New server roles: 'netbios primary domain controller', 'active directory domain controller'
abartlet at samba.org
Mon Jun 11 16:13:29 MDT 2012
On Mon, 2012-06-11 at 14:44 -0400, simo wrote:
> On Mon, 2012-06-11 at 11:28 +1000, Andrew Bartlett wrote:
> > I've prepared a branch with new server role values, in a attempt to
> > allow an smb.conf to distinguish between our major operating modes.
> > This will in turn make it easier for us to stop folks running smbd when
> > they mean samba, and vice versa. (This has already been a common
> > mistake with Samba4 alpha users so far).
> > https://git.samba.org/?p=abartlet/samba.git/.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/s3fs-improvements
> > I chose 'netbios primary/backup domain controller' over 'nt4 domain
> > controller' or 'samba3 domain controller', as it doesn't reference a
> > long-gone and unsupported version of Microsoft's windows or a previous
> > version of our Samba. The Samba 4.0 AD mode is described as 'active
> > directory domain controller'. For compatibility with previous Samba4
> > alphas, the term 'domain controller' is an alias of 'active directory
> > domain controller'.
> > The 'server role' parameter remains optional, but I think it is a
> > clearer way to describing the intent of what the administrator is trying
> > to build, rather than the way they are trying to build it.
> > I do realise this puts FreeIPA in an odd spot (it would use the 'netbios
> > backup domain controller'), but I'm happy for an alias to be added for
> > that if required, and possibly for an extra role to be added for
> > Novell's eDirectory.
> 'classic primary/backup domain controller' sounds better, and avoid
> 'netbios' which is not accurate in any case.
What I'm searching for is a term that lasts over the next decade and
still has meaning. That is why I tried to pick a term that mentioned a
specific technology. In a few years time, what would the term 'classic'
mean to our users? (As a counter-example, think of how meaningless it
feels when Samba-TNG calls us 'samba classic').
Aside from the FreeIPA case (which I think could possibly benefit from
an distinct mode, to run on TCP/IP and use epmd, or use an alias), what
exactly is inaccurate about 'netbios'?
I'm also trying to pick a term that would replace:
samba-tool domain samba3upgrade
I'm not sure that
samba-tool domain netbios-domain-upgrade
samba-tool domain classic-domain-upgrade
really works, but I still can't think of any better options.
Perhaps the context (against AD domain controller) makes it clear? If I
can dig into this a bit more, then I can be sure we have picked a term
that will be suitable long term, whatever it is.
> FreeIPA would use then the 'classic primary domain controller' role, why
> would Novell need something different ?
The last patch I had from Novell had a large number of 'if
lp_ncaclrpc_dir()' statements all over the code. While I tried to
convince them to remove many of them, they won't be able to remove them
all - it is after all a new major operating mode.
Thanks for your thoughts,
Andrew Bartlett http://samba.org/~abartlet/
Authentication Developer, Samba Team http://samba.org
More information about the samba-technical