Can Samba co-operate?

[Mike McCormack]

Hi Christopher,

That is exactly what i was looking for.

i understand that would it would difficult to re=write samba, and that
it may impact performance in a bad way, but the user i'm looking to
support wouldn't be running a performance critical server anyway.

Any chance of getting a look at the code? 

Mike

Original message from: "Christopher R. Hertel" <crh at nts.umn.edu>
>
>Samba takes full ownership of those ports.
>
>I've argued, from time to time, that it would be best to have a NBT
daemon
>to manage services on the three key ports.  I agree with the
>counter-argument that Samba probably shouldn't be overhauled to work
this
>way.  On the other hand, I have started work on a code library that
would 
>allow exactly what I'm describing.
>
>My thinking is that there would be an 'nbtd' that would manage
NetBIOS
>nameing, NetBIOS datagrams, and NetBIOS sessions as described in
>RFC1001/1002.  On the local host, I'd have Unix Domain Sockets (or
other 
>IPC--eg. ARexx on Amiga) allowing clients to connect to the NBT vLAN
via 
>the nbtd.  One such client would be an SMB daemon.
>
>At one end, the SMB daemon should be able to speak to the NBT daemon
*or*
>directly to the network via port 445.  At the other end, it would be
>really nice to provide a local socket for named pipes, etc.  A system
>administrator (someone with privilage, should be able to add services
by 
>"registering" them with the SMB daemon somehow.
>
>Just an idea at this point, but one advantage of the architecture is 
>that it would certainly handle the stuff you're interested in doing.
>
>Chris -)-----



------------------------------------------
mailto:Mike_McCormack at start.com.au
ph +82 16 430 0425

__________________________________________________________________
Get your free Australian email account at http://www.Looksmart.com.au