[Samba] /etc/hosts and DHCP

Ross Boylan rossboylan at stanfordalumni.org
Fri Sep 25 16:05:13 UTC 2015

On Fri, Sep 25, 2015 at 12:49 AM, Rowland Penny <
rowlandpenny241155 at gmail.com> wrote:

> On 24/09/15 22:08, Ross Boylan wrote:
>> I am trying to follow the advice on
>> https://wiki.samba.org/index.php/Setup_a_Samba_AD_Member_Server.  Among
>> other things, it says "Make sure that your /etc/hosts has a valid entry
>> for
>> resolving your hostname to its public IP (not!), when you join
>> the domain:"
>> But my machine is using DHCP and so I can't hard code this.  What to do?
> Ignore the wiki and don't put anything in /etc/hosts, if (like on ubuntu)
> you have pointing to your hostname, remove or comment out this
> line, but you really should give a member server a fixed ip
>> I am using Debian's resolvconf and bind.  I suspect I'll need to use bind
>> to manage things properly, but perhaps I could let samba do the name
>> resolution.
> you need to use the internal DNS or bind DNS, you cannot use both.
Understood.  My meaning was using samba in place of bind.
Things are even messier, because the VM is relying on DNS from the virtual
network (libvirt's internal dnsmasq) at the moment.

>> A possibly related issue is that the machine has 2 network interfaces, one
>> for a private network and one for the public one that participates in the
>> AD.  So there is not one right answer for the name -> IP resolution,
>> though
>> possibly the fully qualified domain name that goes with active directory
>> could be reserved for the external IP.
> This could be interesting, how are you going to authenticate the private
> network users to a machine that is joined to a domain?
I don't follow.  The machine has Unix users and a mapping between AD users
and Unix users.  Are you saying I can't have both, and that my users must
come either from AD or from local sources, but not both?

>> I'm going on the assumption that "AD Member Server" is what I want,
>> because
>> I want to join the domain, use it for authentication, and server files.
>> Originally I thought "Member Server" meant I was publicly serving up
>> members of the domain; that is not my intention.
> The term 'member server' is a bit of a misnomer, it really should be 'a
> Linux client that serves files', any Linux client is basically set up in
> the same way, what you do with it after, is what defines its role.
Thanks.  So it's a server that's a domain member, not a server that serves
member identities (which would make it a controller).


More information about the samba mailing list