Windows 2000 Beta 3 and PDC?

[Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton]

On Mon, 17 May 1999, Simon Butcher wrote:

> 
> Hi Sean,
> 
> > Previously, I had been using samba as a domain controller for my NT40SP4 =
> > box (using encrypted passwords of course.)
> >
> > I just upgraded to Windows 2000 Beta 3 and I cannot get my w2k box to =
> > become part of my samba domain.  Is this even supported yet?
> 
>  I've got the Windows 2000 beta pack (shame on me :) and have the same
> problem. I'm going to a Microsoft Conference which is coming up in about two
> weeks - it's a big discussion about implementing windows 2000.. I'd like to
> bring up samba into the discussion, because I know it's widely used, and
> Microsoft have already some "support" about it (or rather a heap of pages on
> their website saying that "certain Unix SMB clones, such as Samba" are able
> to use devices on computers such as $C etc.)

microsoft's policy is to test against file sharing capabilities.  they do
not test nt being a member of a samba-controlled domain: this they regard
as a 3rd party responsibility.  which is a pity, because they would find
far more bugs in their OS [than we have time or money to findd] and would
fix them quicker.

>  If anyone else has any questions that they want me to bring up, I'd be
> happy to ask..

yes.

1) are microsoft going to publish, and i mean fully document, all
protocols required to fully integrate nt workstations into domains
controlled by 3rd party products, such as sun's cascade, syntax's
totalnet, samba, sco's visionfs?

part of the benefits of such a publication are that a public release will
generate a huge amount of goodwill towards microsoft, and independent
experts previously ambivalent or against microsoft's proprietary practices
are likely to provide useful comments and suggestions on the security and
practicality of their protocols.  third party vendors implementing the
protocol will accidentally find compatibility problems that will need to
be fixed, which can only result in better, robust products all round,
which will benefit at the very least microsoft and their customers.

[example of the "accidental compatibility problems" mentioned above:
whilst network-reverse-engineering the DCE/RPC over SMB protocol (aka
MSRPC) i find at least one problem every two to three weeks.  when
_deliberately_ going out of my way to find such problems, that rate
increases to one problem every two to three days.  as the MSRPC protocol
is so comprehensive and extensive, the end of these issues is not yet in
sight].

2) samba users and developers report bugs to microsoft when problems are
found in windows nt.  will microsoft consider doing _full_ integration
testing (domain, file, printing, browsing etc) with the latest versions of
samba and reporting bugs found in samba to samba-bugs at samba.org?

luke