Browsing across subnets without WINS

[Alex at Avantel]

On March 18, 2003 10:53 pm, "Christopher R. Hertel" wrote:
>
> The first comment/correction/suggestion is that there needs to be a *lot*
> better understanding of the workings of the NBT namespace.

Agree with that for sure - look forward to the book.

>
> You don't need WINS replication (but JF has been working on it).  WINS
> replication simply means that you have two WINS servers with the same data.
> That gives you redundancy, but that's all.
>
> So how does redundancy help with browsing?  It doesn't.

Well, other than the problems caused by losing the only WINS (or access to 
it), none. And perhaps WINS cannot be used to address this problem . .  

The problem I experienced is this; It's not practical to have one samba 
server for every workgroup on the subnet. There has to be a way to have 
multiple workgroups on the same subnet linked to other subnets which also 
have multiple workgroups, some or all of which are intended to be "the same 
workgroup" - ie. show up in my browse list for the workgroup AND can actually 
be browsed whether they are local or not.  

>
> As for the workgroup name being different on each subnet...  That's the way
> Browsing works.  Really.  Promise.
>
> As for the workgroup name being different on different subnets... combining
> browse lists from multiple workgroups has *nothing* to do with WINS
> replication.  With Windows, the only way that the browse list for workgroup
> A gets combined with the browselist for workgroup B is if there is a subnet
> somewhere that has a Local Master Browser for A *and* an LMB for B on the
> same subnet.  Browselists from separate workgroups are combined when the
> LMBs on a subnet exchange information.  That combined lists are then
> uploaded to the DMBs and re-propogated.

With samba it's possible to "glue together" a workgroup accross the WAN. When 
there are multiple workgroups on the same subnet, there must be a samba 
server for each of those workgroups on the subnet so that the workgroups can 
each be glued together.  There is no way to accomplish that with a single 
samba server - that was the problem for which I have found no solution as 
yet.  

It's my understanding that this problem has been solved with the MS approach 
to browsing the WAN - what is the limitation in samba that prevents that from 
working?  AFAIK it's either the limitation of the samba LMB/DMB or name 
resolution (WINS) - or is it somehting else?  

>
> If all of your DMBs are Samba-based, then you can use Samba's 'enhanced
> browsing' and 'remote browse sync' options to improve things.  Read up on
> these options in the smb.conf documentation.

No need to - been there, done that, it works.  The limitation is still the 
same - IF there is only one samba server on a subnet, THEN there can only be 
one workgroup on the subnet or browsing will break accross the WAN.  If you 
use a MS server, that's not the case.  Or am I wrong on that too?

>
> I hope that makes a little more sense.  I've seen the Avantel docs and,
> well, that's why I am writing a book about how this stuff actually works.
>
> Chris -)-----

Much anticipated . . . and will certainly be appreciated

Alex Vandenham
Avantel Systems
Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
=============