PDC Question...

Jim_F._Goeke at dadebehring.com Jim_F._Goeke at dadebehring.com
Fri Oct 8 11:58:16 GMT 1999

im thinking its the other way around.  Samba was made to take advantage of SMB,
a protocol that M$ uses.  My point is that there is a security entry in W2k that
mentions Samba directly

Greg Dickie <greg at discreet.com> on 10/07/99 03:32:30 PM

Please respond to greg at discreet.com

To:   Jim F. Goeke/gg/DadeInt at DadeInt
cc:   Multiple recipients of list SAMBA-NTDOM <samba-ntdom at samba.org>
Subject:  Re: PDC Question...

uhhh I must be be misunderstanding this email, nt 3.51, nt4, win95, win98,
windows 3.1, lanmanager all have "builtin" smb support. Thats why samba was


On 07-Oct-99 Jim_F._Goeke at dadebehring.com wrote:
> Its looking like NT 5(world dom...er...windows 2000) has built in smb
> support.
> Im thinking this is either a dumb move on microsoft or a victory for samba.
> If you have any info send it my way.  Ill do the same.  I just put into test
> the
> first server.
> jim

Greg Dickie
Just A Guy*
*from discreet (the logic is gone)
(514) 954-7171
greg at discreet.com

More information about the samba-ntdom mailing list