Confused about samba4 & s3fs

[Andrew Bartlett]

On Thu, 2012-08-16 at 21:23 +0100, Rowland Penny wrote:
> On 16/08/12 20:58, Gémes Géza wrote:
> > 2012-08-16 21:12 keltezéssel, Rowland Penny írta:
> >> On 16/08/12 18:40, Gémes Géza wrote:
> >>> 2012-08-16 19:22 keltezéssel, Rowland Penny írta:
> >>>> On 16/08/12 15:10, Arvid Requate wrote:
> >>>>> maybe I should have explained more clearly, that s3fs is a service of
> >>>>> the samba process that avoids the need to start the smbd separately
> >>>>> and provides all the internal wiring necessary to authenticate 
> >>>>> against
> >>>>> the samba backend. AFAIK s3fs efetively runs the same codebase as
> >>>>> smbd. So you have to differentiate between three thigs here: first 
> >>>>> the
> >>>>> "old style" of running smbd as a separate process, second the
> >>>>> improved convenience of "s3fs" that runs/forks mostly the same code
> >>>>> automatically from the samba process itself. And finally the "NTvfs"
> >>>>> fileserver code, which AFAIK is based on an initiative mainly of 
> >>>>> Tridge to
> >>>>> write a fileserver from scratch with an improved internal 
> >>>>> structure. The
> >>>>> NTvfs code is still in source4, but it is not the default (as of 
> >>>>> beta1) as
> >>>>> it is still in early stages of development and feature 
> >>>>> completeness as
> >>>>> compared to the smbd/s3fs code.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Cheers,
> >>>> Sorry I am still confused, I know that if you now start the samba4 
> >>>> daemon you also get the smbd daemon, you can start the nmbd daemon 
> >>>> to get network browsing. As far as I can see, all of this works, so 
> >>>> I ask again, do I use s3fs so it can be tested or not?
> >>>>
> >>>> If testing is not required, why was all the effort put into adding 
> >>>> s3fs to samba4?
> >>>>
> >>>> Rowland
> >>>>
> >>> No the services offered by nmbd in a Samba3 installation are offered 
> >>> by the samba binary on a Samba4 install, s3fs means (in a simplified 
> >>> manner) load the Samba3 smbd for serving files. The user facing 
> >>> benefit of using s3fs instead of ntvfs is, that Samba3s smbd (and 
> >>> thus s3fs) has received lots of improvements (like support for newer 
> >>> smb/cifs dialects used by Vista/7) which didn't were ported to ntvfs.
> >>>
> >>> Regards
> >>>
> >>> Geza Gemes
> >>>
> >>>
> >> Slightly less confused now, as far as I can see, this means that we 
> >> should be running s3fs to serve files (i.e. the smbd daemon) and the 
> >> samba daemon takes care of authentication.
> >>
> >> What I am confused about now is Geza's statement about nmbd, he seems 
> >> to be saying that you can have the server browseable just by running 
> >> the samba daemon, but I have to run the nmbd daemon for the server 
> >> shares to be visible.
> >>
> >> Rowland
> >>
> > On the samba4 install the samba binary listens on the port (137/udp 
> > and 138/udp) nmbd would listen on a samba3 install, however the samba4 
> > implementation doesn't offer browsing support (yet). Because of that 
> > you can't run nmbd on the host where you run samba4 (unless you employ 
> > tricky virtual interfaces and bind interfaces only configurations).
> >
> > Regards
> >
> > Geza Gemes
> >
> >
> well you have got me really confused now, you say that you can't run 
> nmbd on the samba4 host without pulling tricks. Well because I don't 
> know better, I just started the nmbd daemon on the samba4 server and I 
> can now browse to the visible shares from windows xp and linux clients, 
> just what am I doing wrong ;-)

If you run nmbd on a Samba4 DC, then nmbd won't know how to pass on the
NETLOGON datagram packets to the cldap server, unless specially
configured with 'cldap proxy'.  Even then, the source IP address is lost
due to the proxy, which will break sites support.

Also, you have to turn off the nbt server in 'samba', otherwise when I
fix it to correctly die when a port is in use, samba won't start. 

Andrew Bartlett

-- 
Andrew Bartlett                                http://samba.org/~abartlet/
Authentication Developer, Samba Team           http://samba.org