What version of samba is compatible with Active Directory? Thank you in advance, Ed Cook
On Tue, 2001-10-23 at 14:46, samba-admin@lists.samba.org wrote:> What version of samba is compatible with Active Directory? >Version 4.8 also known as, none at the moment. What features do you need? Chris Tooley> > Thank you in advance, > > Ed Cook > > > -- > To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the > instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
Forgive me if I don't understand all the NT/Windows terms. We've just migrated to Active Directory in "native mode" and all our our samba servers stopped working (Samba 2.0.6), except for one SGI box that was at the newest version of Samba ( 2.2.2 ). We are using "security=domain" in our smb.conf file. As far as I can tell the one server at Samba 2.2.2 seems to be ok. -- Alison -----Original Message----- From: Chris Tooley [mailto:ctooley@amoa.org] Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2001 3:42 PM To: Jeremy Allison Cc: Edward Cook; samba@samba.org Subject: Re: Active Directory Winodws Compatible? On Tue, 2001-10-23 at 17:16, Jeremy Allison wrote:> On Tue, Oct 23, 2001 at 03:14:49PM -0500, Chris Tooley wrote: > > On Tue, 2001-10-23 at 14:46, samba-admin@lists.samba.org wrote: > > > What version of samba is compatible with Active Directory? > > > > > Version 4.8 > > > > also known as, none at the moment. > > Not true - see below. >Please note the sarcasim.> > What features do you need? > > Well it depends what you mean by "compatible with Active Directory" ? > Is Windows NT 4.x compatible ? If so, then yes we're *completely* > compatible already, and will work happily in a Win2k "native mode" > environment. > > Please specify exactly what you need (as Chris asked :-). >And please specify to the list, as I cannot by any means resolve these issues. I just had this sneaking suspicion that was what someone was going to ask for.> Jeremy.Chris -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
Jeremy,
Thanks for the info. I must have to admit that I'm totally confused now.
Can you tell me what new feature in 2.2.2 allows the "security-domain"
option to work? Someone told me that using "security=domain" means
that
your samba server is acting like a BDC and that BDC's are not allowed in a
"native mode" active directory environment. But if this is the case
then
why would samba 2.2.2 work in a "native mode" active directory
environment?
I apologize if I seem dense. I've got the O'Reilly "using
Samba" book and
have been reading it over and over again. But I'm not sure I understand the
NT terms so I get confused.
Here's my questions:
1) What is it that 2.2.2 has that 2.0.6 doesn't have which allows
"security=domain" to work?
2) Our samba servers running 2.0.6 appear to be ok as long as we switch to
"security=server"...why is that?
Our company is doing a huge rollout of a new application that heavily relies
on using samba in a clustered failover environment. Our European
counterparts were hesitant to use samba because they weren't familiar with
it. I fought hard to use samba because it's been such a reliable and
valuable tool for our local site. Now I'm facing a predicament where
questions are being asked and I don't know how to answer them! I still feel
strongly that samba is the answer..but I sound like an idiot when I try to
explain why because I just don't understand all the technical details of
Active Directory and samba.
Thanks for any help/info/insights.
-- Alison Ayson
-----Original Message-----
From: jra@samba.org [mailto:jra@samba.org]
Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2001 6:13 PM
To: Ayson, Alison {Info~Palo Alto}
Cc: 'Chris Tooley'; Jeremy Allison; Edward Cook; samba@samba.org
Subject: Re: Active Directory Winodws Compatible?
On Tue, Oct 23, 2001 at 03:47:40PM -0700, Ayson, Alison {Info~Palo Alto}
wrote:> Forgive me if I don't understand all the NT/Windows terms. We've
just
> migrated to Active Directory in "native mode" and all our our
samba
servers> stopped working (Samba 2.0.6), except for one SGI box that was at the
newest> version of Samba ( 2.2.2 ). We are using "security=domain" in
our
smb.conf> file. As far as I can tell the one server at Samba 2.2.2 seems to be ok.
Yep, that's pretty much as I'd expect. We tested Samba 2.2.x with
Windows 2000/XP as our base test client/server.
I'd suggest upgrading the other servers to 2.2.2.
Thanks,
Jeremy
Thank you!!!!!
-----Original Message-----
From: jra@samba.org [mailto:jra@samba.org]
Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2001 6:14 PM
To: Ayson, Alison {Info~Palo Alto}
Cc: 'jra@samba.org'; 'Chris Tooley'; Edward Cook;
samba@samba.org
Subject: Re: Active Directory Winodws Compatible?
On Wed, Oct 24, 2001 at 03:25:43PM -0700, Ayson, Alison {Info~Palo Alto}
wrote:
> Here's my questions:
>
> 1) What is it that 2.2.2 has that 2.0.6 doesn't have which allows
> "security=domain" to work?
Better RPC client and server code. The code in 2.0.6 doesn't understand
the RPC packets from a Win2k client or server correctly, the 2.2.2 code
does.
> 2) Our samba servers running 2.0.6 appear to be ok as long as we switch to
> "security=server"...why is that?
security=server doesn't use the RPC code. It simply proxies the
authentication
request over a new SMB connection to the server. Thus it doesn't need to
know
anything about the Windows 2000 RPC changes.
Hope this helps,
Jeremy.