[Samba] domain-based DFS ?

L.P.H. van Belle belle at bazuin.nl
Thu Jul 3 03:05:41 MDT 2014

Thanks Davor... 

you found at least one problem, adding the interfaces and bind options fixed at least 1 thing. 

No changes on the windows 7 pc.

in smb.conf i added 

        interfaces =
        bind interfaces only = yes

( Ubuntu users dont use eth or lo, this is buggy  ) 

        comment = DFS Root Share
        path = /export/dfsroot
        browsable = yes
        msdfs root = yes
        read only = no

now my test :

smbclient //localhost/dfs  -U 'DOMAIN\administrator'
cd someshare


windows7 pc to \\servername\dfs\someshare 

now working on the domain based dfs 



>-----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
>Van: davortvusir at gmail.com 
>[mailto:samba-bounces at lists.samba.org] Namens Davor Vusir
>Verzonden: donderdag 3 juli 2014 9:54
>Aan: steve
>CC: samba at lists.samba.org
>Onderwerp: Re: [Samba] domain-based DFS ?
>2014-07-02 14:40 GMT+02:00 Davor Vusir <davortvusir at gmail.com>:
>> Den 1 jul 2014 16:56 skrev "steve" <steve at steve-ss.com>:
>>> On Tue, 2014-07-01 at 16:32 +0200, L.P.H. van Belle wrote:
>>> > well..
>>> >
>>> > I just did a test with this for steve also.
>>> >
>>> > same result.
>>> >
>>> > \\domain.name\sysvol and netlogon accessable no problems.
>>> >
>>> > \\domain.name\dfs   Access denied again? "Network path cannot be
>>> > found...", 0x8xxxyy35?
>>> >
>>> > \\server1.domain.name\dfs  works, but someshare not.
>>> > \\server1.domain.name\dfs\someshare
>>> >
>>> > my steps.
>>> >
>>> > mkdir -p /export/dfsroot
>>> > chown root:root /export/dfsroot
>>> > chmod 755 /export/dfsroot
>>> > ln -s  'msdfs:mem1.internal.domain.tld\someshare'
>>> > /export/dfsroot/someshare
>>> >
>>> > also tried : ln -s  'msdfs:mem1.internal.domain.tld\\someshare'
>>> > /export/dfsroot/someshare
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > smbclient //localhost/dfs  -U 'administrator'
>>> > cd someshare
>>> >
>>> > tree connect failed: NT_STATUS_BAD_NETWORK_NAME
>>> > Unable to follow dfs referral [\mem1.internal.domain.tld\]
>>> > cd \somewhare\: NT_STATUS_BAD_NETWORK_NAME
>>> >
>>> > so far for me..
>>> >
>>> > found this one
>>> > https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/linux.samba/mi4O5lHE8Vc
>>> > so i think this is not fixed yet...
>>> > there is a patch in this link, but since im on sernet im 
>not trying the
>>> > patch.
>>> Yeah, thanks Louis.
>>> This is looking more and more like a time consuming, 
>undocumented dead
>>> end. I'm really tempted to drop it at this point and spend 
>the time on a
>>> proper cluster instead. I get the feeling that this was 
>always going to
>>> be second best, and it only works with windows clients anyway.
>>> Cheers,
>>> Steve
>> Is it an IPv6 issue? I know Windows XP does not speak IPv6 
>> But...
>> I have turned off IPv6 on the AD DC. And installed Microsoft 
>Fixit 50409 on
>> my Win 7.
>> Regards
>> Davor
>Back again! :)
>First of all, I refuse to believe that I'm the only one that got
>domain-based DFS to work.
>I want to share some final thoughts in this matter.
>This link, 
>is a transcript of how I installed and configured Samba. To make
>domain-based DFS work I simply put 'host msdfs = yes' to the global
>section, added the required share definition, created the links,
>restarted Samba end rebooted the Windows client.
>If you take a few minutes and read the wiki page, you'll see a section
>about turning off IPv6 on the host. This might be what differs in my
>and your setup. And what makes the difference.
>My thoughts:
>The host is IPv6 capable. Samba understands and responds to requests
>over both IPv4 and IPv6. An IPv4-only host, like Windows XP or Windows
>7 with Microsoft Fixit 50409 installed, sends a request. Samba, or the
>DFS-module, recieves it and processess it but as the host is IPv6
>capable, Samba, or the DFS-module, returns an answer over a valid
>adapter. May it be IPv4 or IPv6. Is the IPv6 adapter prioritized? For
>Samba, or the DFS-module, it doesn't seem to matter. If samba, or the
>DFS-module, just makes the check 'if ValidAdapter == true send
>response;' it might just be sent over IPv6 and there is no one on the
>other end to recieve the message. Or if the DFS code doesn't support
>IPv6, it simply drops it.
>Would 'bind interfaces only',
>be a better alternative to turning off IPv6 on the host? In
>co-operation with 'interfaces',
>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