similar to: "map to guest = bad user" ignored in Samba 4?

On 12/03/18 11:28, Rowland Penny via samba wrote: > On Mon, 12 Mar 2018 11:11:44 +0000 > Sebastian Arcus via samba <samba at lists.samba.org> wrote: > >> I have a Samba AD running Samba 4.7.5. Everything was working fine, >> when, seemingly out of the blue, the users started to be denied >> access to all shares. If I try from a Windows 7 or Windows 10 >>

I am moving a Samba AD DC to a new server (I am merging two different hardware servers serving different functions). The new server has the same name as the old one, and same IP addresses on the network interfaces. I have moved the following directories: /var/lib/samba /var/cache/samba /etc/samba/ /var/named/ Samba will start, Bind starts (I'm using the Bind backend), the dns tests from

On 29/03/18 15:52, Rowland Penny via samba wrote: > On Thu, 29 Mar 2018 15:01:26 +0100 > Sebastian Arcus via samba <samba at lists.samba.org> wrote: > >> There seems to be a slight issue with the instructions at the >> following wiki page: >> >> https://wiki.samba.org/index.php/Configure_DHCP_to_update_DNS_records_with_BIND9 >> >> The

Apologies if this is a documented feature and I missed it - I've been googling and reading through the docs but haven't spotted any mention anywhere. Is the vfs_recycle feature officially being supported with Samba in AD mode? I have a few AD DC's with file shares on them - and have been struggling with file permissions not being inherited on the file shares. I have finally

Check the kr5b.conf and confirm DNS is working On Fri, Mar 9, 2018 at 9:20 PM, Sebastian Arcus via samba < samba at lists.samba.org> wrote: > > On 09/03/18 10:52, Sebastian Arcus via samba wrote: > >> I am moving a Samba AD DC to a new server (I am merging two different >> hardware servers serving different functions). The new server has the same >> name as the

I have a Samba AD running Samba 4.7.5. Everything was working fine, when, seemingly out of the blue, the users started to be denied access to all shares. If I try from a Windows 7 or Windows 10 machine, logged in as a user in "Domain Uses", I get: "Windows cannot access \\server-name\share_name. You do not have permission to access \\server-name\share_name" If I use

On 12/05/17 09:10, Marc Muehlfeld wrote: > Hi Sebastian, > > Am 11.05.2017 um 19:39 schrieb Sebastian Arcus via samba: >> I can see in the docs that a domain rename is not >> recommended/supported by Samba for an already provisioned domain. >> However, what I can't work out is if this is not possible during the >> classicupgrade step either? > >

There seems to be a slight issue with the instructions at the following wiki page: https://wiki.samba.org/index.php/Configure_DHCP_to_update_DNS_records_with_BIND9 The /usr/local/bin/dhcp-dyndns.sh script seems to use a hardwired value for the lease expiry time of 3600 - independent of whatever is configured in dhcpd.conf. With the examples provided, it should work, as the example dhcpd.conf

On 02/12/19 15:10, Rowland penny via samba wrote: > On 02/12/2019 14:28, Sebastian Arcus via samba wrote: >> Apologies if this is a documented feature and I missed it - I've been >> googling and reading through the docs but haven't spotted any mention >> anywhere. Is the vfs_recycle feature officially being supported with >> Samba in AD mode? I have a few AD

On 11/06/19 13:29, Rowland penny via samba wrote: > On 11/06/2019 13:13, Sebastian Arcus via samba wrote: >> >> On 11/06/19 11:49, Rowland penny via samba wrote: >>> On 11/06/2019 11:38, Sebastian Arcus via samba wrote: >>>> >>>> On 11/06/19 11:07, Rowland penny via samba wrote: >>>>> On 11/06/2019 10:34, Sebastian Arcus via samba

On 21/08/17 13:39, Robert Wolf wrote: > > On Mon, 21 Aug 2017, Sebastian Arcus wrote: > >> >> On 21/08/17 10:37, Gedalya wrote: >>> On 08/21/2017 07:28 AM, voytek at sbt.net.au wrote: >>>> is there a 'preferred way'? should I tell users to use 143 over 993 ? or >>>> 993 over 143? or? >>> There is no concrete answer. There

On 02/12/19 15:44, Rowland penny via samba wrote: > On 02/12/2019 15:32, Sebastian Arcus via samba wrote: >> >> On 02/12/19 15:10, Rowland penny via samba wrote: >> >> Thank you for the quick reply. I should have mentioned that these DC's >> are at at different sites. At each site there is only one Linux server >> - hence why the DC is also the file

On 02/12/19 16:53, Rowland penny via samba wrote: > On 02/12/2019 16:24, Sebastian Arcus via samba wrote: >> </snip> > >>> You should have 'vfs objects = dfs_samba4 acl_xattr recycle' >> >> Thank you very much for this - now it is working. This lack of >> permissions inheritance issue has been plaguing me for months - it is >> very

I've just bought an OpenVOX B200p ISDN card - and if I remember correctly from last time I used one of these - it is possible to use either DAHDI or mISDN with it. Are there any factors to consider when choosing which software to use? Is one better than the other - or does one have features which are not present in the other? I will be using it for a simple PBX, with 2 ISDN channels as

On 12/03/18 12:56, Rowland Penny via samba wrote: > On Mon, 12 Mar 2018 11:36:47 +0000 > Sebastian Arcus via samba <samba at lists.samba.org> wrote: > >> >> On 12/03/18 11:28, Rowland Penny via samba wrote: >>> On Mon, 12 Mar 2018 11:11:44 +0000 >>> Sebastian Arcus via samba <samba at lists.samba.org> wrote: >>> >>>> I have a

I can see in the docs that a domain rename is not recommended/supported by Samba for an already provisioned domain. However, what I can't work out is if this is not possible during the classicupgrade step either? Does this make any difference, or would it present the same difficulties as renaming an already provisioned Samba AD? It case what I'm asking is not quite clear - I have a

On 11/06/19 11:49, Rowland penny via samba wrote: > On 11/06/2019 11:38, Sebastian Arcus via samba wrote: >> >> On 11/06/19 11:07, Rowland penny via samba wrote: >>> On 11/06/2019 10:34, Sebastian Arcus via samba wrote: >>>> I've just upgraded a Samba AD server to 4.10.2 a few weeks ago from >>>> 4.x (I'm afraid I'm not sure the exact

Hello list, I use Asterisk with one sipgate.co.uk trunk. Asterisk connects to sipgate.co.uk as a sip agent/client (with "register =>" statement in sip.conf). If I restrict the number of ports used in rtp.conf (to 10000-10005 for example) - will that affect the sip sessions to sipgate.co.uk as well - or only those sessions where Asterisk acts as a sip proxy/server? Many thanks,

Hello! Thanks. I'm trying but still unsuccessful ..... Regards Em 30-05-2017 16:05, Sebastian Arcus via samba escreveu: > > On 30/05/17 15:42, Carlos A. P. Cunha via samba wrote: >> Hello! >> >> My Configuration: >> >> lsb_release -a >> >> No LSB modules are available. >> Distributor ID: Ubuntu >> Description: Ubuntu 14.04.3

On 11/06/19 11:07, Rowland penny via samba wrote: > On 11/06/2019 10:34, Sebastian Arcus via samba wrote: >> I've just upgraded a Samba AD server to 4.10.2 a few weeks ago from >> 4.x (I'm afraid I'm not sure the exact earlier version) - and since >> then I just haven't managed to pin down the file permissions and >> inheritance on the shares as