[Samba] system error 64, win xp and samba

[John H Terpstra]

On Fri, 29 Nov 2002 mlh at zip.com.au wrote:

> On Thu, Nov 28, 2002 at 04:59:42PM +0000, John H Terpstra wrote:
> > On Thu, 28 Nov 2002, mlh wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > Just so that it gets into the archives for
> > > future googlers:
> > >
> > > If you get 'system error 64' on a windows xp
> > > machine trying to connect to samba, then
> > > make sure you have nothing running on port 445.
> > >
> > > I had an apache ssl instance running on that port.
> >
> > Really? The well known port for that is 443.
>
> Yeah, I know.   I have a whole bunch of apache servers,
> of potentially different versions, hence different ports.
> (rather than use virtual servers)
> The first uses 80+443, the second 81+444, the third ... well
> you can guess :-)
>
> > > Doh!  Had to scratch my head a bit over it.
> > >
> > > XP doesn't actually need anything to be on 445,
> > > it just gets confused and gives up if there is.
> >
> > Port 445 is the port Win2K and WinXP use for netbiosless SMB.
> > It is the correct well known TCP port that Microsoft have registered for
> > the purpose.
>
> Does any present or future Samba plan to use it too?
> (I presume the answer is yes for future, but I think
> no for the present.?)

Samba already uses port 445. Has done for a while. Generally speaking, it
is not a good idea to use well known ports (1-1024) randomly. See smb.h in
the samba source code.

- John T.
-- 
John H Terpstra
Email: jht at samba.org