Turning off SMB1 make slashdot and theregister !

[Andrew Bartlett]

On Tue, 2019-07-30 at 09:32 -0700, Jeremy Allison wrote:
> 
> I have to admit I really think this is the only workable
> solution for the size of fileserver maintanence team we
> have.
> 
> I'm working on modernizing the fileserver VFS right
> now, and the requirements to keep SMB1 working are
> causing massive amounts of extra work.
> 
> If we can ditch SMB1, many many simplifications
> become possible in the fileserver code that require
> enormous effort today. Take a look at the directory
> scanning cleanup fixes I'm going to try and land
> this week - 99% of that is fixing up old SMB1
> code that is simply unneeded if we were SMB2+
> only.
> 
> The AD-DC codebase moves forward as rapidly as
> possible to match current Windows needs.
> 
> The fileserver needs to be able to do the
> same.
> 
> All IMHO of course :-).

Thanks Jeremy!

It is really good to be seriously discussing this! 

We do have to be realistic as to what we can maintain.  I'm in a
similar discussion with Andreas about how much we should rely on
GnuTLS.  

By discussing it broadly I hope we can draw out support or objections
earlier than release date + 12 months (because that is just
impractically late). 

I still think a lo-fi (will not pass all tests) SMB1 proxy is a good
idea, but that's all, just an idea not a mandate or unwavering
objection. 

Another alternative could perhaps be to support SMB1 using the current
code, but not the full semantics. 

Andrew Bartlett

-- 
Andrew Bartlett
https://samba.org/~abartlet/
Authentication Developer, Samba Team         https://samba.org
Samba Development and Support, Catalyst IT   
https://catalyst.net.nz/services/samba