[PATCH]: Inconsistent recmaster during election.

Martin Schwenke martin at meltin.net
Mon Feb 8 03:08:08 UTC 2016

Hi Kenny,

On Thu, 21 Jan 2016 17:21:26 +1100, Martin Schwenke
<martin at meltin.net> wrote:

> On Wed, 20 Jan 2016 19:03:40 -0800, Kenny Dinh <kdinh at peaxy.net> wrote:
> > > "We need to figure out if some changes to winbind mean that this    
> > particular smbcontrol is no longer required."
> > 
> > Do you mean recent patches to winbind?  Do you want me to test with samba
> > 4.2.x or any newer version of samba, or would samba 4.2.3-10 and ctdb 2.5.4
> > be fine?  
> I thought I saw some changes go by where winbind tracks IP addresses
> itself, or similar.  I don't have enough context or time to be able to
> dig into this right now.  But I am wondering if the smbcontrol is
> needed at all.

> [...]

> At this point, my interest is in determining how necessary/important
> the smbcontrol is and consider allowing it to time out.  In the best
> case we could remove it altogether.

We did some tests today.  If you're running Samba 4.0.x or 4.1.x
(and I believe that you're running the latter) then you can just
comment out the "smbcontrol winbindd ip-dropped ..." lines from
49.winbind and 11.natgw.

There was a feature added in Samba 4.0 that makes winbindd track IP
address changes on Linux.  A bug fix in Samba 4.2.2 (and later versions)
(original commit 0d161e42d9aeb155eae2b04eccec497b21de8029) caused a
regression in above feature, so it stopped working.  This means that the
smbcontrol commands are needed again.

This bug:


is tracking the fix.  We would expect that the fix will appear in 4.4,
4.3 and 4.2.

When the above bug fix lands, we will open a bug to remove unnecessary
"smbcontrol winbindd ip-dropped ..." commands from CTDB.

peace & happiness,

More information about the samba-technical mailing list