Just a quick Q

[James OGorman]

Stephen Langasek wrote:
> 
> 
> How well this will work for you depends on how much functionality you're
> looking to get out of it.  You do lose some capabilities by using ip masq
> instead of public IP, but all things considered it works pretty darn well
> when you have no choice but to masquerade.  The big issue to look at is
> that IP masq does not normally let you make incoming TCP/IP connections
> through the masquerading firewall. For samba, this means no getting to
> shares on those Win95 boxes from your central site, basically.

Right now, I dont really see a time that there will be a share on the
Win 95 boxes at the remote site that I will need to get to from the main
network. But if I ever do, I like this option the best.
 
>   * re-exporting smb shares. With smbmount under Linux, it should be
> possible to mount all the relevant data on the masqing server that you
> want the Win95 machines to share, then re-share it from smbd on that
> machine.

It sounds the most doable with a little amount of trouble, and something
that I will have to keep in the back of my head.

To tell the truth, playing around on a test machine while I wait for the
server to come in, this Samba stuff is fun. I had a little trouble at
first getting NT to broswe the Samba box, I did not have encrypted
passwords turned on and did not know for sure where to look (found it in
/usr/sbin, if I had been thinking I would have looked there....). Now I
got the NT machines working, but on 95 boxes when I try to browse it
pops up with a box that says connecting to $IPC and asks for a password
(no username field). I am sure it is just a matter of time before I get
that figured out as well.

Thanks for your help everyone, it is nice to know that others have done
this before as well. 

Jim