[Samba] Our success story with samba4
esiotrot at gmail.com
Mon Oct 25 01:31:34 MDT 2010
On 25 October 2010 08:45, Daniel Müller <mueller at tropenklinik.de> wrote:
> besides nsd it is possible to make dynamic update work with bind on centos
Yes, sure. It's just that bind configuration seems to be a
significantly difficult part of getting Samba 4 working (many people
seem to have trouble with it) so I was wondering if nsd was any
I am using bind, but I don't really need dynamic DNS updates because I
am only using Samba 4 for authentication of services on a couple of
servers. i.e. no workstations. Static IPs. No machines
Since I have bind working, I am not looking to switch to nsd. I was
just wondering why Lukasz chose it, but I suppose they were using it
already, before implementing Samba 4.
> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: samba-bounces at lists.samba.org [mailto:samba-bounces at lists.samba.org] Im
> Auftrag von Lukasz Zalewski
> Gesendet: Freitag, 22. Oktober 2010 21:55
> An: Michael Wood
> Cc: samba at lists.samba.org; samba-technical
> Betreff: Re: [Samba] Our success story with samba4
> On 22/10/2010 19:52, Michael Wood wrote:
> Hi Michael,
>> Hi Lukasz
>> On 19 October 2010 11:12, Lukasz Zalewski<lukas at eecs.qmul.ac.uk> wrote:
>>> Hi all,
>>> This message is a testament to the great work samba team has done, but
>>> also an encouragement to those of you that still not sure if samba4 will
>>> work in your environment.
>>> This semester we have moved from samba 3.0.X DC to samba4 DC for
>>> and things are working great
>>> The move was predominantly driven by switching from Windows XP to Windows
>>> desktop platform (but also by a need for proper group policy).
>>> Our setup is quite simple and includes:
>>> One samba4 DC (running on centos 5.5 x64) with nsd dns backend
>> Do you have dynamic DNS updates working with nsd? Using Kerberos?
>> From clients too or just with the samba_dnsupdate script?
> Nope, AFAIK nsd can't do ms style dynamic updates (its the one bundled
> with Centos 5.5). We decided to go for static dns (we have only one s4
> DC), which is composed of the bind config file generated by s4 provision
> (nsd can use bind config files, but TXT records have to be quoted for
> some reason) and all other records generated from database.
>> How was it to set up compared to bind?
> Besides not setting up dynamic updates, quite easy (I think easier than
> bind). As mentioned earlier, it supports bind config syntax (but TXT
> records have to be quoted).
Michael Wood <esiotrot at gmail.com>
More information about the samba