dynamically loadable named pipe providers

Volker.Lendecke at SerNet.DE Volker.Lendecke at SerNet.DE
Thu Dec 12 13:39:01 GMT 2002


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

> Yes, I've heard that this is the case. The point I was trying to make
> for the sake of argument is that one can treat SMB as transport as one
> would TCP/IP.

Ok. I was only trying to find out what you can do without port
135. BTW, Ethereal does not speak much about MAPI...

> While we have implemetned "named pipes" on top of UNIX domain sockets,
> it is important to note that they are logically distinct from raw
> DCE RPC over domain sockets (ncalrpc).
> 
> Non-named pipe clients must make a DCE RPC BIND or ALTER_CONTEXT in order
> to authenticate themselves to the RPC server. 

Ah, ok. Sounds reasonable. Although I'm not really the one to argue
about that. I have not looked at DCE RPC enough to really know what's
going on and how much of it is in actual use.

Volker

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Key-ID D32186CF, Fingerprint available: phone +49 551 3700000

iD8DBQE9+JG8OmSXH9Mhhs8RAtfdAJ9c3DwQ62+4RUdzuvFOKIm/sruI2QCgmkCU
jtCDXupgXClpebcBNyW49lU=
=3Erv
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----



More information about the samba-technical mailing list