can someone with more samba knowledge then me tell me what this means in my log file? [2000/06/28 16:37:31, 1] lib/util_sock.c:client_name(997) Gethostbyaddr failed for 192.168.0.1 It doesn't appear to be a problem with samba itself but rather the way I have my network setup? any help would be appreciated.. the reason being I am having random connection problems with my cleint windows2000 computers.. TIA John Kuhn
John Kuhn wrote:> > can someone with more samba knowledge then me tell me > what this means in my log file? > > [2000/06/28 16:37:31, 1] lib/util_sock.c:client_name(997) > Gethostbyaddr failed for 192.168.0.1Most likely that 192.168.0.1 is not in /etc/hosts or in DNS (which it shouldn't be in DNS anyways unless you have a local, isolated DNS server) or you don't have /etc/resolv.conf configured correctly on your Samba server). 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 )
Hi Is it normal that gethostbyaddr keeps complaining that it can't find the hostname for an address? This error keeps popping up in the log.smb. My Samba server is using a NT WINS server for name registration and resolution. The individual logfiles don't complain about this. Here's the full story: Yesterday suddenly nobody could log on no more to our Samba Fileserver. The server itself seemed to be doing just fine. From the other Linux boxes I could log on to SMB, but from the Windows clients I couldn't even telnet or ftp to SMB. We discovered that this problem was caused by a leased line that was down with our corporate headquarters where the DNS server was (for their domain). So in order to log on to SMB fileserver DNS had to be running maybe? When the leased was back on line, everything was back to normal. So we decided to manage our own DNS domain. We installed our own DNS on Linux that manages our domain (registered all right) alone. After a few hours of configuring the DNS, things seemed to be running normal again. So next time we lost contact with headquartes we should be fine. Can anyone explain to me why SMB needs a DNS server when all it needs really is netbios resolution? Thanks. Berton. -------------- next part -------------- HTML attachment scrubbed and removed