SAMBA and Win2K Terminal Services

[Charles N. Owens]

Grotnes Per Kjetil PBE-SIT wrote:

> > > First I have to correct myself.  Its MultipleUsersOnConnection, DWORD 0x1.
> > Ummm, actually, according to MS's KB article Q190162, the required value is 0x0
> > ... and this matches my experience as well.  This registry modification saved
> > my butt with NT-TSE.
> > (link:  http://support.microsoft.com/support/kb/articles/q190/1/62.asp)
>
> Yes, its as you say 0x0 and it has saved my butt too in the NT-TSE.  In the distribution- fix it
> claims:
>
> [HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE?SYSTEM?CurrentControlSet?Services?Rdr?Parameters]
> "MultipleUsersOnConnection"=dword:00000001
>
> Which is wrong as you say..
>
> > ** The question at hand, though, is whether this registry modification has any affect with
> > Windows2000 Server (under which we now wish to run Terminal Services).
> > Ulf Norton has reported that
> > the Q190162 registry fix does not seem to help... ie. after the fix is applied (and the system
>
> Okay, my mistake.  I suspected that he ment the registry fix did not work, but I had to put it in
> to make sure he had tried it.  My additional suggestion was the "nt smb support = no".
>
> W2K might have changed the required registry key to modify or maybe removed the
> feature?  Ill see what I can find in the W2K related newsgroups/lists.
>
> How about looking into the 2048 open file limitation?  Would it be possible to increase this
> value on a W2K server?  This might required some changes in the max-values in
> the smb.conf file and also the unix/linux system parameters.

My impression of this (I believe from a ntdom list discussion from last year) is that the 2048 limit
(on open files per SMB connection) is a result of Microsoft's non-standard implementation of the SMB
protocol... it was said that they've borrowed for other purposes some bits that are supposed to be
used to track filehandles.  If this is the case then I doubt that it is tunable on the Windows side.
My recollection on this is hazy... What I do remember, though, is that the root of problem was
definitely with Microsoft, not Samba.

Samba itself (and I believe I got this frim Luke Leighton himself) will scale to something like
65,535 open files per SMB connection (ie. the file identifier is a 16-bit field).

I'm curious as to how or if this limit comes into play in all-Microsoft implementations.

Thanks for digging into this!  Anyone else have any additional comments?

cno

--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Charles N. Owens                               Email: owensc at enc.edu
                                            http://www.enc.edu/~owensc
  Network & Systems Administrator
  Information Technology Services  "Outside of a dog, a book is a man's
  Eastern Nazarene College         best friend.  Inside of a dog it's
                                   too dark to read." - Groucho Marx
-------------------------------------------------------------------------