(no subject)

Jay Ts jay at jayts.cx
Thu Oct 24 02:55:01 GMT 2002

On Wed, Oct 23, 2002 at 02:43:05PM -0500, Steven French wrote:
> >From: "l. a. walsh" <lwlsh at tlinx.org>
> >Subject: Running smb without nmb? (Linux Suse 8.1 feature)
> >Ok -- enough of my whining.  Question is this: is there any good reason
> >for splitting the two or making so one is runnable w/o the other?
> That is cool.   I thought that I was the only one who prefers not to run
> nmbd  :)

That's because the rest of us didn't even know it would work!
Steve, can you please clarify?

You are obviously running without NBNS (NetBIOS Name Service = WINS),
and browsing protocol, so your system can't ever be chosen as the
master browser, or act as a backup browser.

Do you have another system on the net acting as a WINS server?  And
a system running as master browser?  I assume the system you are
talking about is one of many SMB servers on your network, and you
find that that particular one doesn't need to run nmbd.

> On my test systems I don't want to deal with WINS related traffic, and as a
> general practice prefer to limit the network services running on my servers
> to the minimum.
> Although that means the server will not be sending
> browser announcements which might make it harder for other servers to find
> mine, if you are configured for DFS (or perhaps with 3.0 servers publish
> your servers shares in ActiveDirectory) that may not be a big restriction.

You mean, your nmbd-free system has its shares included in a Dfs tree
hosted by another server, right?  If you are suggesting that a general-
purpose Samba server can be effectively run without nmbd, I'd like to
hear more about it.

> The Linux CIFS VFS is passed IP addresses and does not need/use Netbios
> names anyway so the RFC1001 support that nmbd helps with is not necessary.

Er, is that all you're using your test systems for?

Jay Ts

More information about the samba-technical mailing list