Bug in nmbd_become_dmb.c (CVS 1.7 3.somehting) [patch]

Damjan "Zobo" Cvetko zobo at lana.krneki.org
Tue Jan 28 09:22:02 GMT 2003


Well.. I understand from the docs, that #1b is reserved for PDC (acting as
browse master.. cannot be split up), but if I say "domain logons".. smbd
gives me "Server's Role (logon server) conflicts with share-level security".

The shares still work (for now), but I'm getting this error in log.smbd:
[2003/01/28 10:58:35, 0] lib/util_sock.c:get_socket_addr(878)
  getpeername failed. Error was Transport endpoint is not connected

Btw: I'm using wrepld.. Works great! But I'd like to have a way to force a
replication... (I could just restatr the wrepld, but sending it a signal
would be a more fancy way of doing it)

Thank you
-Zobo

"Simo Sorce" <idra at samba.org> wrote in message
news:1043738942.1996.2.camel at localhost...
> I still think we _need_ to introduce a "server role" paramter, leaving
> the other active for tuning, but so that new admins will not get mad to
> have a decent configuration.
>
> server role = share|server|member|PDC|BDC|ADS
>
> or something like that.
>
> Simo.
>
> On Mon, 2003-01-27 at 23:20, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 27, 2003 at 03:08:52PM -0600, Gerald (Jerry) Carter wrote:
> > > On Wed, 22 Jan 2003, Damjan "Zobo" Cvetko wrote:
> >
> > > > I dont know if this is the rigth list for this..
> > > > I'm using the latest samba 3.x. from CVS.. (because of the wins
replication)
> > > > I have it set up as master browser, but it wont register itself (to
the WINS
> > > > server running in the same nmbd) as DMB (WROKGROUP#1b..)
> >
> > > Why not just set
> >
> > > domain master = yes
> > > domain logons = yes
> >
> > > ?
> >
> > > By not setting domain logons, you've created a box that Windows
clients
> > > will believe to be a PDC but one that will not be listed in the
DOMAIN#1c
> > > list of addresses.
> >
> > > >    /* Do the domain master names. */
> > > > -  if(lp_server_role() == ROLE_DOMAIN_PDC)
> > > > +  if (lp_domain_master() == True)
> > > >    {
> >
> > > I don't think i will commit this patch unless you can further convince
 me.
> >
> > It's a change from Samba's previous behavior.
> >
> > If there's ever anything else on the network that needs the #1b name, it
> > will be broken by Samba registering the #1b name. Period.  It doesn't
> > matter whether the option to enable this is called 'domain master = yes'
> > or 'domain logons = yes'; if the user enables the corresponding setting
> > in a domain with a preexisting PDC, it will break one way or the other.
> > So changing the meaning of the option doesn't really protect against
> > this, but it does break configurations that previously worked for people
> > who need DMBs but don't need logon servers.
> >
> > Much better, IMHO, would be to leave the code as it was in 2.2, but
> > make sure 3.0's *documentation* strongly encourages using 'domain
logons'
> > instead of 'domain master'.  Granted, in all the cases I've seen,
> > enabling 'domain logons' in addition to 'domain master' hasn't done any
> > harm; but is it really worth gratuitiously breaking users' 2.2 configs
to
> > get this point across?
> >
> > FWIW, this is the third time I've seen this issue come up with the 3.0
> > alphas.
> --
> Simo Sorce    -  idra at samba.org
> Samba Team    -  http://www.samba.org
> Italian Site  -  http://samba.xsec.it
>





More information about the samba-technical mailing list