samba - May 2018 - Samba4 on Ubuntu 18.04 Howto setup ADDC with bind9_DLZ (extra part 4.8.1 samba)

So, I'm curious about the contrast between modifying netplan vs simply
disabling systemd.resolved

Is there some advantage to the gyrations to make netplan work, vs simply
disabling resolved and manually defining the IP and DNS server?
[I'm not complaining, I'm thankful for all the options - just wanting to
have the best handle possible on the reasoning behind one method vs the other.]

Thanks Louis!

-Greg

LPHvBvs> Hai, 

LPHvBvs> I detected a minor error and i added a quick fix. 
LPHvBvs> And i'm testing my 4.8.1 debian package on ubuntu 18.04, see
below..

LPHvBvs> Syslog shows.
LPHvBvs> May  9 14:50:26 ubuntu1804 systemd[9448]:
LPHvBvs> /lib/systemd/system-generators/netplan failed with exit status 1.
LPHvBvs> The fix is:  editor /etc/netplan/01-netcfg.yaml
LPHvBvs> The last adresses: needs a server adres. 

LPHvBvs> cat /etc/netplan/01-netcfg.yaml
LPHvBvs> # This file describes the network interfaces available on your
system
LPHvBvs> # For more information, see netplan(5).
LPHvBvs> network:
LPHvBvs>   version: 2
LPHvBvs>   renderer: networkd
LPHvBvs>   ethernets:
LPHvBvs>     eth0:
LPHvBvs>       addresses: [ 192.168.249.31/24 ]
LPHvBvs>       gateway4: 192.168.249.1
LPHvBvs>       nameservers:
LPHvBvs>           search: [ internal.example.com ]
LPHvBvs>           addresses: 

LPHvBvs> The corrected version is :
LPHvBvs> cat /etc/netplan/01-netcfg.yaml
LPHvBvs> # This file describes the network interfaces available on your
system
LPHvBvs> # For more information, see netplan(5).
LPHvBvs> network:
LPHvBvs>   version: 2
LPHvBvs>   renderer: networkd
LPHvBvs>   ethernets:
LPHvBvs>     eth0:
LPHvBvs>       addresses: [ 192.168.249.31/24 ]
LPHvBvs>       gateway4: 192.168.249.1
LPHvBvs>       nameservers:
LPHvBvs>           search: [ internal.example.com ]
LPHvBvs>           addresses: [ 192.168.249.31 ]         <<<< IP
OF THE AD-DC.

LPHvBvs> When this is set run the following.
LPHvBvs> netplan --debug generate

LPHvBvs> Reboot and check you logs again. 

[...SNIP...]

On Fri, 11 May 2018 07:14:38 -0700
Gregory Sloop via samba <samba at lists.samba.org> wrote:
> So, I'm curious about the contrast between modifying netplan vs
> simply disabling systemd.resolved
> 
> Is there some advantage to the gyrations to make netplan work, vs
> simply disabling resolved and manually defining the IP and DNS
> server? [I'm not complaining, I'm thankful for all the options -
just
> wanting to have the best handle possible on the reasoning behind one
> method vs the other.]
> 
My opinion is pretty basic, if you are setting up a Samba AD DC, then
you don't need/want anything installed that could change the DNS
settings.

Louis's point of view seems to be, do the least amount of alteration
to the OS to get it work without removing anything.

You pays your money and makes your choice ;-)

Rowland

RPvs> On Fri, 11 May 2018 07:14:38 -0700
RPvs> Gregory Sloop via samba <samba at lists.samba.org> wrote:
>> So, I'm curious about the contrast between modifying netplan vs
>> simply disabling systemd.resolved
>> Is there some advantage to the gyrations to make netplan work, vs
>> simply disabling resolved and manually defining the IP and DNS
>> server? [I'm not complaining, I'm thankful for all the options
- just
>> wanting to have the best handle possible on the reasoning behind one
>> method vs the other.]

RPvs> My opinion is pretty basic, if you are setting up a Samba AD DC, then
RPvs> you don't need/want anything installed that could change the DNS
RPvs> settings.

RPvs> Louis's point of view seems to be, do the least amount of
alteration
RPvs> to the OS to get it work without removing anything.

RPvs> You pays your money and makes your choice ;-)

systemd sure is a drama queen, eh? For something that's supposed to be
simply a behind-the-scenes,
don't-screw-it-up-just-do-it-simply-easily-and-reliably, systemd seems to
have become the center of the universe. [Pretty soon the OS will be there to
keep systemd working, instead of the other way-round.]

All that said, I tend to hew to Louis' take - modify the stock install as
minimally as possible. [I think I find fewer things down the road that want to
bite me in the night, if I do it that way...]

Still, I would like Louis' take.
:)

Hai,

And yes, i can confirm that Rowland is correct about my point of view.
I'll also explain a bit why so people can understand my thoughts. 

I install a server as minimal as possible, yes, you might miss some packages,
but you can install these after the base setup.
The Why is, This saves a lot of space, unneeded updates/upgrade of packages you
dont use and it results in a more stable server.

I setup with, at least i try to, as less as possible of adjustment of the
default config files and try to stay in line with the thoughts of the
developers.
The Why is, and you upgrade packages or the OS upgrade, lesser problems and
lesser you need to upgrade to quicker and more save for unattended upgrade.
Because if this all my servers run with unattended upgrades. Daily all packages,
kernel reboot needed, in the weekends.

This is why i dont care about sysv services systemd whatever, use it how to os
is designed.
And if you dont like it, .. ( sorry for the example ) like Rowland and systemd,
he switched to Devuan.
A Debian version but without systemd.

I dont like Ubuntu, but i do like Debian. 
You think, but its the same, no, totaly not, yes, same packages, but not the
same in how the system runs.
A good example is how the resolving is done, the "unneeded" packages
ubuntu installs which only slows down your system.

My vision. 
Servers, Debian stable, no gui as minimal as possible. 
* A note, companies might need, ubuntu or RedHat due to hardware/software
support and regulations.

Desktop, Debian stable/Ubuntu Desktop/Ubuntu Mate/Mint
	Regular user, keep the desktop defaults.
	user like me, install the minimal desktop. 

Media server, kodi/plex etc, Ubuntu server.
	Debian is getting better here, but i have not tested that. 

Above is based on almost 20 years linux use. 
Just shareing my thoughs here about the how and why i use my linux. 

Questions, just ask me. 

Greetz, 

Louis

> -----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
> Van: samba [mailto:samba-bounces at lists.samba.org] Namens 
> Rowland Penny via samba
> Verzonden: vrijdag 11 mei 2018 16:24
> Aan: samba at lists.samba.org
> Onderwerp: Re: [Samba] Samba4 on Ubuntu 18.04 Howto setup 
> ADDC with bind9_DLZ (extra part 4.8.1 samba)
> 
> On Fri, 11 May 2018 07:14:38 -0700
> Gregory Sloop via samba <samba at lists.samba.org> wrote:
> 
> > So, I'm curious about the contrast between modifying netplan vs
> > simply disabling systemd.resolved
> > 
> > Is there some advantage to the gyrations to make netplan work, vs
> > simply disabling resolved and manually defining the IP and DNS
> > server? [I'm not complaining, I'm thankful for all the 
> options - just
> > wanting to have the best handle possible on the reasoning behind one
> > method vs the other.]
> > 
> 
> My opinion is pretty basic, if you are setting up a Samba AD DC, then
> you don't need/want anything installed that could change the DNS
> settings.
> 
> Louis's point of view seems to be, do the least amount of alteration
> to the OS to get it work without removing anything.
> 
> You pays your money and makes your choice ;-)
> 
> Rowland 
> 
> -- 
> To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the
> instructions:  https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba
> 
>

Sorry to bother you more, Louis...
Can you take a quick whack at this?

---
> So, I'm curious about the contrast between modifying netplan vs
> simply disabling systemd.resolved
> 
> Is there some advantage to the gyrations to make netplan work, vs
> simply disabling resolved and manually defining the IP and DNS
> server?
---

I'd honestly prefer disabling systemd.resolved - but would like to
understand your way of doing it better, so I can make an informed choice.

Thanks [and sorry all for the thread drifting from strictly Samba stuff...]
-Greg

LPHvBvs> Hai,

LPHvBvs> And yes, i can confirm that Rowland is correct about my point of
view.
LPHvBvs> I'll also explain a bit why so people can understand my
thoughts.

LPHvBvs> I install a server as minimal as possible, yes, you might
LPHvBvs> miss some packages, but you can install these after the base setup.
LPHvBvs> The Why is, This saves a lot of space, unneeded
LPHvBvs> updates/upgrade of packages you dont use and it results in a more
stable server.

LPHvBvs> I setup with, at least i try to, as less as possible of
LPHvBvs> adjustment of the default config files and try to stay in
LPHvBvs> line with the thoughts of the developers. 
LPHvBvs> The Why is, and you upgrade packages or the OS upgrade,
LPHvBvs> lesser problems and lesser you need to upgrade to quicker and
LPHvBvs> more save for unattended upgrade.
LPHvBvs> Because if this all my servers run with unattended upgrades.
LPHvBvs> Daily all packages, kernel reboot needed, in the weekends. 

LPHvBvs> This is why i dont care about sysv services systemd
LPHvBvs> whatever, use it how to os is designed. 
LPHvBvs> And if you dont like it, .. ( sorry for the example ) like
LPHvBvs> Rowland and systemd, he switched to Devuan.
LPHvBvs> A Debian version but without systemd.

LPHvBvs> I dont like Ubuntu, but i do like Debian. 
LPHvBvs> You think, but its the same, no, totaly not, yes, same
LPHvBvs> packages, but not the same in how the system runs.
LPHvBvs> A good example is how the resolving is done, the
"unneeded"
LPHvBvs> packages ubuntu installs which only slows down your system.

LPHvBvs> My vision. 
LPHvBvs> Servers, Debian stable, no gui as minimal as possible. 
LPHvBvs> * A note, companies might need, ubuntu or RedHat due to
LPHvBvs> hardware/software support and regulations. 

LPHvBvs> Desktop, Debian stable/Ubuntu Desktop/Ubuntu Mate/Mint
LPHvBvs>         Regular user, keep the desktop defaults.
LPHvBvs>         user like me, install the minimal desktop. 

LPHvBvs> Media server, kodi/plex etc, Ubuntu server.
LPHvBvs>         Debian is getting better here, but i have not tested that. 

LPHvBvs> Above is based on almost 20 years linux use. 
LPHvBvs> Just shareing my thoughs here about the how and why i use my linux. 

LPHvBvs> Questions, just ask me. 

LPHvBvs> Greetz, 

LPHvBvs> Louis

>> -----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
>> Van: samba [mailto:samba-bounces at lists.samba.org] Namens 
>> Rowland Penny via samba
>> Verzonden: vrijdag 11 mei 2018 16:24
>> Aan: samba at lists.samba.org
>> Onderwerp: Re: [Samba] Samba4 on Ubuntu 18.04 Howto setup 
>> ADDC with bind9_DLZ (extra part 4.8.1 samba)
>> On Fri, 11 May 2018 07:14:38 -0700
>> Gregory Sloop via samba <samba at lists.samba.org> wrote:
>> > So, I'm curious about the contrast between modifying netplan
vs
>> > simply disabling systemd.resolved
>> > 
>> > Is there some advantage to the gyrations to make netplan work, vs
>> > simply disabling resolved and manually defining the IP and DNS
>> > server? [I'm not complaining, I'm thankful for all the 
>> options - just
>> > wanting to have the best handle possible on the reasoning behind
one
>> > method vs the other.]
>> > 
>> My opinion is pretty basic, if you are setting up a Samba AD DC, then
>> you don't need/want anything installed that could change the DNS
>> settings.
>> Louis's point of view seems to be, do the least amount of
alteration
>> to the OS to get it work without removing anything.
>> You pays your money and makes your choice ;-)
>> Rowland 
>> -- 
>> To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the
>> instructions:  https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba




-- 
Gregory Sloop, Principal: Sloop Network & Computer Consulting
Voice: 503.251.0452 x82
EMail: gregs at sloop.net
http://www.sloop.net
---

Hai Gregory, 
 
No problem, now netplan, but i cant tell you much about netplan out of
experiance, i've never used it.
But what is it exact you want to know?? 
The how and why i configure like this is already a bit explained.

 
about this part: 
> So, I'm curious about the contrast between modifying netplan vs simply
disabling systemd.resolved
 

But I did a bit reading. (https://netplan.io/)  and that looks ok, so the
contrast here imo, there isnt.
once you configured with netplan, networkmanager and systemd-networkd/resolved
use the netplan config.
So, now its a new one on my todo list to figure a setup with netplan. Thanks
guys ;-/ 
 
Now a nice example of why to configure network/dns and stay in scope of the
systems viewpoint.
http://www.ubuntugeek.com/how-to-fix-dns-problems-after-upgrading-ubuntu-17-10-from-ubuntu-17-04-16-10-16-04.html
I was also a victum of such upgrade problems multiple times yes. to configure
outside the systems viewpoint.  ( long ago ubuntu 8.x/10.x Debian 4-5-6 )
 
Understanding "my way" of installing..   I'll try to keep it a
short message..  and remember its "my way" not a preffered way, its my
preffered way of installing.
 
I install minimal, as minimal as possible at least for servers.  
    Ubuntu does not like my way of installing thats also why i higly preffer
Debian.
    ( Things like /vmlinux not found, grub problems due to usb install, i
installed to little, and due to that unable to boot of other program errors. )
    then i setup the needed tools i want to use. just things like an editor and
basic tools.
 
- i start with the basic network settings, ip and resolving and i make sure this
is 100% correct. 
  what i use, well, i dont care about this, i use thats offered in the minimal
install so in ubuntu 14.04 it was primary networkmanager now its
systemd-networkd.
  Just take some time to read into a new thing and do that when the server is
still at a minimal install, and most important, use minimal changes.
  If you change a default system file, ALWAYS backup it before changing it.  
 
- (if used optional) configure DNS server. 
- setup a time server, or configure it to get a good time source ( any domain
member points always to the primary NTP in the LAN )
 
These to are the most important things to configure. a good network setup and
time server setup.
After these i test my resolving. And as of this point i setup based on the use
of the server.
I install in the same order, always, because the keeps e steps easy to repeat
and if something goes wrong its more easy to track down.
 
This is why i created this.
https://github.com/thctlo/samba4/tree/master/howtos 
This order is also how i always install my servers and anyone can adopt this for
any os.
Just follow the install order, try it and see if you encounter problems.
I'll bet you get problem but less then before.
 
So in my opinion, its not about whats prefered or how its configured, it about
what/how you install and use it, then you can think about howto configure it and
whats preffered.
 
 
Did i make sence here? 
 
 
Greetz, 
 
Louis
 
 
 
 
 
 

Van: Gregory Sloop [mailto:gregs at sloop.net] 
Verzonden: woensdag 16 mei 2018 1:22
Aan: L.P.H. van Belle via samba; L.P.H. van Belle
Onderwerp: Re: [Samba] Samba4 on Ubuntu 18.04 Howto setup ADDC with bind9_DLZ
(extra part 4.8.1 samba)



Sorry to bother you more, Louis...
Can you take a quick whack at this?

---
> So, I'm curious about the contrast between modifying netplan vs
> simply disabling systemd.resolved
> 
> Is there some advantage to the gyrations to make netplan work, vs
> simply disabling resolved and manually defining the IP and DNS
> server?
---

I'd honestly prefer disabling systemd.resolved - but would like to
understand your way of doing it better, so I can make an informed choice.

Thanks [and sorry all for the thread drifting from strictly Samba stuff...]
-Greg

LPHvBvs> Hai,

LPHvBvs> And yes, i can confirm that Rowland is correct about my point of
view.
LPHvBvs> I'll also explain a bit why so people can understand my
thoughts.

LPHvBvs> I install a server as minimal as possible, yes, you might
LPHvBvs> miss some packages, but you can install these after the base setup.
LPHvBvs> The Why is, This saves a lot of space, unneeded
LPHvBvs> updates/upgrade of packages you dont use and it results in a more
stable server.

LPHvBvs> I setup with, at least i try to, as less as possible of
LPHvBvs> adjustment of the default config files and try to stay in
LPHvBvs> line with the thoughts of the developers. 
LPHvBvs> The Why is, and you upgrade packages or the OS upgrade,
LPHvBvs> lesser problems and lesser you need to upgrade to quicker and
LPHvBvs> more save for unattended upgrade.
LPHvBvs> Because if this all my servers run with unattended upgrades.
LPHvBvs> Daily all packages, kernel reboot needed, in the weekends. 

LPHvBvs> This is why i dont care about sysv services systemd
LPHvBvs> whatever, use it how to os is designed. 
LPHvBvs> And if you dont like it, .. ( sorry for the example ) like
LPHvBvs> Rowland and systemd, he switched to Devuan.
LPHvBvs> A Debian version but without systemd.

LPHvBvs> I dont like Ubuntu, but i do like Debian. 
LPHvBvs> You think, but its the same, no, totaly not, yes, same
LPHvBvs> packages, but not the same in how the system runs.
LPHvBvs> A good example is how the resolving is done, the
"unneeded"
LPHvBvs> packages ubuntu installs which only slows down your system.

LPHvBvs> My vision. 
LPHvBvs> Servers, Debian stable, no gui as minimal as possible. 
LPHvBvs> * A note, companies might need, ubuntu or RedHat due to
LPHvBvs> hardware/software support and regulations. 

LPHvBvs> Desktop, Debian stable/Ubuntu Desktop/Ubuntu Mate/Mint
LPHvBvs>         Regular user, keep the desktop defaults.
LPHvBvs>         user like me, install the minimal desktop. 

LPHvBvs> Media server, kodi/plex etc, Ubuntu server.
LPHvBvs>         Debian is getting better here, but i have not tested that. 

LPHvBvs> Above is based on almost 20 years linux use. 
LPHvBvs> Just shareing my thoughs here about the how and why i use my linux. 

LPHvBvs> Questions, just ask me. 

LPHvBvs> Greetz, 

LPHvBvs> Louis

>> -----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
>> Van: samba [mailto:samba-bounces at lists.samba.org] Namens 
>> Rowland Penny via samba
>> Verzonden: vrijdag 11 mei 2018 16:24
>> Aan: samba at lists.samba.org
>> Onderwerp: Re: [Samba] Samba4 on Ubuntu 18.04 Howto setup 
>> ADDC with bind9_DLZ (extra part 4.8.1 samba)
>> On Fri, 11 May 2018 07:14:38 -0700
>> Gregory Sloop via samba <samba at lists.samba.org> wrote:
>> > So, I'm curious about the contrast between modifying netplan
vs
>> > simply disabling systemd.resolved
>> > 
>> > Is there some advantage to the gyrations to make netplan work, vs
>> > simply disabling resolved and manually defining the IP and DNS
>> > server? [I'm not complaining, I'm thankful for all the 
>> options - just
>> > wanting to have the best handle possible on the reasoning behind
one
>> > method vs the other.]
>> > 
>> My opinion is pretty basic, if you are setting up a Samba AD DC, then
>> you don't need/want anything installed that could change the DNS
>> settings.
>> Louis's point of view seems to be, do the least amount of
alteration
>> to the OS to get it work without removing anything.
>> You pays your money and makes your choice ;-)
>> Rowland 
>> -- 
>> To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the
>> instructions:  https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba




-- 
Gregory Sloop, Principal: Sloop Network & Computer Consulting
Voice: 503.251.0452 x82
EMail: gregs at sloop.net
http://www.sloop.net
---