Windows 2000 support
repenny241155 at gmail.com
Mon Apr 11 18:17:19 UTC 2016
On 11/04/16 18:44, Thomas Schulz wrote:
>> On 11/04/16 17:04, Thomas Schulz wrote:
>>>> On 08/04/16 18:52, Thomas Schulz wrote:
>>>>> In the thread titled
>>>>> '[PATCH] samba-tool throws error if there is an empty FSMO role'
>>>>> Rowland asked:
>>>>>> Also would this be a good time to start discussing dropping support for
>>>>>> '2000', Microsoft dropped support for it nearly 6yrs ago, you have to
>>>>>> actively select the 2000 function level at provision and who is likely
>>>>>> to do that ?
>>>>> We have a domain with a Windows 2000 Server system as the domain controller.
>>>>> Awhile back I tried to set up Samba 4.1.something as an additional
>>>>> domain controller to provide some redundancy if the Windows 2000 machine
>>>>> went down. I was not sucessfull as replication did not work from the
>>>>> Samba DC back to the Windows DC. After working on it for awhile I gave
>>>>> up on it. Is there some special 2000 function level that I could have
>>>>> selected that would have made things work?
>>>>> I know that it is a very bad thing to rely on Windows 2000 Serever on a
>>>>> 15 year old computer, but for several reasons we can not update it.
>>>>> We reciently went out and bought a full set of spare parts for the
>>>>> machine so that we can fix any failures.
>>>>> Tom Schulz
>>>> What I meant was, and said so in a roundabout way, should we drop
>>>> support for 'provisioning' a *new* domain as function level '2000'.
>>>> Obviously there will be cases of people wanting to join a Samba AD
>>>> machine to a 2000 server and this should be supported as a way for users
>>>> to upgrade to an higher function level.
>>>> It sounds like I need to re-visit the fsmo.py code and make it (if
>>>> possible) 2000 aware (i.e. no DNS roles)
>>> When I tried it, there were three problems that I remember.
>>> One was that the DNS information was not picked up by the Windows 2000 DC.
>> I have just set up a Samba 2000 AD domain to test my yet again
>> re-written fsmo.py code and you don't get any DNS zones in AD, perhaps
>> this was the reason for your first problem.
> Our Windows 2000 Server does have the DNS information expected of an AD DC.
> It may well not have a role for that. I am not sure how to tell.
>>> I worked around that by manually entering the information on the 2000 DC.
>>> The second was that if I added a new user on the Samba DC, the information
>>> was not replicated to the Windows 2000 DC.
>> I have tested this and a user created on the first DC is not replicated
>> and when I try to force replication, I get this:
>> root at dc2000a:~# samba-tool drs replicate dc2000b dc2000a
>> ERROR(<class 'samba.drs_utils.drsException'>): DsReplicaSync failed -
>> drsException: DsReplicaSync failed (2, 'WERR_BADFILE')
>> "/usr/local/samba/lib/python2.7/site-packages/samba/netcmd/drs.py", line
>> 350, in run
>> drs_utils.sendDsReplicaSync(self.drsuapi, self.drsuapi_handle,
>> source_dsa_guid, NC, req_options)
>> "/usr/local/samba/lib/python2.7/site-packages/samba/drs_utils.py", line
>> 83, in sendDsReplicaSync
>> raise drsException("DsReplicaSync failed %s" % estr)
>>> Adding a new user on the Windows
>>> DC did replicate to the Samba DC.
>> If I try to create a user on the second DC, I get this:
>> ERROR(ldb): Failed to add user 'User2': -
>> ../source4/dsdb/samdb/ldb_modules/ridalloc.c:551: No RID Set DN - Remote
>> RID Set creation needed
>>> The third problem was that if I set up the Samba file server machines to
>>> use security=domain then the file servers would often be unable to
>>> authenticate a user. They did work before I manually added the DNS
>>> records on the Windows 2000 DC. They also did work with security=domain
>>> and specifying the server with 'password server=machine'.
>> I wonder if it would have worked if you had used 'security = ADS'
> I mis-typed that second line. I ment to say security=ads did not work
> when the Samba DC`s DNS information was added to the Windows 2000 DC.
> The added DNS information was in exactly the same format as that already
> in the Windows 2000 DC for itself.
>>> I decided that I did not want to trust the Samba DC so I demoted it.
>> Don't blame you :-)
>>> This was with Samba 4.1.something. I see that there has been some work
>>> to make Samba tolerate missing information when becomming a DC, so perhaps
>>> I should try again.
>> If my small test is anything to go on, I wouldn't bother just yet :-D
> Thanks for looking at this. I was hoping that there was some magic step
> in setting up a Samba DC when the original one is a Windows 2000 DC.
> Tom Schulz
> Applied Dynamics Intl.
> schulz at adi.com
There may be 'magic step', but if there is, I do not know it and have no
way of testing to possibly find it, as I do not have an actual windows
More information about the samba-technical