[jcifs] Any improvement to DFS connections?

[Daniel Palmer]

My testing (on a live system - so testing was limited) against Win2k/2k3
servers with XP clients indicated that before a client accessed any
share on the server it would try to do a DFS lookup - and cache this
result.  This was on an AD domain - but I'd expect that the same would
be said against a 2k3 server not running AD.

If anyone is interested to test this and report their findings - it may
show that Windows doesn't magically know that certain shares are DFS..

You'll prob want to grab the dfsutil tool (from Win2k3's support tools I
think) and do a dfsutil /purgemupcache /pktflush /spcflush before doing
your packet captures.   Or if you're super keen in wadeing through
captures - do it from the time a machine first joins the domain ;)

Daniel

> -----Original Message-----
> Sent: Wednesday, 17 August 2005 2:43 PM
> To: jcifs at lists.samba.org
> Subject: Re: [jcifs] Any improvement to DFS connections?
> 
> 
> Is w2k3 using the second method ? (I'm using w2k3 without ad)
> 
> Michael B Allen wrote:
> > There are apparently two different flavors of DFS. One is 
> documented 
> > in the CIFS spec and describes a referral mechanism. JCIFS fully 
> > supports this form of DFS. There is a second form which clients 
> > apparently pre-populate their DFS mappings perhaps during logon or 
> > through some kind of AD communication. JCIFS does not support this 
> > form at all and will not in the near future.
> > 
> > Mike
> > 
> > On Tue, 16 Aug 2005 14:00:42 -0600
> > "MacDermid, Kenny" <kenny.macdermid at abridean.com> wrote:
> > 
> > 
> >>Hello,
> >>
> >>I messaged a while back with some connection problems when 
> connecting 
> >>to a DFS. I've tried the latest version and continue to receive 
> >>'network name not found' when ever I try to access it. Is 
> this a known 
> >>issue, or should it work.
> >>
> >>I'm making the connection to:
> >>
> >>smb://domainname.com/dfs/
> >>
> >>Which is accessible in windows explorer using:
> >>
> >>\\domainname.com\dfs\
> >>
> >>If this should work then I'll setup ethereal tomorrow to 
> submit proper 
> >>captures.
> >>
> >>Thanks,
> >>
> >>Kenny
> >>
> >>--
> >>Outgoing mail is certified Virus Contaminated:
> >>X5O!P%@AP[4(P^)7CC)7$EICAR-STANDARD-ANTIVIRUS-TEST-FILE!$H+H*
> >>Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
> >>Version: 7.0.338 / Virus Database: 267.10.10/73 - Release 
> Date: 08/15/2005
> >> 
> >>
> > 
> > 
> > 
> 
> 
----------
The information contained in this email and any attachments is confidential and/or privileged. This email and any attachments are intended to be read only by the person named above. If the reader of this email and any attachments is not the intended recipient, or a representative of the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, dissemination or copying of this email and any attachments is prohibited. If you have received this email and any attachments in error, please notify the sender by email, telephone or fax and return it to the sender at the email address above.