inconsistent browsing info for samba server

[John Barbee]

Hi there,

	I have two Samba servers running within an NT domain.  One Samba
(F-Samba) server runs samba-1.9.18.10 on top of FreeBSD-2.2.8 and the
other (L-Samba) runs samba-1.9.18p2-C6 on a RedHat Linux variant.  All of
our NT machines run NT4,SP4.  One is workstation and the rest run server.  
The PDC is an NT Server (NT1).

	F-Samba and L-Samba only show up in the browsers of about half of
the NT machines, not including NT1, the PDC.

	Running "smbclient -L F-Samba" on L-Samba or "smbclient -L
L-Samba" on F-Samba produces accurate results in both share information
and interface information.

	Running "nmblookup '*'" returns only those NT machines that can
see the Samba servers.

	Running "nmblookup -M" gives a name query error.

	Running "nmblookup -S -B NT1 '*'" i get a name query error even
though the query was sent to correct IP address.

	However, running "nmblookup -S -B NT2 '*'" another NT Server it
returns with 10 names including "..__MSBROWSE__."  This might be due to
our NT administrator playing around with the Master Browser settings.  I'm
not clear on what he did exactly.  He's studying for his MCSE so he not
around for me to ask.

	I looked around on the website and noticed BROSWER-config.txt
recommends using only one protocol since NetBIOS can run over both IPX and
IP.  Interestingly enough, the PDC NT1 runs only NetBUI and TCP/IP.  NT2
runs NetBUI, TCP/IP and IPX.  I was hoping there would be a hard and fast
correlation here but it isn't the case.  Some NT machines that run IPX
don't see the Samba Servers and some that don't run IPX see the Samba
Servers.

Here are some excerpts from testparms of both Samba Servers.

F-Samba
=======
name resolve order = lmhosts host wins bcast
os level = 0
preferred master = No
local master = No
domain master = No  
guest account = nobody
guest only = No
guest ok = No 

L-Samba
=======
os level = 0
preferred master = No
local master = Yes
domain master = No
guest account = nobody
guest only = No
guest ok = No


So, does anyone have any ideas on this one?

Thanks.
john