On 12/23/2009 11:31 AM, apmail...@free.fr wrote:
>
> Then , I wanted to try how the failover would behave if the SRV
> _kerberos-master._udp. record was present. But my Active Directory
> admin
> says he has indeed the _kerberos._XX SRV record, but that he is not proposed
> with the choice to add
Quoting Jeffrey Watts :
> What I've noticed is that if you use the -S option (to explicitly specify
> the server), 'net' seems to ignore that and use DNS instead. I've watched
> with the debug set to 5 and I've seen 'net' try to connect to different
> KDCs. I would assume that it would be good b
What I've noticed is that if you use the -S option (to explicitly specify
the server), 'net' seems to ignore that and use DNS instead. I've watched
with the debug set to 5 and I've seen 'net' try to connect to different
KDCs. I would assume that it would be good behavior if it were trying to
acce
Ok,
Thank you
I have posted the question to the samba list now.
I don't need the "dns_fallback = false" option ?
Andrew
Quoting Jeffrey Watts :
> Samba appears to disregard krb5.conf, or at least parts of it. I have the
> same problems with the 'net' command.
>
> Jeffrey.
>
> On Fri, Dec 4,
Samba appears to disregard krb5.conf, or at least parts of it. I have the
same problems with the 'net' command.
Jeffrey.
On Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 8:14 AM, wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
>
> I would like to continue one of the topic from this thread :
> http://mailman.mit.edu/pipermail/kerberos/2009-May/014982
Hi,
I would like to continue one of the topic from this thread :
http://mailman.mit.edu/pipermail/kerberos/2009-May/014982.html
->8
> Also, we dont use SRV/TXT for kdc/realm identification in DNS and I
> dont explicitly specify the dns_lookup in the krb5.conf. In this
> context the
