Re: SV: [Samba] Samba-Citrix compatability
On Tue, 4 Nov 2003, Eric Roseme wrote: > John and/or Andrew, > > I created some slides diagraming this issue in simplistic terms for > Microsoft management when I was attempting to persuede them to uncomment > the MultipleUsersOnConnection code from the W2000 redirector (to no > avail). If you think that they could be useful for officially > documenting the issue, I can email you the pdf directly (I do not want > to dump a big file in everyone's inbox). Eric, Please do send that to me. I'll extract and ammend the HOWTO from it. Thnx. - John T. > > Eric Roseme > > John H Terpstra wrote: > > >On Tue, 4 Nov 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > > > > > >>I have searched for some FAQ/HOWTO regarding Citrix/Metaframe to no > >>avail. (Like this one > >>http://samba.org/~jht/HOWTO/Samba-HOWTO-Collection.pdf ) > >> > >>What I would like to see in such a FAQ/HOWTO: > >> > >> > > > >Are you willing to help write this? You too can make a difference you > >know! > > > > > > > >>- Compilation issues regarding Citrix/metaframe > >>- - ie the need to increase the MAX_CONNECTION setting before > >>compilation > >>- - ie how to compile samba to a 64 bit application to get more > >>available file descriptors (problem for solaris) > >>- the need to tweak the /etc/system settings (ie "set rlim_fd_max = > >>") > >>- oplocks settings in smb.conf > >>- the single smbd process issue and workaround(s) (wins and > >>DNS-proxy/netbios names?) > >>- the home-share issue and problem > >> > >>All these issues, and probably more, I feel are related to > >>Citrix/metaframe vs. Samba. If I am wrong and somewhere there is a FAQ > >>regarding this then all the better. Just need to find it. ;-) If not > >>then it is most neeeded. > >> > >> > > > >Good points! Will you contribute some text that we can add to the HOWTO? > > > >Information like this gets documented when someone with your kind of > >passion writes some basic guidelines and contributes it to the HOWTO. > >Please do not leave this to others, while the needs are fresh in your mind > >please write a few paragraphs on each and send them to me for inclusion. > > > >Cheers, > >John T. > > > > > > > >>And Samba4? What is this? :-) Due 2005? > >> > >>Kind regards > >>Per Kjetil Grotnes > >>Some governmental department in Norway > >> > >> > >> > >> > >>>Andrew Bartlett > >>>Sendt: 4. november 2003 02:20 > >>> > >>>On Tue, Nov 04, 2003 at 11:55:25AM +1100, DAVIES Rob wrote: > G'day, > > >>> > >>> > We are having problems when connecting to our Solaris 8 server Zeus > from our Windows 2000 Terminal Servers. > > > >>>I think you might be hitting two of the nastiest bugs with > >>>that combination. > >>> > >>>Firstly, there are issues with Solaris 8, and TDB locks, for > >>>which there is a solaris kernel patch (it's an fcntl issue). > >>>But more importantly, there is an issue caused by the way > >>>Windows Terminal Server clients connect - they all use the > >>>same smbd. This causes all their operations to be > >>>serialised, even worse if something blocks. > >>> > >>>The best solution is to call your system by as many names as > >>>possible. For example, call it by one name per user, > >>>particularly for roaming profiles. (So make a user's profile > >>>path/homedir \\zeus-username\username or the like). Use DNS > >>>(with a samba wins server set to 'dns proxy') or fixed > >>>entires in your wins.dat, or an lmhosts file, to force the > >>>multiple names. Samba doesn't mind what it gets called. > >>> > >>> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > -- 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
Re: SV: [Samba] Samba-Citrix compatability
John and/or Andrew, I created some slides diagraming this issue in simplistic terms for Microsoft management when I was attempting to persuede them to uncomment the MultipleUsersOnConnection code from the W2000 redirector (to no avail). If you think that they could be useful for officially documenting the issue, I can email you the pdf directly (I do not want to dump a big file in everyone's inbox). Eric Roseme John H Terpstra wrote: On Tue, 4 Nov 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I have searched for some FAQ/HOWTO regarding Citrix/Metaframe to no avail. (Like this one http://samba.org/~jht/HOWTO/Samba-HOWTO-Collection.pdf ) What I would like to see in such a FAQ/HOWTO: Are you willing to help write this? You too can make a difference you know! - Compilation issues regarding Citrix/metaframe - - ie the need to increase the MAX_CONNECTION setting before compilation - - ie how to compile samba to a 64 bit application to get more available file descriptors (problem for solaris) - the need to tweak the /etc/system settings (ie "set rlim_fd_max = ") - oplocks settings in smb.conf - the single smbd process issue and workaround(s) (wins and DNS-proxy/netbios names?) - the home-share issue and problem All these issues, and probably more, I feel are related to Citrix/metaframe vs. Samba. If I am wrong and somewhere there is a FAQ regarding this then all the better. Just need to find it. ;-) If not then it is most neeeded. Good points! Will you contribute some text that we can add to the HOWTO? Information like this gets documented when someone with your kind of passion writes some basic guidelines and contributes it to the HOWTO. Please do not leave this to others, while the needs are fresh in your mind please write a few paragraphs on each and send them to me for inclusion. Cheers, John T. And Samba4? What is this? :-) Due 2005? Kind regards Per Kjetil Grotnes Some governmental department in Norway Andrew Bartlett Sendt: 4. november 2003 02:20 On Tue, Nov 04, 2003 at 11:55:25AM +1100, DAVIES Rob wrote: > G'day, > We are having problems when connecting to our Solaris 8 server Zeus from our Windows 2000 Terminal Servers. I think you might be hitting two of the nastiest bugs with that combination. Firstly, there are issues with Solaris 8, and TDB locks, for which there is a solaris kernel patch (it's an fcntl issue). But more importantly, there is an issue caused by the way Windows Terminal Server clients connect - they all use the same smbd. This causes all their operations to be serialised, even worse if something blocks. The best solution is to call your system by as many names as possible. For example, call it by one name per user, particularly for roaming profiles. (So make a user's profile path/homedir \\zeus-username\username or the like). Use DNS (with a samba wins server set to 'dns proxy') or fixed entires in your wins.dat, or an lmhosts file, to force the multiple names. Samba doesn't mind what it gets called. -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
Re: SV: [Samba] Samba-Citrix compatability
On Tue, 4 Nov 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > From: John H Terpstra [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > I have searched for some FAQ/HOWTO regarding Citrix/Metaframe to no > > > avail. (Like this one > > > http://samba.org/~jht/HOWTO/Samba-HOWTO-Collection.pdf ) > > > What I would like to see in such a FAQ/HOWTO: > > Are you willing to help write this? You too can make a > > difference you know! > > Hehe. Hi John. I knew you would pop in here sooner or later. I am sure > you have a default text you paste in for us silly enough to stick our > nose out. ;-) Jokes aside. Yes, I could attempt to help with this as > I told Andrew earlier. Your posting was too tempting to leave it alone. :) > > > > All these issues, and probably more, I feel are related to > > > Citrix/metaframe vs. Samba. If I am wrong and somewhere there is a > > > FAQ regarding this then all the better. Just need to find > > Information like this gets documented when someone with your > > kind of passion writes some basic guidelines and contributes > > it to the HOWTO. Please do not leave this to others, while > > the needs are fresh in your mind please write a few > > paragraphs on each and send them to me for inclusion. > > We do not have any _current_ need of a HOWTO. What I registred was a > user question and an answer from one of the samba-team that I had seen > before (with some additional info about dns-proxy that I had not seen > before and still wonder about). Please document your thoughts. Send them in, ask others to help flesh it out. None of us knows enough, but by working together we can produce good information for our users. > Thus I see that there is a need for such a Citrix-HOWTO, and I would > have offered my services earlier if I felt confident that i could > contribute to this document. As I said earlier - we have a running > environment and its been awhile since i tweaked it. I am probably not > the best to deliver such info, but I might do an attempt. If you have the passion to write something that is much better than a competent expert who writes nothing. - John T. > > Regards > Per Kjetil Grotnes > > (PS: i think you do great work getting people to help the community with > documenting samba) > > -- 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
Re: SV: [Samba] Samba-Citrix compatability
From: John H Terpstra [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > I have searched for some FAQ/HOWTO regarding Citrix/Metaframe to no > > avail. (Like this one > > http://samba.org/~jht/HOWTO/Samba-HOWTO-Collection.pdf ) > > What I would like to see in such a FAQ/HOWTO: > Are you willing to help write this? You too can make a > difference you know! Hehe. Hi John. I knew you would pop in here sooner or later. I am sure you have a default text you paste in for us silly enough to stick our nose out. ;-) Jokes aside. Yes, I could attempt to help with this as I told Andrew earlier. > > All these issues, and probably more, I feel are related to > > Citrix/metaframe vs. Samba. If I am wrong and somewhere there is a > > FAQ regarding this then all the better. Just need to find > Information like this gets documented when someone with your > kind of passion writes some basic guidelines and contributes > it to the HOWTO. Please do not leave this to others, while > the needs are fresh in your mind please write a few > paragraphs on each and send them to me for inclusion. We do not have any _current_ need of a HOWTO. What I registred was a user question and an answer from one of the samba-team that I had seen before (with some additional info about dns-proxy that I had not seen before and still wonder about). Thus I see that there is a need for such a Citrix-HOWTO, and I would have offered my services earlier if I felt confident that i could contribute to this document. As I said earlier - we have a running environment and its been awhile since i tweaked it. I am probably not the best to deliver such info, but I might do an attempt. Regards Per Kjetil Grotnes (PS: i think you do great work getting people to help the community with documenting samba) -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
Re: SV: [Samba] Samba-Citrix compatability
>Andrew Bartlett wrote: > > On each of our Citrix servers we can have up to 100 users all > > connecting to 10 shares on the samba server = 1000 connections > > 'services' for that one citrix server? > I know all this. Now all I need is for you to write it up in > bugzilla.samba.org so we can remmember to get it fixed. Yes, well. I got carried away. And when people now search the mailinglist they might get a thread-hit on Citrix issues here. ;-) I have posted a 'bug' report: #716. Tried to follow the guidelines for filling it in. Hopefully it is acceptable. > > In most other environments other than Citrix this would not be a > > problem (ie w2k workstation clients). > You would be surprised. Even with non-citrix setups, we get > multiple %U mappings, and all the resultant fun. Even single client environments which probably 95% of the usage versus Samba is in the rest of the world? It definitely is a problem for Metaframe users. > > changelog for 2.2.8 we could not find any related fixes to Citrix > > problems. > The main issue is the security fixes. But can you write down > what you have learnt? You mean as a chapter on Citrix Metaframe for us Samba users? Some of the issues I listed are from the mailinglist (which do not directly consern our current setup) and others we just did to solve a problem and not to solve the cause of the problem. But I might attempt to write something about the problems that we have worked through yes. Per Kjetil Grotnes -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
Re: SV: [Samba] Samba-Citrix compatability
On Tue, 4 Nov 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > I have searched for some FAQ/HOWTO regarding Citrix/Metaframe to no > avail. (Like this one > http://samba.org/~jht/HOWTO/Samba-HOWTO-Collection.pdf ) > > What I would like to see in such a FAQ/HOWTO: Are you willing to help write this? You too can make a difference you know! > > - Compilation issues regarding Citrix/metaframe > - - ie the need to increase the MAX_CONNECTION setting before > compilation > - - ie how to compile samba to a 64 bit application to get more > available file descriptors (problem for solaris) > - the need to tweak the /etc/system settings (ie "set rlim_fd_max = > ") > - oplocks settings in smb.conf > - the single smbd process issue and workaround(s) (wins and > DNS-proxy/netbios names?) > - the home-share issue and problem > > All these issues, and probably more, I feel are related to > Citrix/metaframe vs. Samba. If I am wrong and somewhere there is a FAQ > regarding this then all the better. Just need to find it. ;-) If not > then it is most neeeded. Good points! Will you contribute some text that we can add to the HOWTO? Information like this gets documented when someone with your kind of passion writes some basic guidelines and contributes it to the HOWTO. Please do not leave this to others, while the needs are fresh in your mind please write a few paragraphs on each and send them to me for inclusion. Cheers, John T. > > And Samba4? What is this? :-) Due 2005? > > Kind regards > Per Kjetil Grotnes > Some governmental department in Norway > > > > Andrew Bartlett > > Sendt: 4. november 2003 02:20 > > > > On Tue, Nov 04, 2003 at 11:55:25AM +1100, DAVIES Rob wrote: > G'day, > > > > We are having problems when connecting to our Solaris 8 server Zeus > > > from our Windows 2000 Terminal Servers. > > > > I think you might be hitting two of the nastiest bugs with > > that combination. > > > > Firstly, there are issues with Solaris 8, and TDB locks, for > > which there is a solaris kernel patch (it's an fcntl issue). > > But more importantly, there is an issue caused by the way > > Windows Terminal Server clients connect - they all use the > > same smbd. This causes all their operations to be > > serialised, even worse if something blocks. > > > > The best solution is to call your system by as many names as > > possible. For example, call it by one name per user, > > particularly for roaming profiles. (So make a user's profile > > path/homedir \\zeus-username\username or the like). Use DNS > > (with a samba wins server set to 'dns proxy') or fixed > > entires in your wins.dat, or an lmhosts file, to force the > > multiple names. Samba doesn't mind what it gets called. > > -- 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
Re: SV: [Samba] Samba-Citrix compatability
On Tue, Nov 04, 2003 at 11:46:00AM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > From: Andrew Bartlett [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > - Compilation issues regarding Citrix/metaframe > > > - - ie the need to increase the MAX_CONNECTION setting before > > > compilation > > Please file a bug against this. There is no valid reson for > > us to allow 2^16 session setups, but only 2^8 tree connects. > > Hmm, The "bug" I tried to refere to is the "smbd/conn.c: #define > MAX_CONNECTIONS". > If you have Citrix/Metaframe the default value (128? 256?) is way to > low. > This would be the max amount of "connections" from a single machine, > right? > > Quote from "conn.c" : > /* set these to define the limits of the server. NOTE These are on a > per-client basis. Thus any one machine can't connect to more than > MAX_CONNECTIONS services, but any number of machines may connect at > one time. */ > > On each of our Citrix servers we can have up to 100 users all connecting > to 10 shares > on the samba server = 1000 connections 'services' for that one citrix > server? I know all this. Now all I need is for you to write it up in bugzilla.samba.org so we can remmember to get it fixed. > > > - the home-share issue and problem > > What is this one in particular? > > Well, I am not sure this is a bug. More of an issue. > > If you use > > [home-disk] > path = /home/%U/ This is always a bad idea... > and profile path in user manager in windows mapping H: to > \\server\home-disk > > You would get serious problems with files having the same name on two > home-dirs. It would be a locking problem on the windows side. > > User1 opens "iloveyou.doc" on his home-dir for writing would yield a > \\server\home-disk\iloveyou.doc lock. > User2 opens "iloveyou.doc" on her home-dir and windows would think this > was the same \\server\home-disk\iloveyou.doc and get a message the file > was locked. Even though these were > > /home/user1/iloveyou.doc and > /home/user2/iloveyou.doc. > > The fix is to use > > [homes] > path = /home/%S > > And a user manager profile H: mapping to \\server\%username% > > Thus the path above would not (for windows) be: > > \\server\user1\iloveyou.doc and > \\server\user2\iloveyou.doc > > In most other environments other than Citrix this would not be a problem > (ie w2k workstation clients). You would be supprised. Even with non-citrix setups, we get multiple %U mappings, and all the resultant fun. > > > All these issues, and probably more, I feel are related to > > > Citrix/metaframe vs. Samba. If I am wrong and somewhere there is a > > > FAQ regarding this then all the better. Just need to find > > it. ;-) If > > > not then it is most neeeded. > > So, when can we expect the patch (seriously, if you can get > > it started, you might just tempt some of our poor > > documentation slaves.) > > We have run Samba since about '97 with Citrix winframe/metaframe. It > works. But there still are issues. > I keep an eye on all Citrix/Metaframe posts on this mailinglist and I > mean I have seen some attempts of patches for Citrix. But unfortunatly > nothing that has stuck to anywhere reachable (FAQ). > > We have tuned the samba installation compilation, unix-settings and > smb.conf so that it now works fairly well. We still have some weird > "cannot save" happenings once a day or so, but nothing really critical. > I must admit that we are still running 2.2.6 since from the changelog > for 2.2.8 we could not find any related fixes to Citrix problems. The main issue is the security fixes. But can you write down what you have learnt? Andrew Bartlett -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
Re: SV: [Samba] Samba-Citrix compatability
> From: Andrew Bartlett [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > - Compilation issues regarding Citrix/metaframe > > - - ie the need to increase the MAX_CONNECTION setting before > > compilation > Please file a bug against this. There is no valid reson for > us to allow 2^16 session setups, but only 2^8 tree connects. Hmm, The "bug" I tried to refere to is the "smbd/conn.c: #define MAX_CONNECTIONS". If you have Citrix/Metaframe the default value (128? 256?) is way to low. This would be the max amount of "connections" from a single machine, right? Quote from "conn.c" : /* set these to define the limits of the server. NOTE These are on a per-client basis. Thus any one machine can't connect to more than MAX_CONNECTIONS services, but any number of machines may connect at one time. */ On each of our Citrix servers we can have up to 100 users all connecting to 10 shares on the samba server = 1000 connections 'services' for that one citrix server? > > - the home-share issue and problem > What is this one in particular? Well, I am not sure this is a bug. More of an issue. If you use [home-disk] path = /home/%U/ and profile path in user manager in windows mapping H: to \\server\home-disk You would get serious problems with files having the same name on two home-dirs. It would be a locking problem on the windows side. User1 opens "iloveyou.doc" on his home-dir for writing would yield a \\server\home-disk\iloveyou.doc lock. User2 opens "iloveyou.doc" on her home-dir and windows would think this was the same \\server\home-disk\iloveyou.doc and get a message the file was locked. Even though these were /home/user1/iloveyou.doc and /home/user2/iloveyou.doc. The fix is to use [homes] path = /home/%S And a user manager profile H: mapping to \\server\%username% Thus the path above would not (for windows) be: \\server\user1\iloveyou.doc and \\server\user2\iloveyou.doc In most other environments other than Citrix this would not be a problem (ie w2k workstation clients). > > All these issues, and probably more, I feel are related to > > Citrix/metaframe vs. Samba. If I am wrong and somewhere there is a > > FAQ regarding this then all the better. Just need to find > it. ;-) If > > not then it is most neeeded. > So, when can we expect the patch (seriously, if you can get > it started, you might just tempt some of our poor > documentation slaves.) We have run Samba since about '97 with Citrix winframe/metaframe. It works. But there still are issues. I keep an eye on all Citrix/Metaframe posts on this mailinglist and I mean I have seen some attempts of patches for Citrix. But unfortunatly nothing that has stuck to anywhere reachable (FAQ). We have tuned the samba installation compilation, unix-settings and smb.conf so that it now works fairly well. We still have some weird "cannot save" happenings once a day or so, but nothing really critical. I must admit that we are still running 2.2.6 since from the changelog for 2.2.8 we could not find any related fixes to Citrix problems. > > And Samba4? What is this? :-) Due 2005? > A research project, that has stripped out all the basic > assumptions from Samba, and is building it all from scratch > again. Very interesting. The very brave can check out the > samba4 repository, but it's not something even close to > functional yet (the posix backend - ie, access to a unix > filesystem is yet to be reimplemeted). Yes, sounds very interesing indeed. Regards Per Kjetil Grotnes -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
Re: SV: [Samba] Samba-Citrix compatability
On Tue, Nov 04, 2003 at 10:11:00AM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > I have searched for some FAQ/HOWTO regarding Citrix/Metaframe to no > avail. (Like this one > http://samba.org/~jht/HOWTO/Samba-HOWTO-Collection.pdf ) > > What I would like to see in such a FAQ/HOWTO: > > - Compilation issues regarding Citrix/metaframe > - - ie the need to increase the MAX_CONNECTION setting before > compilation Please file a bug against this. There is no valid reson for us to allow 2^16 session setups, but only 2^8 tree connects. > - - ie how to compile samba to a 64 bit application to get more > available file descriptors (problem for solaris) > - the need to tweak the /etc/system settings (ie "set rlim_fd_max = > ") > - oplocks settings in smb.conf > - the single smbd process issue and workaround(s) (wins and > DNS-proxy/netbios names?) > - the home-share issue and problem What is this one in particular? > All these issues, and probably more, I feel are related to > Citrix/metaframe vs. Samba. If I am wrong and somewhere there is a FAQ > regarding this then all the better. Just need to find it. ;-) If not > then it is most neeeded. So, when can we expect the patch (seriously, if you can get it started, you might just tempt some of our poor documentation slaves.) > And Samba4? What is this? :-) Due 2005? A research project, that has stripped out all the basic assumptions from Samba, and is building it all from scratch again. Very interesting. The very brave can check out the samba4 repository, but it's not something even close to functional yet (the posix backend - ie, access to a unix filesystem is yet to be reimplemeted). Andrew Bartlett -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
SV: [Samba] Samba-Citrix compatability
I have searched for some FAQ/HOWTO regarding Citrix/Metaframe to no avail. (Like this one http://samba.org/~jht/HOWTO/Samba-HOWTO-Collection.pdf ) What I would like to see in such a FAQ/HOWTO: - Compilation issues regarding Citrix/metaframe - - ie the need to increase the MAX_CONNECTION setting before compilation - - ie how to compile samba to a 64 bit application to get more available file descriptors (problem for solaris) - the need to tweak the /etc/system settings (ie "set rlim_fd_max = ") - oplocks settings in smb.conf - the single smbd process issue and workaround(s) (wins and DNS-proxy/netbios names?) - the home-share issue and problem All these issues, and probably more, I feel are related to Citrix/metaframe vs. Samba. If I am wrong and somewhere there is a FAQ regarding this then all the better. Just need to find it. ;-) If not then it is most neeeded. And Samba4? What is this? :-) Due 2005? Kind regards Per Kjetil Grotnes Some governmental department in Norway > Andrew Bartlett > Sendt: 4. november 2003 02:20 > > On Tue, Nov 04, 2003 at 11:55:25AM +1100, DAVIES Rob wrote: > G'day, > > > We are having problems when connecting to our Solaris 8 server Zeus > > from our Windows 2000 Terminal Servers. > > I think you might be hitting two of the nastiest bugs with > that combination. > > Firstly, there are issues with Solaris 8, and TDB locks, for > which there is a solaris kernel patch (it's an fcntl issue). > But more importantly, there is an issue caused by the way > Windows Terminal Server clients connect - they all use the > same smbd. This causes all their operations to be > serialised, even worse if something blocks. > > The best solution is to call your system by as many names as > possible. For example, call it by one name per user, > particularly for roaming profiles. (So make a user's profile > path/homedir \\zeus-username\username or the like). Use DNS > (with a samba wins server set to 'dns proxy') or fixed > entires in your wins.dat, or an lmhosts file, to force the > multiple names. Samba doesn't mind what it gets called. -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
