Long machine names...

Jeremy Allison jallison at whistle.com
Thu May 21 18:44:57 GMT 1998

Jean-Francois Micouleau wrote:
> Yep. As we can't be 100% sure of non duplicate uid for machine accounts,
> why don't store them in a mangled file, so we are sure nobody will touch
> it ? Just start the uid numbering over 2^32 and count up, this way it
> won't collide with users' uids ?

But if we require machine accounts to be stored in the
same place as UNIX accounts are stored (not I'm not
stipulating any particular database here :-) then we
*can* be 100% sure of non-duplicate machine uids.

That's why I moved away from the scheme you are (re-)proposing.
I'm still convinced the UNIX password database is the correct
place for machine accounts.

The issues now facing us are (a) Machine account names
can be longer than some UNIXs allow, and (b) Some
UNIXs don't like the '$' currently at the end of
the name.

Both these can be fixed, without sacrificing the
underlying design decision.


Buying an operating system without source is like buying
a self-assembly Space Shuttle with no instructions.

More information about the samba-technical mailing list