RE: Draft of branch maintainence and release plans....
Yep, that's my code. I had been working with Jeremy to get this integrated but we hit a legal issue. It was recently overcome though he probably doesn't know it yet :-) The patch allows you to plug-in various EA backends, and I had to do some nasty stuff to the VFS in to make that happen. The stackable VFS would be a much better way to do it, but didn't exist at the time. I hope Alexander's work makes it into samba 3.0. Matt Zinkevicius Software Engineer Network Storage Array Solutions Hewlett-Packard -Original Message- From: Tim Potter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 1:14 PM To: Esh, Andrew Cc: Gerald Carter; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Draft of branch maintainence and release plans On Tue, Jul 09, 2002 at 01:21:37PM -0500, Esh, Andrew wrote: That's the same code I'm talking about. I have it running. Great! I was just making sure there wasn't going to be a huge duplication of effort. Tim.
Re: Draft of branch maintainence and release plans....
On Wed, Jul 10, 2002 at 03:41:36PM -0400, ZINKEVICIUS,MATT (HP-Loveland,ex1) wrote: Yep, that's my code. I had been working with Jeremy to get this integrated but we hit a legal issue. It was recently overcome though he probably doesn't know it yet :-) No I didn't ! Tell me more please ! :-). Jeremy.
Re: Draft of branch maintainence and release plans....
On Tue, Jul 09, 2002 at 11:05:39AM +1000, Andrew Bartlett wrote: Just for the record, no one was placing the burden on you andrew (or even suggesting that it rested upon you). If you don't want to do it or would rather work on something else, then that's fine. I think you read too much into the original proposal. No, but from here it does rather look like I'm the only (team) person working on PDC-specific code currently, particularly in HEAD. (Hence why I have am so glad to be working with kai, jelmer and metze on the new SAM stuff - and with idra's keen eye on details I would prefer to gloss over... ;-) You might want to take a look at the ethereal NETLOGON code. Ronnie has been doing lots of work, apparently with netmon.exe and a random packet generator. (-: Just out of curiousity, IIRC Kai did the current trust relationship stuff and tpot did the sam sync stuff. Or am I remembering incorrectly here. I could be. Memory is a little fuzzy. Tpot did the sam sync stuff - but has indicated he is too busy to continue, I worked with mimir on the trusted domains code - most of it was actually done when I did AuthRewrite, and mimir sorted out some important protocol details with the join etc. To be fair most of the code was already in TNG. It just needed debugging and merging and some quiet time in an airport lounge. Tim.
RE: Draft of branch maintainence and release plans....
Title: RE: Draft of branch maintainence and release plans That's the same code I'm talking about. I have it running. -Original Message- From: Tim Potter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 10:10 AM To: Esh, Andrew Cc: Gerald Carter; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Draft of branch maintainence and release plans On Tue, Jul 09, 2002 at 09:47:53AM -0500, Esh, Andrew wrote: I could work on the ext_attr patch, unless what you want out of it is drastically different that what I already have running. I am using the VFS module xfs_ea, which uses libattr from Bestbits and SGI. I can generify xfs_ea so it isn't XFS specific, and release it as a simple libattr interface. Sound good? There was a patch that did most of this already, as well as storing some nifty things like the dos mode bits and NT ACLs. It was fairly intrustive but did a lot of stuff. Tim.
Re: Draft of branch maintainence and release plans....
On Thu, 4 Jul 2002, Tim Potter wrote: On Tue, Jul 02, 2002 at 11:54:18AM -0500, Gerald (Jerry) Carter wrote: Roadmap to 3.0 -- The following features are planned for inclusion in 3.0. This list was compiled based on previous promises during 2.2 development and believed future directions of Samba I have noticed a number of good patches posted to the list that have not been applied or reasons given why they have not been applied. I guess this falls down to no-one having the time. Two I can remember off the top of my head: - the patch for porting Samba to daemon tools - extended attributes patch Is there anyone out there annoyed or confused at not getting your patch applied? Speak out now! (-: We should probably apply the daemon tools patch if it is ok. This has been brought several times in the past. Do you have a link? I'll let someone else worry about the ext attr patch. cheers, jerry - Hewlett-Packard http://www.hp.com SAMBA Team http://www.samba.org --http://www.plainjoe.org Sam's Teach Yourself Samba in 24 Hours 2ed. ISBN 0-672-32269-2 --I never saved anything for the swim back. Ethan Hawk in Gattaca--
Re: Draft of branch maintainence and release plans....
David, Someone is doing to need to own these. They sound like solid ideas. I've not followed the threads on them due to lack of time (but i do have a vague recollection). However, they all seem like icing to me. In other words, they would be great to have, but we have lived without them. This said, if someone donates their time to do it, then great. But I'm not sure if they are features which should be placed on the 3.0 will not ship until these are done list. Make sense? On Wed, 3 Jul 2002, David Lee wrote: Could I add a few things for consideration? Note the word foundation in what follows. Most items have such a structural foundation aspect as a pre-requisite to building the actual functionality. To a first approximation, I'm assuming that the foundation work can only be done by the Samba Team. (Is this a fair assumption in the items listed?) Once that is done, then the rest of us can then contribute the further building work. panic action event mechanism --- ... session exec ... cheers, jerry
Re: Draft of branch maintainence and release plans....
On Wed, 3 Jul 2002, Andrew Bartlett wrote: * Full Windows NT 4.0 PDC support - Trust relationships - SAM replication [And someone said] I don't see this being in 3.0. Maybe a later release, but there is more work 'todo' in this area that you might expect. Natrually, Samba-Samba replication will be fully supported. Gerald Carter wrote: This is where you and i disagree on what's important. I'm not saying you have to do it, but I do have a problem of keep us as developers promising something and never delivering. **If** we can deliver this, then we have a smooth road for migrating from NT 4.0 PDC's to Samba DC's. This may also buy us time in the requests for a Samba Win2K compatible DC. Am I misunderstanding, or was Andrew suggesting that PDC improvement should be put on hold while the team works on AD functionality? I'm of the opinion that a good, workmanlike kerberos implementation able to work with AD is the most desirable single item for 3.0, and that there is a community of folks, like myself, that would like to jump from a security=user, unix-centric configuration straight to a security=kerberos unix-centric configuration (;-)) --dave -- David Collier-Brown, | Always do right. This will gratify Performance Engineering | some people and astonish the rest. Americas Customer Engineering, | -- Mark Twain (905) 415-2849 | [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Draft of branch maintainence and release plans....
On Mon, 8 Jul 2002, Gerald Carter wrote: Someone is doing to need to own these. They sound like solid ideas. I've not followed the threads on them due to lack of time (but i do have a vague recollection). However, they all seem like icing to me. In other words, they would be great to have, but we have lived without them. This said, if someone donates their time to do it, then great. But I'm not sure if they are features which should be placed on the 3.0 will not ship until these are done list. Thanks for the reply, Gerald. Appreciated! In those items (reminder: panic action, session exec, event mechanism) I was, like you, attempting just such discrimination. Each has a vital core (or foundational) component, then each has its layer of icing. So I was suggesting that the Samba Team could concentrate their efforts on those core aspects, and leave the icing to those of us who then need to develop our own applications on top of this. panic action: the core aspect was simply that someone (I think on the Samba Team) had mentioned an issue with appropriately opening the logfile. session exec: Andrew B. had mentioned his plan to provide this hook, so presumably has his ideas of what he would do and where (and that it is realistic for him to do it). event mechanism: Jeremy had mentioned the desirability of doing this, and identified the rather intricate problems that would need to be considered, requiring someone with deep knowledge of that area. Once each of those is in place, then the rest of us can ice the cake. But we can't ice a cake which isn't there. To me (am I alone?), the great advantage of 3.0 seems to be not so much your list's added functionality in itself (though that would and will be great!), but the modularisation which allows a much wider group of people to contribute into such functionality. [ Note the parallels both to the VFS work, and also to Andrew B's passdb restructuring: the core Samba Team have provided the core structure, others can provide the plug-in modules. ] Keep up the good work, and thanks for a great product. -- : David LeeI.T. Service : : Systems Programmer Computer Centre : : University of Durham : : http://www.dur.ac.uk/t.d.lee/South Road: : Durham: : Phone: +44 191 374 2882 U.K. :
RE: Draft of branch maintainence and release plans....
David Lee [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote (edited for brevity): Could I add a few things for consideration? To a first approximation, I'm assuming that the foundation work can only be done by the Samba Team. (Is this a fair assumption in the items listed?) In the case of the panic action, as I will elaborate shortly, I believe that a few OS experts could work independently and then submit some work back to the Samba Team. panic action Some months ago we had a discussion about panic action, and agreed on the desirability of improving the default behaviour, so that, if reasonably possible, it would automatically attempt to invoke a debugging program to dump a backtrace into that smbd's own log file. And in the last few days, this list has seen another example of a sys.admin. who (like me and many others of us) would have been able to benefit if a default debug/backtrace had been in place. I would be willing to work (off-list) with a small number of OS experts to agree on an API for producing a back-trace of the stack. I know how we do this for VOS, I know some of the issues involved, and I believe that such an API definition should be independent of Samba. The challenge is to produce an OS-independent API that is flexible enough to accommodate the rather wide variety of operating systems, while hiding the guts of the mechanism from the callers. (The code to actually traverse the stack and produce output that can be interpreted by mortals or even by code is almost certainly going to be OS-specific, but I think we can probably produce an API that we can all then implement). If anyone else considers themselves qualified interested, please contact me off-list. Thanks PG -- Paul Green, Senior Technical Consultant, Stratus Technologies. Day: +1 978-461-7557; FAX: +1 978-461-3610 Speaking from Stratus not for Stratus
Re: Draft of branch maintainence and release plans....
David Collier-Brown wrote: On Wed, 3 Jul 2002, Andrew Bartlett wrote: * Full Windows NT 4.0 PDC support - Trust relationships - SAM replication [And someone said] I don't see this being in 3.0. Maybe a later release, but there is more work 'todo' in this area that you might expect. Natrually, Samba-Samba replication will be fully supported. Gerald Carter wrote: This is where you and i disagree on what's important. I'm not saying you have to do it, but I do have a problem of keep us as developers promising something and never delivering. **If** we can deliver this, then we have a smooth road for migrating from NT 4.0 PDC's to Samba DC's. This may also buy us time in the requests for a Samba Win2K compatible DC. Am I misunderstanding, or was Andrew suggesting that PDC improvement should be put on hold while the team works on AD functionality? I've never suggested that anybody put any work on hold. I'm just worried about others promising features that I personally feel might not be compleated in the timeframe and that I *know* have major hurdles in the way. In particular given that I'll probalby be the one working on it anyway. (I just like to set my own timelines). I'm currently putting a lot of effort into both getting a workable, *real*, SAM implmenentation - so as to allow the AD work. I'm of the opinion that a good, workmanlike kerberos implementation able to work with AD is the most desirable single item for 3.0, and that there is a community of folks, like myself, that would like to jump from a security=user, unix-centric configuration straight to a security=kerberos unix-centric configuration (;-)) Given current progress, this isn't somthing that will be done for 3.0, but is a very worthwhile goal. (Actually, most of the work is really outside Samba anyway). 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
Re: Draft of branch maintainence and release plans....
On Mon, Jul 08, 2002 at 10:43:13AM -0500, Gerald Carter wrote: We should probably apply the daemon tools patch if it is ok. This has been brought several times in the past. Do you have a link? Hmm - can't find the link in the mail archives. I do have: http://www.sub-rosa.com/handler/pub/samba-HEAD-daemontools-diff I'll let someone else worry about the ext attr patch. Jeremy seemed pretty keen. (-: Tim.
Re: Draft of branch maintainence and release plans....
Gerald Carter wrote: On Tue, 9 Jul 2002, Andrew Bartlett wrote: I've never suggested that anybody put any work on hold. I'm just worried about others promising features that I personally feel might not be compleated in the timeframe and that I *know* have major hurdles in the way. In particular given that I'll probalby be the one working on it anyway. (I just like to set my own timelines). Just for the record, no one was placing the burden on you andrew (or even suggesting that it rested upon you). If you don't want to do it or would rather work on something else, then that's fine. I think you read too much into the original proposal. No, but from here it does rather look like I'm the only (team) person working on PDC-specific code currently, particularly in HEAD. (Hence why I have am so glad to be working with kai, jelmer and metze on the new SAM stuff - and with idra's keen eye on details I would prefer to gloss over... ;-) Just out of curiousity, IIRC Kai did the current trust relationship stuff and tpot did the sam sync stuff. Or am I remembering incorrectly here. I could be. Memory is a little fuzzy. Tpot did the sam sync stuff - but has indicated he is too busy to continue, I worked with mimir on the trusted domains code - most of it was actually done when I did AuthRewrite, and mimir sorted out some important protocol details with the join etc. 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
Re: Draft of branch maintainence and release plans....
On Tue, Jul 02, 2002 at 11:54:18AM -0500, Gerald (Jerry) Carter wrote: Everyone, Here are the plans for getting 3.0 ready for release and the maintainence plans for SAMBA_2_2. Comments welcome. I would love to see this out sometime during the Fall of this year. Of course, none of this will get done without everyone's help :-) Roadmap to 3.0 -- The following features are planned for inclusion in 3.0. This list was compiled based on previous promises during 2.2 development and believed future directions of Samba * Internationalization - The UNICODE support is done. Jeremy thinks we will probably need some auditing and testing before release. * Full Windows NT 4.0 PDC support - Trust relationships - SAM replication These features will allow for full replacement and migration from Windows NT 4.0 domain controllers. Both of these features are partially completed. * Windows 2000 domain client support - Done. * NTLMv2 Sign/Seal of RPC packets - NTLMv2 should be ok, the sign/seal is yet to be done. * Winbind idmap storage central idmap repository (for clusters, nfs, etc...) * Winbind working with Samba DC * Group Mapping support (pluggable?) * Printer attribute publishing using 'net' * pluggable passwd support - Done. Stackable VFS? -- / Alexander Bokovoy --- Clones are people two.
Re: Draft of branch maintainence and release plans....
Everyone, Greetings ... Here are the plans for getting 3.0 ready for release and the maintainence plans for SAMBA_2_2. Comments welcome. Great ... I would love to see this out sometime during the Fall of this year. Of course, none of this will get done without everyone's help :-) Not to be a pain, but could you state this in a 2002/Q3 or something, I don't know when your fall is. Thanks Mailed Lee
Re: Draft of branch maintainence and release plans....
On Tue, 2 Jul 2002, Gerald (Jerry) Carter wrote: Here are the plans for getting 3.0 ready for release and the maintainence plans for SAMBA_2_2. Comments welcome. Thanks for the news: it is useful to know this sort of thing. Roadmap to 3.0 -- The following features are planned for inclusion in 3.0. This list was compiled based on previous promises during 2.2 development and believed future directions of Samba [...] Could I add a few things for consideration? Note the word foundation in what follows. Most items have such a structural foundation aspect as a pre-requisite to building the actual functionality. To a first approximation, I'm assuming that the foundation work can only be done by the Samba Team. (Is this a fair assumption in the items listed?) Once that is done, then the rest of us can then contribute the further building work. panic action Some months ago we had a discussion about panic action, and agreed on the desirability of improving the default behaviour, so that, if reasonably possible, it would automatically attempt to invoke a debugging program to dump a backtrace into that smbd's own log file. And in the last few days, this list has seen another example of a sys.admin. who (like me and many others of us) would have been able to benefit if a default debug/backtrace had been in place. I think Andrew Bartlett had identified an issue to do with diverting the output into the log file, which would need attention. It would be useful if that foundation aspect could be put in place by the Team (Andrew B?). Then others of us could look at detecting (autoconf?) and scripting for various debugging tools. event mechanism --- Around 17th June we had a discussion about generalising the central loop of smbd to that other devices (e.g. /dev/smb/n) could be read etc. One example would be so that write(1) and wall(1) could be used and the data translated into WinPopup. This example has been proven in demonstration, but Jeremy, understandably, wants this foundational event mechanism to be tightened before we build anything on it. session exec In various contexts, including a make home directory discussion in recent days, and earlier discussions about write(1) (see above), Andrew B. has mentioned the possibility of a session exec as a foundation for such work. Such a foundation would, I understand, also allow the finger problem to be fixed (e.g. the exec script invoking some external agency to be built to create/delete/mange/whatever /dev/smb/n). OK? -- : David LeeI.T. Service : : Systems Programmer Computer Centre : : University of Durham : : http://www.dur.ac.uk/t.d.lee/South Road: : Durham: : Phone: +44 191 374 2882 U.K. :
Re: Draft of branch maintainence and release plans....
On Wed, 3 Jul 2002, C.Lee Taylor wrote: Not to be a pain, but could you state this in a 2002/Q3 or something, I don't know when your fall is. I was intentially vague for that reason :-) actually i was thinking more like November. But that's up in the air right now. cheers, jerry - Hewlett-Packard http://www.hp.com SAMBA Team http://www.samba.org --http://www.plainjoe.org Sam's Teach Yourself Samba in 24 Hours 2ed. ISBN 0-672-32269-2 --I never saved anything for the swim back. Ethan Hawk in Gattaca--
Re: Draft of branch maintainence and release plans....
Gerald (Jerry) Carter wrote: Everyone, Here are the plans for getting 3.0 ready for release and the maintainence plans for SAMBA_2_2. Comments welcome. I would love to see this out sometime during the Fall of this year. Of course, none of this will get done without everyone's help :-) Roadmap to 3.0 -- The following features are planned for inclusion in 3.0. This list was compiled based on previous promises during 2.2 development and believed future directions of Samba * Internationalization - The UNICODE support is done. Jeremy thinks we will probably need some auditing and testing before release. * Full Windows NT 4.0 PDC support - Trust relationships - SAM replication I don't see this being in 3.0. Maybe a later release, but there is more work 'todo' in this area that you might expect. Natrually, Samba-Samba replication will be fully supported. These features will allow for full replacement and migration from Windows NT 4.0 domain controllers. Both of these features are partially completed. * Windows 2000 domain client support - Done. * NTLMv2 Sign/Seal of RPC packets - NTLMv2 should be ok, the sign/seal is yet to be done. This gets messy - in particular the 'netlogon' problem isn't related to NTLMv2 at all, its another associated mess... * Winbind idmap storage central idmap repository (for clusters, nfs, etc...) * Winbind working with Samba DC * Group Mapping support (pluggable?) The folks on #samba-technical (kai, metze, ctrlsoft, idra and I) are working on a new SAM interface (fully pluggable etc), and we will bring discussions here shortly on how to move this towards the mythical 'Samba 3.0'. * Printer attribute publishing using 'net' * pluggable passwd support - Done. Other possible feature which may be included depending on time/resources. Probably in later 3.x release. * Background updates of print queue caches * WINS replication * loadable library support for named pipes * non-blocking winbind implementation * Printer attribute publishing via smbd * SAM Replication over NT4 RPC protocols. SAMBA_2_2 maintainence -- The SAMBA_2_2 will only be updated to include fixes for severe bugs or security exploits. All testing will be done against HEAD at this point. No new features/functionality are to added due to the risk of destabilizing the branch. There will be a 2.2.6 release most likely, but all efforts should be concentrated on HEAD. Finally! :-) 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
Re: Draft of branch maintainence and release plans....
Jerry- I have a good start on the following, and putting it on the list will help keep it on my radar :). For 3.0 --- *Conversion to NTSTATUS for return codes Wishlist *Pluggable backend for storing WINS entries (ie SQL, LDAP) Matt Pavlovich Message: 8 Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2002 11:54:18 -0500 (CDT) From: Gerald (Jerry) Carter [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Draft of branch maintainence and release plans Everyone, Here are the plans for getting 3.0 ready for release and the maintainence plans for SAMBA_2_2. Comments welcome. I would love to see this out sometime during the Fall of this year. Of course, none of this will get done without everyone's help :-) Roadmap to 3.0 -- The following features are planned for inclusion in 3.0. This list was compiled based on previous promises during 2.2 development and believed future directions of Samba * Internationalization - The UNICODE support is done. Jeremy thinks we will probably need some auditing and testing before release. * Full Windows NT 4.0 PDC support - Trust relationships - SAM replication These features will allow for full replacement and migration from Windows NT 4.0 domain controllers. Both of these features are partially completed. * Windows 2000 domain client support - Done. * NTLMv2 Sign/Seal of RPC packets - NTLMv2 should be ok, the sign/seal is yet to be done. * Winbind idmap storage central idmap repository (for clusters, nfs, etc...) * Winbind working with Samba DC * Group Mapping support (pluggable?) * Printer attribute publishing using 'net' * pluggable passwd support - Done. Other possible feature which may be included depending on time/resources. Probably in later 3.x release. * Background updates of print queue caches * WINS replication * loadable library support for named pipes * non-blocking winbind implementation * Printer attribute publishing via smbd SAMBA_2_2 maintainence -- The SAMBA_2_2 will only be updated to include fixes for severe bugs or security exploits. All testing will be done against HEAD at this point. No new features/functionality are to added due to the risk of destabilizing the branch. There will be a 2.2.6 release most likely, but all efforts should be concentrated on HEAD. cheers, jerry - Hewlett-Packard http://www.hp.com SAMBA Team http://www.samba.org --http://www.plainjoe.org Sam's Teach Yourself Samba in 24 Hours 2ed. ISBN 0-672-32269-2 --I never saved anything for the swim back. Ethan Hawk in Gattaca-- --__--__-- Message: 9 Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2002 11:54:32 -0500 (CDT) From: Gerald (Jerry) Carter [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Jelmer Vernooij [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: ADS-HOWTO.sgml On Fri, 28 Jun 2002, Jelmer Vernooij wrote: Hi jerry, Here's the ADS HOWTO converted to sgml.. Adding it to HEAD now. Thanks. cheers, jerry - Hewlett-Packard http://www.hp.com SAMBA Team http://www.samba.org --http://www.plainjoe.org Sam's Teach Yourself Samba in 24 Hours 2ed. ISBN 0-672-32269-2 --I never saved anything for the swim back. Ethan Hawk in Gattaca--
