[Samba] Re: Samba and the InterWeb
Alex Hooper
ahooper at bmjgroup.com
Thu Feb 14 13:21:20 GMT 2008
Scott Lovenberg uttered:
> Alex Hooper wrote:
>> Scott Lovenberg uttered:
>>> Alex Hooper wrote:
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> We have an office-based Windows-locked publishing system whose only
>>>> delivery mechanism is to write to a local filesystem, and a
>>>> requirement for its output to be available to a collocated
>>>> production environment comprising Solaris and Linux boxes. The
>>>> 'obvious' solution was to run a Samba server on one of the
>>>> collocated Linux boxes and mount the share it provides on the
>>>> relevant Windows machines in the office. And this is what I have
>>>> done. This works, but encounters the problem I am about to describe.
>>>>
>>>> SCENARIO ONE:
>>>>
>>>> Connecting to the server/share in Explorer (Windows XP) by typing
>>>> the path (\\dns.host.name\share) into the address bar is
>>>> accomplished without problem, as is receiving a directory listing.
>>>> But uploading a file to the remote share (by drag and dropping)
>>>> causes Explorer to freeze for anything between 10 and 30 seconds
>>>> after which the file transfers at good speed.
>>>>
>>>> SCENARIO TWO:
>>>>
>>>> Map the remote share, using same connection details. Now copy is
>>>> often fine, but sometimes will just fail with a "Cannot copy
>>>> <filename>: The specified network name is no longer available." and
>>>> leave a zero-length file at the remote end.
>>>>
>>>> Not infrequently, smbd processes are being left in an
>>>> 'uninterruptible sleep' state.
>>>>
>>>> If I mount the remote share via smbmount onto a Linux server in the
>>>> office, I don't encounter any of these problems.
>>>>
>>>> Packet-sniffing on scenario one shows that the pause is happening
>>>> before any set-up for the file transfer: it looks like the client
>>>> disconnects, then there's a pause, then it reconnects.
>>>>
>>>> I'm using Samba version 3.0.25b-1.el4_6.4 on RHEL ES release 4.
>>>> Clients are Windows XP Pro. Our office has a fairly large and
>>>> complex LAN which is managed by a separate department. Access to the
>>>> Internet is, not surprisingly, via a NATting gateway. Appropriate
>>>> ports have been opened in the firewalls, though all communication is
>>>> in Direct-hosted mode (ie, I only see traffic on port 445/tcp).
>>>>
>>>> smb.conf looks like this:
>>>>
>>>> [global]
>>>>
>>>> workgroup = WG123
>>>> netbios name = n2323 # hostname of server
>>>> server string = FOO-BAR-Samba
>>>>
>>>> #wins proxy = yes
>>>> #wins server = xxx.xx.xx.x
>>>>
>>>> security = user
>>>> passdb backend = tdbsam
>>>>
>>>> load printers = no
>>>>
>>>> # idle time (mins) before client is disconnected
>>>> dead time = 15
>>>> keepalive = 10
>>>> socket options = IPTOS_THROUGHPUT SO_SNDBUF=8576
>>>> inherit permissions = yes
>>>>
>>>> [test-xml]
>>>> path = /stuff/test-xml
>>>> writeable = Yes
>>>> public = no
>>>>
>>>> Could anyone suggest what might be going on here?
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>>
>>>> Alex.
>>> On scenario1, is it (Windows client) trying to connect to port 445 on
>>> the server, being dropped instead of rejected, timing out, and then
>>> establishing a connection on port 139? I think by default Windows
>>> tries to connect to both at the same time or something weird like that.
>>>
>>
>> No. There is no attempt to use port 139: only 445 is approached.
>>
>>>
>>> On scenario2, I've seen behavior something akin to this on a
>>> corrupted e1000 kernel module. I've also seen bad cables (twice
>>> where gigabit and mii are concerned, IIRC) that behave all kinds of
>>> weird, at any given moment.
>>>
>>
>> The server's using the bnx2 module and the NIC is at 100MB FD. I'm not
>> noting any other network weirdness, which would seem to suggest
>> cabling is probably OK, wouldn't it?
>>
> I once heard a quote (which I'd like to attribute to Jeremy Allison for
> some reason) to the effect of "The Windows SMB network stack is like a
> canary in a coal mine, when you have network troubles it's the first
> thing to die." I could get everything else to work just fine with this
> driver, but SMB/CIFS just kept flaking out. So, I always try to trace a
> problem starting from the wall back.
>
>>> Anyways, FWIW, how does your 'netstat -s' output look? Are you
>>> getting a considerable number of connection resets being sent or
>>> received?
>>>
>>
>> No. All the "reset sent"s in the diff below belong to an unrelated
>> application. In the time between the two netstats compared below,
>> various stalling transfers were made and one "network name is no
>> longer available" was received:
>>
>> # diff -Bub /root/netstat-20080213-0939 /root/netstat-20080213-1016
>> --- /root/netstat-20080213-0939 2008-02-13 09:39:24.000000000 +0000
>> +++ /root/netstat-20080213-1016 2008-02-13 10:16:34.000000000 +0000
>> @@ -1,43 +1,44 @@
>> Ip:
>> - 4336 total packets received
>> + 21933 total packets received
>> 0 forwarded
>> 0 incoming packets discarded
>> - 4335 incoming packets delivered
>> - 4134 requests sent out
>> + 20292 incoming packets delivered
>> + 19069 requests sent out
>> Icmp:
>> - 26 ICMP messages received
>> + 92 ICMP messages received
>> 0 input ICMP message failed.
>> ICMP input histogram:
>> - echo requests: 26
>> - 26 ICMP messages sent
>> + echo requests: 92
>> + 92 ICMP messages sent
>> 0 ICMP messages failed
>> ICMP output histogram:
>> - echo replies: 26
>> + echo replies: 92
>> Tcp:
>> - 6 active connections openings
>> - 161 passive connection openings
>> + 11 active connections openings
>> + 169 passive connection openings
>> 0 failed connection attempts
>> - 0 connection resets received
>> - 93 connections established
>> - 4176 segments received
>> - 3992 segments send out
>> + 1 connection resets received
>
> Hrm... the client reset. Do you have a wire sniff to see what is going
> on right before the client sends a reset?
>
Hi,
I've put one at
http://www.oops.org.uk/misc/transfer-file-20080213-reset02.pcap
I'm unable to extract useful clue from it, though brain fog is building
up here. I'm starting to consider publishing to an internal machine and
syncing with SCP or rsync. Feels hacky, though.
Cheers,
--
Alex Hooper | <w> www.bmjpg.com
Systems and Database Administration | <e> ahooper at bmjgroup.com
BMJ Knowledge, BMJ Publishing Group | <t> +44 20 7383 6049
BMA House, LONDON, WC1H 9JR |
_______________________________________________________________________
The BMJ Group is one of the world's most trusted providers of medical information for doctors, researchers, health care workers and patients www.bmjgroup.bmj.com. This email and any attachments are confidential. If you have received this email in error, please delete it and kindly notify us. If the email contains personal views then the BMJ Group accepts no responsibility for these statements. The recipient should check this email and attachments for viruses because the BMJ Group accepts no liability for any damage caused by viruses. Emails sent or received by the BMJ Group may be monitored for size, traffic, distribution and content. BMJ Publishing Group Limited trading as BMJ Group. A private limited company, registered in England and Wales under registration number 03102371. Registered office: BMA House, Tavistock Square, London WC1H 9JR, UK.
_______________________________________________________________________
More information about the samba
mailing list