[Samba] About NAS versus Samba

L.P.H. van Belle belle at bazuin.nl
Fri Jul 12 00:53:15 MDT 2013

 I'm evaluating replacing some Linux file server for a NAS 
>product, but
>>>> all them make me nervous when the vendor talks about 
>"Active Directory
>>>> support" and nothing else.

Its simple, this is a BAD thing tot do. 
But if you really want a nas. 

Get a synology. 
The best you can get, is my experiance. 

Just get a pc with 2 harddisks and install. 

or if you want a ready setup for samba4 . 
get the sernet samba4 appliance.

My advice, get or the synoligy of the samba4 app. 

personaly, get the samba4 appliance. 
get zarafa, and you have about the samba as Windows + exchange 

Im running samba 3 with zarafa now, and im in the process of upgradeing to samba4. 

Good luck. 


>-----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
>Van: jimpotter at orange.net 
>[mailto:samba-bounces at lists.samba.org] Namens Jim Potter
>Verzonden: vrijdag 12 juli 2013 8:44
>Aan: samba at lists.samba.org
>Onderwerp: Re: [Samba] About NAS versus Samba
>I use a Netgear readynas1500 as a fileserver for my Samba3/ldap domain 
>which I' ve just upgraded to AD and it works fine in both 
>cases (lots of 
>users, though with relatively few active connections). It runs a bog 
>standard Samba3 + winbind member server (NT or ADS) as far as 
>I can tell.
>Having said that, the 2 shortcomings I have found are with windows 7 
>clients...  troubles doing offline files (there are  bunch of tweaks, 
>but none work perfectly) and it doesnt work too well with the 
>feature in win7 (it needs indexing o some sort that isn't povided by 
>samba I think)
>BTW, would a Samba4 member server setup help with these issues? If it 
>did, I'd upgrade even if it did invaidate warranty...
>On 11/07/2013 05:03, fernando at lozano.eti.br wrote:
>> Hi Cris,
>>>> Hi there, Has anyone tried to configure a NAS server to 
>>>> users using a Samba PDC, or even a Samba4 DC 
>(AD-compatible) or an IPA
>>>> server?
>>> not in a while, but I have done a samba 3 DC
>> This was not my question. I'm ok running samba 3 DCs. :-)
>> Have you ever configured a NAS so it would authenticate users from 
>> your Samba DC and them serve SMB file shares (aka network drives) to 
>> Windows desktops?
>>>> I'm evaluating replacing some Linux file server for a NAS 
>product, but
>>>> all them make me nervous when the vendor talks about 
>"Active Directory
>>>> support" and nothing else.
>>> if 3rd party support is your concern, why are you using fedora 
>>> instead of
>>> RHEL?
>> Are you trying to sell me RHEL subscriptions or help me with my 
>> question? ;-) Anything wrong about asking about Fedora on a Fedora 
>> list, or any server issue is forbidden for Fedora users? ;-)
>> AFAIK it shouldn't matter, from a technical perspective, if 
>the samba 
>> DC runs Fedora, Debian, Slackware, RHEL, SuSE, Ubuntu, Solaris, 
>> whatever. I am not talking about OS level FC drivers or iSCSI 
>> initiators. Either a NAS will be compatible with Samba3, 
>Samba4, both 
>> or neither. This depends on the SMB and MSRPC features needed by the 
>> NAS, all them application level protocols, not kernel 
>modules. If I'll 
>> need Red Hat support for managing this system is another, unrelated, 
>> question.
>> If the NAS vendors state they su???port RHEL, that's not que 
>> either, as supporting RHEL could mean the RHEL linux kernel 
>smbfs and 
>> cifsfs driver talks to the NAS, not the NAS talks to the 
>Samba DC. Or 
>> else, RHEL support may mean just that the NAS talks NFS and 
>so a RHEL 
>> machine can mount volumes from tne NAS. That's not what I want.
>> Most times I see linux servers they are simply members of a MSAD 
>> domain, not the DC themselves. But mine are. All vendors I talked to 
>> assume MSAD, and don't know about Samba. :-(
>> Anyway Fedora is my desktop system and development 
>workstation. The DC 
>> in question runs RHEL. But if this works I can try someday using 
>> Fedora or CentOS with the same (or other) NAS.
>>>>> In theory, many NASes are Linux boxes running samba, so there
>>>> shouldn't be a problem, except if the web admin interface 
>won't support
>>>> a samba DC setup and I won't have SSH access to configure 
>the NAS samba
>>>> myself
>>> a cheaper nas will probably use samba, but not all NASs do. 
>there are
>>> several commercial SMB/CIFS implementation out there.
>> At least iomega/lenovo/emc state their NAS runs Samba. And a lot of 
>> less know vendors also. I'll buy a single, cheap NAS, not a high end 
>> EMC rack full of boxes. :-)
>> But... will any NAS you know work with a Samba DC, or else, using an 
>> IPA server? Or will they only work with Microsoft Windows Server AD?
>> All vendors I contacted talk only about MS Active Directory. They 
>> don't even know about NT4-style domains, which would mean a 
>Samba3 DC 
>> should work. Besides, AFAIK a Samba4 DC isn't supported by 
>RHEL at all 
>> -- that's why I included IPA in my question -- I'd have to 
>use Sernet 
>> packages for Samba4. Even then, Samba4 is very new, I don't 
>know if a 
>> NAS implementation would accept it in place of a MSAD DC.
>> Most vendors talk to me about vmware, exchange and sql 
>server support. 
>> They offer me windows-only backup servers and the like. Some even 
>> offer me SAP R/3 agents, while my ERP is another one. They can only 
>> follow their standard script for windows shops. So I ask for the 
>> collective knowledge from the Fedora and Samba lists... can anyone 
>> tell me "I tried this NAS and it worked"? Or should I better forget 
>> about this and keep using cheap intel boxes as file servers?
>> Am I the first linux sysadmin in the world who's considering 
>to have a 
>> NAS replacing some file servers but keeping his samba DCs?
>> []s, Fernando Lozano
>To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the
>instructions:  https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba

More information about the samba mailing list