/smbpa > sswd. Error was No such file or directory > [2002/10/02 10:38:15, 0] passdb/pdb_smbpasswd.c:(1367) > unable to open passdb database. > [2002/10/02 10:38:15, 1] smbd/password.c:(555) > Couldn't find user 'rm38144' in passdb. > [2002/10/02 10:38:15, 2] smbd/reply.c:(962) > NT Password did not match for user 'rm38144'! > [2002/10/02 10:38:15, 1] smbd/reply.c:(998) > Rejecting user 'rm38144': bad password > [2002/10/02 10:38:15, 3] smbd/error.c:(91) > error string = No such file or directory > [2002/10/02 10:38:15, 3] smbd/error.c:(103) > error packet at smbd/reply.c(1000) cmd=115 (SMBsesssetupX) > NT_STATUS_LOGON_FAI > LURE > [2002/10/02 10:38:15, 3] smbd/process.c:(860) > Transaction 397 of length 74 > > I see that the NT Password did not match for user rm38144, however the NT > password and the UNIX password are the same. Could this be something with > the clearcase_albd account? > the interesting part of the transactionis higher in the log i think security=SERVER is tried first then falls through to smbpasswd if there is some problem. all I'm seeing is the part after falling through to smbpasswd (which does not exist in your case) brad -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
RE: [Samba] ClearCase and Samba
what do you have in users.map file for clearcase_albd acct? rm38144 is he part of group vob or view group? -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Wednesday, October 02, 2002 10:55 AMTo: Bradley W. LanghorstCc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: Re: [Samba] ClearCase and SambaIn August we started having windows domain controller issues. Could it be the number of users that are running ClearCase at a given point in time? We have between 40 - 70 users accessing the VOBs at any given time. The samba config file is setup not run security = SERVER. The error logs: [2002/10/02 10:38:15, 2] passdb/pdb_smbpasswd.c:(170) startsmbfilepwent_internal: unable to open file /usr/local/samba/private/smbpa sswd. Error was No such file or directory [2002/10/02 10:38:15, 0] passdb/pdb_smbpasswd.c:(1367) unable to open passdb database. [2002/10/02 10:38:15, 1] smbd/password.c:(555) Couldn't find user 'rm38144' in passdb. [2002/10/02 10:38:15, 2] smbd/reply.c:(962) NT Password did not match for user 'rm38144'! [2002/10/02 10:38:15, 1] smbd/reply.c:(998) Rejecting user 'rm38144': bad password [2002/10/02 10:38:15, 3] smbd/error.c:(91) error string = No such file or directory [2002/10/02 10:38:15, 3] smbd/error.c:(103) error packet at smbd/reply.c(1000) cmd=115 (SMBsesssetupX) NT_STATUS_LOGON_FAI LURE [2002/10/02 10:38:15, 3] smbd/process.c:(860) Transaction 397 of length 74I see that the NT Password did not match for user rm38144, however the NT password and the UNIX password are the same. Could this be something with the clearcase_albd account? Mathew SpurgeonEli Lilly and CompanySoftware Engineering Support TeamPhone: (317) 276-7436Mobile: (317) 716-7789http://mcntstep03.d51.lilly.com/SEST[EMAIL PROTECTED] "Bradley W. Langhorst" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 10/02/2002 10:41 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Samba] ClearCase and SambaOn Wed, 2002-10-02 at 11:06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:> We have a samba 2.2.3 and Rational ClearCase 2002.05.20 implementation at > our company. This configuration worked without a problem from April to > August however now the users are getting a "Connect As" string from their > Windows 2000 machines. If the users do an ipconfig /release and /renew > the problem goes away for the day, however it reoccurs everyday.> I don't know what might be wrong...maybe their windows passwords and the samba passwords have gotten out ofsync. what do the logs say?what changed in august?brad
RE: [Samba] ClearCase and Samba
what changed after august, any network changes also can you post your conf file what do you share via samba, clearcase vobs and views? -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Wednesday, October 02, 2002 10:06 AMTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: [Samba] ClearCase and SambaWe have a samba 2.2.3 and Rational ClearCase 2002.05.20 implementation at our company. This configuration worked without a problem from April to August however now the users are getting a "Connect As" string from their Windows 2000 machines. If the users do an ipconfig /release and /renew the problem goes away for the day, however it reoccurs everyday. Mathew SpurgeonEli Lilly and CompanySoftware Engineering Support Team[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: [Samba] solaris/2.2.2 authentication against NT domain (ie. root canal)
why do you have smbpasswd file, when you are in domain mode? -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2002 3:07 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [Samba] solaris/2.2.2 authentication against NT domain (ie. root canal) Greetings, This is my first post (hopefully not too newbie for this group). Thank you in advance to anyone who feels compelled to help. I'm trying to get a copy of Samba 2.2.2 running on Solaris 9 to authenticate against an NT domain. I have successfully done this on a Redhat 7.2 box which is running Samba 2.2.4 on the same domain. As best as I can tell, the configurations of these sambas seem the same but something must be wrong. I can successfully add the box to the domain and access it fine using 'share' authentication but when I try to use 'domain' authentication, I get "Incorrect password or unknown username" and the following is generated in log.smbd [2002/09/25 15:54:04, 0] smbd/password.c:domain_client_validate(1554) domain_client_validate: could not fetch trust account password for domain DOMAINP [2002/09/25 15:54:04, 0] passdb/pdb_smbpasswd.c:startsmbfilepwent(171) startsmbfilepwent_internal: unable to open file /usr/local/samba/private/smbpasswd. Error was No such file or directory [2002/09/25 15:54:04, 0] passdb/pdb_smbpasswd.c:pdb_getsampwnam(1368) unable to open passdb database. [2002/09/25 15:54:04, 0] passdb/pdb_smbpasswd.c:startsmbfilepwent(171) startsmbfilepwent_internal: unable to open file /usr/local/samba/private/smbpasswd. Error was No such file or directory [2002/09/25 15:54:04, 0] passdb/pdb_smbpasswd.c:pdb_getsampwnam(1368) unable to open passdb database. My username map file is essentially... !root = me nobody = * ...and here's my configuration... # Global parameters [global] coding system = client code page = 850 code page directory = /usr/local/samba/lib/codepages workgroup = DOMAINNAME netbios name = BOXNAME netbios aliases = netbios scope = server string = Samba 2.2.2 interfaces = bind interfaces only = No security = DOMAIN encrypt passwords = Yes update encrypted = Yes allow trusted domains = Yes hosts equiv = min passwd length = 5 map to guest = Never null passwords = No obey pam restrictions = No password server = server1 server2 server3 smb passwd file = /usr/local/samba/private/smbpasswd root directory = pam password change = No passwd program = passwd chat = *new*password* %n\n *new*password* %n\n *changed* passwd chat debug = No username map = /etc/usernamemap password level = 0 username level = 0 unix password sync = No restrict anonymous = No lanman auth = Yes use rhosts = No log level = 0 syslog = 1 syslog only = No log file = max log size = 5000 timestamp logs = Yes debug hires timestamp = No debug pid = No debug uid = No protocol = NT1 large readwrite = No max protocol = NT1 min protocol = CORE read bmpx = No read raw = Yes write raw = Yes nt smb support = Yes nt pipe support = Yes announce version = 4.5 announce as = NT max mux = 50 max xmit = 65535 name resolve order = lmhosts host wins bcast max packet = 65535 max ttl = 259200 max wins ttl = 518400 min wins ttl = 21600 time server = No change notify timeout = 60 deadtime = 0 getwd cache = Yes keepalive = 300 lpq cache time = 10 max smbd processes = 0 max disk size = 0 max open files = 1 read size = 16384 socket options = TCP_NODELAY stat cache size = 50 use mmap = Yes total print jobs = 0 load printers = Yes printcap name = lpstat disable spoolss = No enumports command = addprinter command = deleteprinter command = show add printer wizard = Yes os2 driver map = strip dot = No character set = mangled stack = 50 stat cache = Yes domain admin group = domain guest group = machine password timeout = 604800 add user script = delete user script = logon script = logon path = \\%N\%U\profile logon drive = logon home = \\%N\%U domain logons = No os level = 20 lm announce = Auto lm interval = 60 preferred master = Auto local master = Yes domain master = Auto browse list = Yes enhanced browsing = Yes dns proxy = Yes wins proxy = No wins serv
RE: [Samba] Installation problem with samba-2.2.5
try with some other version of gcc and also compile some c program with current version and see u get the same error -Original Message- From: abhishek kumar [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 20, 2002 2:23 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: abhishek kumar Subject: [Samba] Installation problem with samba-2.2.5 Hi , I am trying to install samba 2.2.5 on my solaris box. It fails in the very first step ..samba/source/./configure ...saying that cc or gcc is not able to produce the executables. I have gcc 3.0.4 and cc on my Path. Can anyone please helpme out. Thanks Abhishek -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
RE: [Samba] Samba versus Dreamweaver
Hi Keller, Barry I am getting the same error even though i tried these settings. The strange thing is am getting the error ,but the file is getting written to unix share from windows but i was wondering why the mysterious error, am getting the error but lock file , i have manually clear on windows side, originally its supposed to save file on windows side and put a lock on it, and when i check in back on unix side it should write back and clear the lock on windows Now i am getting error, but able to write the file on unix side , but have to manually clear the lock thanks in advance for your input Javid -Original Message- From: Keller Nicolas [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, June 14, 2002 8:44 AM To: 'Barry Dean' Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: AW: [Samba] Samba versus Dreamweaver Finally... :-) """ dos filetimes = yes dos filetime resolution = yes dos filemode = yes fake directory create times = yes inherit permissions = Yes """ ...has done the trick! Permissons were all set correctly before (Samba and FS) but this lines helped me out. It's a little slower than before (?) but it doesn't matter if only it works for more than one person - and it does :-) So thank you very very much & have a nice weekend! Bye, Nicolas Keller -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Good advice. You may also need: dos filetimes = yes dos filetime resolution = yes dos filemode = yes fake directory create times = yes create mask = 0112 force directory mode = 0775 inherit permissions = Yes In your SAMBA config. We do just what you do, SAMBA shares for groups of web authors. The authors belong to one of about 300 groups, the directories are set owned by root, group writable by one of these groups and not world accessible at all. The group sticky bit is set and a Solaris ACL is added to allow the user the web server runs as to have read access. All seems to run quite nicely. Even from Macs that run DAVE. On Friday 14 Jun 2002 11:39 am, Mike Brodbelt wrote: > Keller Nicolas wrote: > > Hi! > > > > I hope someone can help me with this one: > > > > We're using Macromedia Dreamweaver 3 to publish local files from a NT4 > > Server to our internet server running Redhat 7.3 / Samba 2.2.3a. Life > > could be so sweet but we're facing a strange problem: Users can't > > _overwrite_ files edited by other users. Everytime someone tries to > > overwrite such a file the message "An error occurred - cannot put > > file.xxx. Access is denied." pops up. But they can delete them and this > > only happens inside Dreamweaver 3, overwriting a file with the normal > > Windows Explorer isn't a problem. I guess my Samba configuration below is > > right and Dreamweaver does some strange things. > > It sounds like your problem is the Unix filesystem semantics not Samba. > To delete a file requires only write access to the *directory* that > contains that file - no permissions on the file itself are required. To > overwrite a file would require changing the data in the file, and so > needs write permission on the *file*. Windows explorer is, I'd guess, > actually deleting/recreating when you overwrite. > > The normal way around this is to set the group ownership of the > directory to a group that contains all the users you want to have > access. Then set the SGID bit on the directory. From that point on, all > files created in that directory will inherit the group ownership of the > parent directory. Subdirectories will inherit both the group ownership > of the parent, and the SGID bit. Then you need to ensure that the umask > is set so that files are created group writeable. You'll (obviously) > also need to chage the group/permissions on the files that were created > before you set the SGID bit on the directory. > > HTH, > > Mike. - -- Barry Dean Senior Computing Officer Computing Service, University of Kent -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iD8DBQE9Ceuy63PGDezn6TQRAsr4AKCcibul2To8vQJa1dKaFba1/WyCdgCg4OPs MrqLu9K9Xvq1ap5O/CpHT6c= =g0ba -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
RE: [Samba] authentication question- pls respond
I was wondering what could cause some w2k clients being prompted for pasword and login again and again ( laptops ) their registry for authentication is hklm\system\currentcontrolset\control\LSA is set to 1 ( user NTLMv2 session security if negotied ) same thing on desktops has no issues. same users when mapped to samba-2.2.4 has no problems samba is in domain mode. ( a account DC is serving client authenticatins ) samba server is member of resource domain. -Original Message- From: Andrew Bartlett [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, June 14, 2002 10:17 AM To: Javid Abdul-AJAVID1 Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Samba] authentication question- pls respond Javid Abdul-AJAVID1 wrote: > > I am running samba-2.0.7 on solaris 2.6 in domain mode > Windows clients are 98/nt/w2k > > I was just wondering if 2.0.7 supports NTLMv2 NO. Support for NTMv2 is only in HEAD. > I am asking this because lately some w2k clients are having issues with > authentication... > > how do i check what if when client is requesting SMBnegprot to the server > what NTLM version samba server is responding This isn't 'negotiated', the client just sends what it likes. Samba HEAD has a multiphase generic security negotiation setup using extended security (SPNEGO), but I'm not about to explain how that works tonight :-) Andrew Bartlett -- Andrew Bartlett [EMAIL PROTECTED] Manager, Authentication Subsystems, Samba Team [EMAIL PROTECTED] Student Network Administrator, Hawker College [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://samba.org http://build.samba.org http://hawkerc.net -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
RE: [Samba] Anyone using antivirus software?
does it support solaris2.6 , for plain samba file servers -Original Message- From: Greg J. Zartman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, June 13, 2002 3:37 PM To: Bob Sully Cc: Rasmus Reinholdt Nielsen; Brian McGraw; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Samba] Anyone using antivirus software? > RAVantivirus works well, I have been evaluating it on one of my home > networks (60-day free trial). But they want $300US for the mail server > version, which is a bit much for a home networker; they have offered me > a 20% discount, but will check some of the other choices first; still a > bit expensive. If they'd bring the price down I'd buy it right now. I've been using RAV for some time now and couldn't be more pleased with it. Virus definition updates can be 100% automated with a CRON job. I have mine set to do incremental updates every 30 minutes. The other thing that I like about RAV is that it is very easy to set up the mail server version to scan shares on your samba network. $300US is well worth the money for the excellent product. -- Greg J. Zartman, P.E. Vice-President Logging Engineering International, Inc. 1243 West 7th Avenue Eugene, Oregon 97402 541-683-8383 541-683-8144 www.leiinc.com -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
[Samba] authentication question- pls respond
I am running samba-2.0.7 on solaris 2.6 in domain mode Windows clients are 98/nt/w2k I was just wondering if 2.0.7 supports NTLMv2 I am asking this because lately some w2k clients are having issues with authentication... how do i check what if when client is requesting SMBnegprot to the server what NTLM version samba server is responding thanks Abdul Javid -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
RE: [Samba] Mapping Drives from Windows 2000
your new pc might have configured for encryption where as samba might be plaintext post your conf file -Original Message-From: Tracy Jackson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2002 2:13 PMTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: [Samba] Mapping Drives from Windows 2000 I have SAMBA on a Unix server. I have 8 pc's running Win 2000. All of these work properly. Mapping a drive to the unix server is no problem. I got a new pc in, and I can not get it to map to the unix. I get the error message : The mapped network drive could not be created because the following error has occurred.The account is not authorized t log in from this station. Now, I can telnet into the unix server. I can ping the unix server. The unix can ping the pc. I do not understand what the deal is or how to fix it. Is this a problem on the pc side or the unix side? Any help would be appreciated. Thanks in advance Tracy Jackson Tennessee Wildlife Resources Agency GIS [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: [Samba] Re: DNS Proxy - WINS problem - please help
dont you think you should have ur dns servers in /etc/resolv.conf not wins servers or if you gave wrong ips to me, then you should change conf file to reflect that -Original Message- From: Terry Davis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, June 11, 2002 4:30 PM To: Javid Abdul-AJAVID1 Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [Samba] Re: DNS Proxy - WINS problem - please help /etc/resolv.conf: domain domain.com nameserver 10.10.1.5 nameserver 10.10.1.8 search domain.com samba-2.2.4 Redhat 7.2 The DNS servers are on the same subnet as the samba server. Thank you! On Tue, 2002-06-11 at 16:23, Javid Abdul-AJAVID1 wrote: > what are setting on samba servers as for as dns is concerned > like in /etc/resolv.conf > what version of samba > what unix version on samba > > > -Original Message- > From: Terry Davis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesday, June 11, 2002 4:11 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: [Samba] Re: DNS Proxy - WINS problem - please help > > > Another note, DNS directly from the client to my dns servers works > fine. Any help would be greatly appreciated. > > On Tue, 2002-06-11 at 12:04, Terry Davis wrote: > > Here is my scenario when a client wants to resolve a name on my local > > network: > > > > CLIENT --> VPN --> SAMBA --> DNS > > > > The client is set up like so: > > DNS1 = ISP DNS1 (204.26.64.1) > > DNS2 = ISP DNS2 (204.26.80.3) > > WINS1 = my samba1 (10.10.1.5) > > WINS2 = my samba2 (10.10.1.8) > > > > This all _seemed_ to have worked 3 days ago for roughly 6 months but > > stopped suddenly without me doing anything. > > > > When the client requests a name on my local network like atlas > > (10.10.1.8), there is no resolution at all. > > > > My first reaction was there was a firewall change or something, but that > > is not the case. > > > > > > 1) How can I see if requests are getting to the samba server for dns > > queries? > > > > 2) Is my thinking correct about DNS proxy? > > > > > > Here is the relevant parts of my smb.conf: > > > > wins support = yes > > wins proxy = no > > dns proxy = yes > > > > Thank you for your help! > > > > -- > > Terry Davis > > http://approbation.org/ > -- > Terry Davis > http://approbation.org/ > > > -- > To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the > instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba -- Terry Davis http://approbation.org/ -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
RE: [Samba] Re: DNS Proxy - WINS problem - please help
what are setting on samba servers as for as dns is concerned like in /etc/resolv.conf what version of samba what unix version on samba -Original Message- From: Terry Davis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, June 11, 2002 4:11 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [Samba] Re: DNS Proxy - WINS problem - please help Another note, DNS directly from the client to my dns servers works fine. Any help would be greatly appreciated. On Tue, 2002-06-11 at 12:04, Terry Davis wrote: > Here is my scenario when a client wants to resolve a name on my local > network: > > CLIENT --> VPN --> SAMBA --> DNS > > The client is set up like so: > DNS1 = ISP DNS1 (204.26.64.1) > DNS2 = ISP DNS2 (204.26.80.3) > WINS1 = my samba1 (10.10.1.5) > WINS2 = my samba2 (10.10.1.8) > > This all _seemed_ to have worked 3 days ago for roughly 6 months but > stopped suddenly without me doing anything. > > When the client requests a name on my local network like atlas > (10.10.1.8), there is no resolution at all. > > My first reaction was there was a firewall change or something, but that > is not the case. > > > 1) How can I see if requests are getting to the samba server for dns > queries? > > 2) Is my thinking correct about DNS proxy? > > > Here is the relevant parts of my smb.conf: > > wins support = yes > wins proxy = no > dns proxy = yes > > Thank you for your help! > > -- > Terry Davis > http://approbation.org/ -- Terry Davis http://approbation.org/ -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
RE: [Samba] User Authenication
yes it is required for write access if you want just read access , you could add guest account option in conf file. other than that you need to have valid unix account to access the unix share. Others: Correct me if am wrong here :--) ABdul Javid -Original Message- From: Geyer, Thomas L. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, June 11, 2002 3:44 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [Samba] User Authenication I have Samba running on a couple of IBM RS/6000 servers running AIX 4.3.3. I have Samba configured to do user authenication to the primary domain controller. The only way that users are able to map to the share is if they have a userid on the unix server. I thought that as long as a user is authenicated at the PDC an account on the unix server would not be necessary. Is an account on the unix server a requirement of Samba and I just missed it in the documentation? If this is not a requirement what options do I need to set? Any help would be appreciated. Thanks. Thomas L. Geyer Email:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Phone:(330) 471-2073 Fax:(330) 471-4034 -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
RE: [Samba] Windows won't send passwd to samba server
am running samba-2.0.7 on solaris6 today am observing smbd is taking up lot of memory like for each connection 48M of which 45 mg is its using for heap any idea, this not normal thanks Javid -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
RE: [Samba] CIFS & SMB Microsoft licenses
I think Intel and Microsoft jointly developed SMB , i guess they still might have patent on it though microsoft changed SMB and called it CIFS. -Original Message- From: Sanjiv Bawa [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, April 16, 2002 9:34 AM To: Davide Dozza; Javid Abdul-AJAVID1 Cc: samba Subject: RE: [Samba] CIFS & SMB Microsoft licenses My understanding is that microsoft adoped SMB. Do they actually have a patent on SMB? It can't possibly even be enforcable. SB -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Davide Dozza Sent: Tuesday, April 16, 2002 10:20 AM To: Javid Abdul-AJAVID1 Cc: samba Subject: Re: [Samba] CIFS & SMB Microsoft licenses Uhm... I have guessed so It seems that Microsoft will release the use of its patents about SMB and CIFS protocols only to companies that won't use GPL/LGPL licenses to interoperate with Win2000 and WinXP. I hope, I'm wrong..... Davide Javid Abdul-AJAVID1 wrote: > Thanks for the article > I was just wondering what this means to Samba > > "The Microsoft license specifically excludes software under the General > Public License, commonly known as the GPL. The GPL is the software license > used by Linux and by SAMBA, a popular open-source program that allows > non-Microsoft systems to share files and printers with Windows." > > Does this mean samba is banned from interoperating with future windows > products??? > > -Original Message- > From: Davide Dozza [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesday, April 16, 2002 9:49 AM > To: samba > Subject: [Samba] CIFS & SMB Microsoft licenses > > > > Hello guys, > > does anyone knows the implications that the CIFS and SMB Microsoft > licenses may have on samba development ? > > http://news.com.com/2010-1075-882846.html > > Davide > > > -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
RE: [Samba] CIFS & SMB Microsoft licenses
which means samba cant be used in future with windows? what other products out there which has no GPL license to interoperate with windows TAS? -Original Message- From: Davide Dozza [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, April 16, 2002 10:20 AM To: Javid Abdul-AJAVID1 Cc: samba Subject: Re: [Samba] CIFS & SMB Microsoft licenses Uhm... I have guessed so It seems that Microsoft will release the use of its patents about SMB and CIFS protocols only to companies that won't use GPL/LGPL licenses to interoperate with Win2000 and WinXP. I hope, I'm wrong. Davide Javid Abdul-AJAVID1 wrote: > Thanks for the article > I was just wondering what this means to Samba > > "The Microsoft license specifically excludes software under the General > Public License, commonly known as the GPL. The GPL is the software license > used by Linux and by SAMBA, a popular open-source program that allows > non-Microsoft systems to share files and printers with Windows." > > Does this mean samba is banned from interoperating with future windows > products??? > > -Original Message- > From: Davide Dozza [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesday, April 16, 2002 9:49 AM > To: samba > Subject: [Samba] CIFS & SMB Microsoft licenses > > > > Hello guys, > > does anyone knows the implications that the CIFS and SMB Microsoft > licenses may have on samba development ? > > http://news.com.com/2010-1075-882846.html > > Davide > > > -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
RE: [Samba] CIFS & SMB Microsoft licenses
Thanks for the article I was just wondering what this means to Samba "The Microsoft license specifically excludes software under the General Public License, commonly known as the GPL. The GPL is the software license used by Linux and by SAMBA, a popular open-source program that allows non-Microsoft systems to share files and printers with Windows." Does this mean samba is banned from interoperating with future windows products??? -Original Message- From: Davide Dozza [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, April 16, 2002 9:49 AM To: samba Subject: [Samba] CIFS & SMB Microsoft licenses Hello guys, does anyone knows the implications that the CIFS and SMB Microsoft licenses may have on samba development ? http://news.com.com/2010-1075-882846.html Davide -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
