New Microsoft Knowledgebase article

[Matthias Wächter]

On Thu, 13 Jan 2000, Jason Levine wrote:

> >domain logons *does have* an affect. It did when installing our Samba
> >boxes - please see Luke's earlier posting confirming this when another
> >PDC exists on the network!
> 
> If it does have an effect, then the docs need to be changed; the DOMAIN.TXT 
> file says that it's only relevant in two security settings (the ones that they 
> are I don't remember, and I don't have access to that file right now).

The problem is that "security" is used synonymiously for the distinction
"user/share" and for "user/domain/server/share". This is _bad_.

To repeat myself: Either one updates the DOCs and make them more or less
unreadable by replacing every "security=user" with "security=user, domain
or server", or we split off the "security = " smb.conf-parameter into a
"security = user/share" and a "authentication by = local (PDC),
remoteserver, domainmember" or whatever.

Even worse: The MS world only distincts between user and share security.
Why does Samba introduce these two new variants as new security settings?

Again: This is only to find a _good_ solution, not to find a _compatible_
solution. Some people prefer the latter and seem to like confusion. <g>

Sehr Wus,
- Matthias

-- 
Wer reitet so spät durch Nacht und Wind?
- Wos waas I
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------