I'm forwarding this "discussion" onto this list, incase any of you
might be
able to help. AT the very bottom of this email was my original question
posted to samba-ntdom. Any help would be appreciated.
-----Original Message-----
From: samba-ntdom-admin@lists.samba.org
[mailto:samba-ntdom-admin@lists.samba.org]On Behalf Of Gerry Maddock
Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2001 2:02 PM
To: Joseph
Cc: samba-ntdom@lists.samba.org
Subject: RE: WIN NT 4.0 NO GO & YES I HAVE ENCRYPTED PASSWORDS
Ok, I changed log level to =3, now I'm getting some logs. Here is the log
file for the NT box I am testing with. I didnt attach the whole log, its now
HUGE. I can forward the entire log if needed. Here is part of it.
2001/10/11 13:55:58, 3] smbd/process.c:process_smb(837)
Transaction 1 of length 174
[2001/10/11 13:55:58, 3] smbd/process.c:switch_message(650)
switch message SMBnegprot (pid 1269)
[2001/10/11 13:55:58, 3] smbd/sec_ctx.c:set_sec_ctx(316)
setting sec ctx (0, 0) - sec_ctx_stack_ndx = 0
[2001/10/11 13:55:58, 3] smbd/negprot.c:reply_negprot(349)
Requested protocol [PC NETWORK PROGRAM 1.0]
[2001/10/11 13:55:58, 3] smbd/negprot.c:reply_negprot(349)
Requested protocol [XENIX CORE]
[2001/10/11 13:55:58, 3] smbd/negprot.c:reply_negprot(349)
Requested protocol [MICROSOFT NETWORKS 1.03]
[2001/10/11 13:55:58, 3] smbd/negprot.c:reply_negprot(349)
Requested protocol [LANMAN1.0]
[2001/10/11 13:55:58, 3] smbd/negprot.c:reply_negprot(349)
Requested protocol [Windows for Workgroups 3.1a]
[2001/10/11 13:55:58, 3] smbd/negprot.c:reply_negprot(349)
Requested protocol [LM1.2X002]
[2001/10/11 13:55:58, 3] smbd/negprot.c:reply_negprot(349)
Requested protocol [LANMAN2.1]
[2001/10/11 13:55:58, 3] smbd/negprot.c:reply_negprot(349)
Requested protocol [NT LM 0.12]
[2001/10/11 13:55:58, 3] smbd/negprot.c:reply_negprot(433)
Selected protocol NT LM 0.12
[2001/10/11 13:55:58, 3] smbd/process.c:process_smb(837)
Transaction 2 of length 198
[2001/10/11 13:55:58, 3] smbd/process.c:switch_message(650)
switch message SMBsesssetupX (pid 1269)
[2001/10/11 13:55:58, 3] smbd/sec_ctx.c:set_sec_ctx(316)
setting sec ctx (0, 0) - sec_ctx_stack_ndx = 0
[2001/10/11 13:55:58, 3] smbd/reply.c:reply_sesssetup_and_X(865)
Domain=[SHADOW] NativeOS=[Windows NT 1381] NativeLanMan=[]
[2001/10/11 13:55:58, 3] smbd/reply.c:reply_sesssetup_and_X(876)
sesssetupX:name=[administrator]
[2001/10/11 13:55:58, 3] smbd/sec_ctx.c:push_sec_ctx(284)
push_sec_ctx(0, 0) : sec_ctx_stack_ndx = 1
[2001/10/11 13:55:58, 3] smbd/sec_ctx.c:set_sec_ctx(316)
setting sec ctx (0, 0) - sec_ctx_stack_ndx = 1
[2001/10/11 13:55:58, 3] smbd/sec_ctx.c:get_current_groups(167)
get_current_groups: uid 0 is in 1 groups: 547
[2001/10/11 13:55:58, 3] smbd/sec_ctx.c:pop_sec_ctx(423)
pop_sec_ctx (0, 0) - sec_ctx_stack_ndx = 0
[2001/10/11 13:55:58, 3] smbd/sec_ctx.c:get_current_groups(167)
get_current_groups: uid 0 is in 1 groups: 547
[2001/10/11 13:55:58, 3] smbd/password.c:register_vuid(322)
uid 595 registered to name administrator
[2001/10/11 13:55:58, 3] smbd/password.c:register_vuid(324)
Clearing default real name
[2001/10/11 13:55:58, 3] smbd/password.c:register_vuid(326)
User name: administrator Real name:
[2001/10/11 13:55:58, 3] smbd/process.c:chain_reply(982)
Chained message
[2001/10/11 13:55:58, 3] smbd/process.c:switch_message(650)
switch message SMBtconX (pid 1269)
[2001/10/11 13:55:58, 3] smbd/sec_ctx.c:set_sec_ctx(316)
setting sec ctx (0, 0) - sec_ctx_stack_ndx = 0
[2001/10/11 13:55:58, 3] smbd/password.c:authorise_login(787)
authorise_login: ACCEPTED: validated uid ok as non-guest
(user=administrator)
[2001/10/11 13:55:58, 3] smbd/service.c:make_connection(477)
Connect path is /tmp
[2001/10/11 13:55:58, 3] smbd/sec_ctx.c:push_sec_ctx(284)
push_sec_ctx(0, 0) : sec_ctx_stack_ndx = 1
[2001/10/11 13:55:58, 3] smbd/sec_ctx.c:set_sec_ctx(316)
setting sec ctx (0, 0) - sec_ctx_stack_ndx = 1
[2001/10/11 13:55:58, 3] smbd/sec_ctx.c:get_current_groups(167)
get_current_groups: uid 0 is in 1 groups: 547
[2001/10/11 13:55:58, 3] smbd/sec_ctx.c:pop_sec_ctx(423)
pop_sec_ctx (0, 0) - sec_ctx_stack_ndx = 0
[2001/10/11 13:55:58, 3] smbd/sec_ctx.c:get_current_groups(167)
get_current_groups: uid 0 is in 1 groups: 547
[2001/10/11 13:55:58, 3] lib/util_seaccess.c:se_access_check(239)
se_access_check: user sid is
S-1-5-21-1132588640-3893169706-2677359455-2190
[2001/10/11 13:55:58, 3] lib/util_seaccess.c:se_access_check(242)
se_access_check: also S-1-5-21-1132588640-3893169706-2677359455-2095
[2001/10/11 13:55:58, 3] lib/util_seaccess.c:se_access_check(242)
se_access_check: also S-1-1-0
[2001/10/11 13:55:58, 3] lib/util_seaccess.c:se_access_check(242)
se_access_check: also S-1-5-2
[2001/10/11 13:55:58, 3] lib/util_seaccess.c:se_access_check(242)
se_access_check: also S-1-5-11
[2001/10/11 13:55:58, 3] smbd/vfs.c:vfs_init_default(98)
Initialising default vfs hooks
[2001/10/11 13:55:58, 3] smbd/sec_ctx.c:set_sec_ctx(316)
setting sec ctx (595, 547) - sec_ctx_stack_ndx = 0
[2001/10/11 13:55:58, 3] smbd/sec_ctx.c:set_sec_ctx(322)
1 user groups:
547
[2001/10/11 13:55:58, 3] smbd/vfs.c:vfs_ChDir(643)
vfs_ChDir to /tmp
[2001/10/11 13:55:58, 3] smbd/service.c:make_connection(606)
shadow (10.1.1.108) connect to service IPC$ as user administrator
(uid=595, gid=547) (pid
1269)
[2001/10/11 13:55:58, 3] smbd/sec_ctx.c:set_sec_ctx(316)
setting sec ctx (0, 0) - sec_ctx_stack_ndx = 0
[2001/10/11 13:55:58, 3] smbd/reply.c:reply_tcon_and_X(387)
tconX service=ipc$ user=administrator
[2001/10/11 13:55:58, 3] smbd/process.c:process_smb(837)
Transaction 3 of length 95
[2001/10/11 13:55:58, 3] smbd/process.c:switch_message(650)
switch message SMBntcreateX (pid 1269)
[2001/10/11 13:55:58, 3] smbd/sec_ctx.c:set_sec_ctx(316)
setting sec ctx (595, 547) - sec_ctx_stack_ndx = 0
[2001/10/11 13:55:58, 3] smbd/sec_ctx.c:set_sec_ctx(322)
1 user groups:
547
[2001/10/11 13:55:58, 3] smbd/nttrans.c:nt_open_pipe(621)
nt_open_pipe: Known pipe srvsvc opening.
[2001/10/11 13:55:58, 3] smbd/process.c:process_smb(837)
Transaction 4 of length 152
[2001/10/11 13:55:58, 3] smbd/process.c:switch_message(650)
switch message SMBtrans (pid 1269)
[2001/10/11 13:55:58, 3] smbd/ipc.c:reply_trans(484)
trans <\PIPE\> data=72 params=0 setup=2
[2001/10/11 13:55:58, 3] smbd/ipc.c:named_pipe(336)
named pipe command on <> name
[2001/10/11 13:55:58, 1] smbd/ipc.c:api_fd_reply(294)
api_fd_reply: INVALID PIPE HANDLE: 86c5
[2001/10/11 13:55:58, 3] smbd/ipc.c:api_no_reply(256)
Unsupported API fd command
[2001/10/11 13:55:58, 3] smbd/process.c:process_smb(837)
Transaction 5 of length 46
[2001/10/11 13:55:58, 3] smbd/process.c:switch_message(650)
switch message SMBclose (pid 1269)
[2001/10/11 13:55:58, 3] smbd/error.c:error_packet(136)
error packet at line 255 cmd=4 (SMBclose) eclass=1 ecode=6
[2001/10/11 13:55:58, 3] smbd/process.c:process_smb(837)
Transaction 6 of length 95
[2001/10/11 13:55:58, 3] smbd/process.c:switch_message(650)
switch message SMBntcreateX (pid 1269)
[2001/10/11 13:55:58, 3] smbd/nttrans.c:nt_open_pipe(621)
nt_open_pipe: Known pipe srvsvc opening.
[2001/10/11 13:55:58, 3] smbd/process.c:process_smb(837)
Transaction 7 of length 152
[2001/10/11 13:55:58, 3] smbd/process.c:switch_message(650)
switch message SMBtrans (pid 1269)
[2001/10/11 13:55:58, 3] smbd/ipc.c:reply_trans(484)
trans <\PIPE\> data=72 params=0 setup=2
[2001/10/11 13:55:58, 3] smbd/ipc.c:named_pipe(336)
named pipe command on <> name
[2001/10/11 13:55:58, 1] smbd/ipc.c:api_fd_reply(294)
api_fd_reply: INVALID PIPE HANDLE: 86c6
[2001/10/11 13:55:58, 3] smbd/ipc.c:api_no_reply(256)
Unsupported API fd command
[2001/10/11 13:55:58, 3] smbd/process.c:process_smb(837)
Transaction 8 of length 46
[2001/10/11 13:55:58, 3] smbd/process.c:switch_message(650)
switch message SMBclose (pid 1269)
[2001/10/11 13:55:58, 3] smbd/error.c:error_packet(136)
error packet at line 255 cmd=4 (SMBclose) eclass=1 ecode=6
[2001/10/11 13:55:58, 3] smbd/process.c:process_smb(837)
Transaction 9 of length 95
[2001/10/11 13:55:58, 3] smbd/process.c:switch_message(650)
switch message SMBntcreateX (pid 1269)
[2001/10/11 13:55:58, 3] smbd/nttrans.c:nt_open_pipe(621)
nt_open_pipe: Known pipe srvsvc opening.
[2001/10/11 13:55:58, 3] smbd/process.c:process_smb(837)
Transaction 10 of length 152
[2001/10/11 13:55:58, 3] smbd/process.c:switch_message(650)
switch message SMBtrans (pid 1269)
[2001/10/11 13:55:58, 3] smbd/ipc.c:reply_trans(484)
trans <\PIPE\> data=72 params=0 setup=2
[2001/10/11 13:55:58, 3] smbd/ipc.c:named_pipe(336)
named pipe command on <> name
[2001/10/11 13:55:58, 1] smbd/ipc.c:api_fd_reply(294)
api_fd_reply: INVALID PIPE HANDLE: 86c7
[2001/10/11 13:55:58, 3] smbd/ipc.c:api_no_reply(256)
Unsupported API fd command
[2001/10/11 13:55:58, 3] smbd/process.c:process_smb(837)
Transaction 11 of length 46
[2001/10/11 13:55:58, 3] smbd/process.c:switch_message(650)
switch message SMBclose (pid 1269)
[2001/10/11 13:55:58, 3] smbd/error.c:error_packet(136)
error packet at line 255 cmd=4 (SMBclose) eclass=1 ecode=6
[2001/10/11 13:55:58, 3] smbd/process.c:process_smb(837)
Transaction 12 of length 95
[2001/10/11 13:55:58, 3] smbd/process.c:switch_message(650)
-----Original Message-----
From: samba-ntdom-admin@lists.samba.org
[mailto:samba-ntdom-admin@lists.samba.org]On Behalf Of Joseph
Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2001 1:45 PM
To: Gerry Maddock
Cc: samba-ntdom@lists.samba.org
Subject: Re: WIN NT 4.0 NO GO & YES I HAVE ENCRYPTED PASSWORDS
Try increasing the debug level a little and see if you get anything
useful in the log files.
Gerry Maddock wrote:
> I thought it might have been some of the "optimizations" I added
to
> /etc/sysctl.conf,so I reverted back to the orinal sysctl.conf with no
> optimizations straight off the RH7.1 install, rebooted and still nothing.
> However, once I lost the "optimizations" I did notice a
log.shadow, which
> Shadow is one of the NT boxes I'm trying to connect from, but the
log.shadow> was empty. Currently, I'm still running the default sysctl.conf from
the
> RH7.1 install (with no added "optimizations" just to rule this
out....
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: samba-ntdom-admin@lists.samba.org
> [mailto:samba-ntdom-admin@lists.samba.org]On Behalf Of Bruno Gimenes
> Pereti
> Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2001 1:04 PM
> To: samba-ntdom@lists.samba.org
> Subject: Re: WIN NT 4.0 NO GO & YES I HAVE ENCRYPTED PASSWORDS
>
>
> I got a problem this week that may be related to your problem. I'd
blocked
> icmp to the PDC (RedHat 7.1 Samba 2.2.1a rpm). No problem to access the
> server but when I tried to join the domain with a W2k I couldn't. I
allowed> the icmp traffic and still couldn't join. When I restarted the smb
daemon
I> could join the domain as before.
>
> Maybe this can help you.
>
> Bruno Gimenes Pereti.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Chris" <cknorton.nei-inc.com@mail.nei-inc.com>
> To: "Gerry Maddock" <gerrym@futuremetals.com>
> Cc: "William L. Terry" <bill@lynden2.sweye.com>;
> <samba-ntdom@lists.samba.org>
> Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2001 1:30 PM
> Subject: Re: WIN NT 4.0 NO GO & YES I HAVE ENCRYPTED PASSWORDS
>
>
>
>>I also, had this problem running RedHat 7.1 with samba -2.0.10-2. I
>>would get the "\\SambaShare is not accessible" from my NT,
W2K, and
>>WinMe machines but I rebooted my samba server and then all of a sudden
>>I could access the samba share.
>>
>>Maybe this will give someone a clue as to what might be the problem.
>>
>>
>>Gerry Maddock wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Thanks! I'm glad I'm not the only one! If I hear anything or
somehow rig
>>>
> it
>
>>>to work, I'll let you know what I did. Please do the same for
me.
>>>
>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>From: samba-ntdom-admin@lists.samba.org
>>>[mailto:samba-ntdom-admin@lists.samba.org]On Behalf Of William L.
Terry
>>>Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2001 11:47 AM
>>>To: samba-ntdom@lists.samba.org
>>>Subject: Re: WIN NT 4.0 NO GO & YES I HAVE ENCRYPTED PASSWORDS
>>>
>>>
>>>Gerry Maddock wrote
>>>
>>>
>>>>I am in the process of upgrading my existing samba 2.05a PDC on
an
>>>>old box running RH6.2 to a new faster box running Samba 2.2.1a
on a
>>>>RH7.1 box. I have all the same files and directories as the old
samba
>>>>box including the same smb.conf file (the only thing changed in
the
>>>>smb.conf were changes to its PDC so I wouldn't have 2
PDC's on the same
>>>>subnet). All of my Nt 4.0 boxes are sp6 with all of the latest
security
>>>>patches. Whenever I try to connect to the new Samba box from my
NT box I
>>>>get:>
>>>>
>>>>\\Penguin is not accessible.
>>>>
>>>>The remote procedure call failed and did not execute.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>I also have this problem with redhat 7.1 and samba 2.2.1a . It is
to the
>>>outside world as if this machine does not exist. I have 16 samba
boxes
>>>out there around the state serving up domains for our locations. I
have
>>>used everything from samba-tng2.5 to samba2.2.0 with success. The
last
>>>
> good
>
>>>combination I got was 2.2.0 with a redhat 7.0 box. I also use a
2.0.7 as
>>>
> a
>
>>>non domain controller on a redhat 7.1 box successfully. I have
tried
>>>
> with
>
>>>two
>>>separate installs to use 2.2.1a with redhat7.1. I also suspected
the
>>>firewall
>>>rules, but I intentionally blew these away with no positive results.
The
>>>only
>>>indication I get that the samba domain exists is that when I give
the
>>>
> domain
>
>>>a
>>>name, the client sees that that domain exists, but can't see any
machines
>>>
> in
>
>>>it.
>>>You can also do "nmblookup -B ACLIENT '* '"
successfully.
>>>
>>>I am also stumped, but I will continue to slog along and see If I
can
>>>stumble
>>>across something.
>>>
>>>--
>>>William L. Terry (bill@sweye.com)
>>>Southwestern Eye Center http://www.sweye.com/
>>>Information Systems
>>>480-892-8400 ext. 142
>>>
>
>