Panagiotis Malakoudis wrote:> > Here is my problem. I have a slackbox running samba 2.0.6 > that uses an NT wins server. I also have a DNS on linux. > Whenever my dns failes (for some reason) hosts that have no > entry on the DNS server but are indeed found on the wins > cannot connect to the samba server. They get "The network is > busy" and the smb log files give me "broken pipe". As soon as > the DNS is back on line...all is well. I've read the O'Reillys > book on name resolution but came up with nothing. Any ideas?This is better suited for the main samba list since it is not related to Samba's domain controlling capabilities. I'm CC:'ing it there as well. Have a look at the 'dns proxy' parameter and the 'name resolve order' parameter as well. Cheers, jerry ---------------------------------------------------------------------- /\ Gerald (Jerry) Carter Professional Services \/ http://www.valinux.com VA Linux Systems gcarter@valinux.com http://www.samba.org SAMBA Team jerry@samba.org http://www.eng.auburn.edu/~cartegw "...a hundred billion castaways looking for a home." - Sting "Message in a Bottle" ( 1979 )
I did. The book says and I quote "dns proxy: If set to yes, a samba WINS server will search DNS if it cannot find a name in WINS." Does this also apply when you have not setup your samba server as a WINS server but instead use another one? Now where name resolve order is concerned... The default order from what I see is lmhosts-hosts-wins-bcast. This is what I use. There is no record in my smb.conf that states otherwise. No record at all that points to a DNS server. Any clues? ----- Original Message ----- From: "Gerald Carter" <gcarter@valinux.com> To: <pmal@space.gr> Cc: "Multiple recipients of list SAMBA-NTDOM" <samba-ntdom@samba.org>; <samba@samba.org> Sent: Friday, June 16, 2000 10:03 AM Subject: Re: Samba and DNS> Panagiotis Malakoudis wrote: > > > > Here is my problem. I have a slackbox running samba 2.0.6 > > that uses an NT wins server. I also have a DNS on linux. > > Whenever my dns failes (for some reason) hosts that have no > > entry on the DNS server but are indeed found on the wins > > cannot connect to the samba server. They get "The network is > > busy" and the smb log files give me "broken pipe". As soon as > > the DNS is back on line...all is well. I've read the O'Reillys > > book on name resolution but came up with nothing. Any ideas? > > This is better suited for the main samba list since it > is not related to Samba's domain controlling capabilities. > I'm CC:'ing it there as well. > > Have a look at the 'dns proxy' parameter and the 'name > resolve order' parameter as well. > > > > > > Cheers, > jerry > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > /\ Gerald (Jerry) Carter Professional Services > \/ http://www.valinux.com VA Linux Systems gcarter@valinux.com > http://www.samba.org SAMBA Team jerry@samba.org > http://www.eng.auburn.edu/~cartegw > > "...a hundred billion castaways looking for a home." > - Sting "Message in a Bottle" ( 1979 )
I have half of a class C assigned to my network (/25 netmask 255.255.255.128) and the reverse (PTR) records must be maintained on my ISP's side. (no one wants the 'hassle' of working out a scheme to delegate the in-addr-arpa. to us for half the block) As it stands I have only asked them to include the server's PTR so that I can ftp, etc. from sites if I need patches or whatever. This works fine as I don't really need to advertise my various Winx clients to the outside world but I see this error quite a bit in the log.smb: [2000/09/07 15:34:52, 1] lib/util_sock.c:client_name(852) Gethostbyaddr failed for 209.91.24.193 [2000/09/07 15:44:34, 1] lib/util_sock.c:client_name(852) Gethostbyaddr failed for 209.91.24.200 [2000/09/07 15:45:03, 1] lib/util_sock.c:client_name(852) Gethostbyaddr failed for 209.91.24.193 [2000/09/07 15:49:11, 1] lib/util_sock.c:client_name(852) Gethostbyaddr failed for 209.91.24.200 Now, what I understand is that this is because the reverse lookup is failing (there are no PTR records for these machines at the ISP by choice). What I am wondering is if I am suffering any kind of 'performance' hit due to these lookup attempts when connections are made to samba shares by various machines? Is this simply an annoying error log message I can ignore, or are there other implications to this? I have been vexed with my entire server slowing down to a crawl, even having 'Network Busy' messages on clients trying to connect at times when I lose all connectivity to my ISP (and I assume DNS/named becomes quite unhappy or something of that nature and is spending a lot of time trying to get answers from the far end about these machines?) This is on a BSDI 4.0.1 system running samba 2.0.4b. Anyone have any insight - thoughts on this? Thanks also to all the previous comments - one problematic user had a 3Com network card which had come preinstalled in her machine. Because of info in recent postings I tried replacing it with a Netgear card and moved her to a different hub and the performance increase was remarkable! And as a happy side effect, the CFO was so pleased she authorized replacing the rest of the 5+ year old Kingston hubs - all in all a good day in network land.... many thanks to the denizens of the sambalist - Rich Parker Director of Engineering Vermont Public Radio