Hello again everyone, We've got a Samba 2.2.3a server (Red Hat 7.2) running here, and it works great, even winbind. We have had a slight problem ever since setting it up though. A few weeks after setup was finished, and a bunch of stuff had been moved onto it, some people could not access the server from the Network Nieghboorhood. Pinging worked fine, as did connecting directly to it's IP (\\aaa.bbb.ccc.ddd). Being in a hurry (Friday, you know), I restarted the server really quick and everything was OK. So, I said "Huh, we'll see if it happens again." Well, a couple of weeks later, it did happen again. After doing some poking around, the server's entry in DNS was OK, but it was no longer registered in the WINS. I ran some searches on the mailing list, and there are quite a few people who have reported the same problem in the past. It would seem the nmbd is not renewing it's WINS registration before/after the release timeout. This time, instead of restarting the entire server, I just restarted the nmbd daemon, and poof, it registered itself with the WINS. Now I know what to do to take care of the problem next time, but it is not a very nice solution. I was wondering if there has been any work done to fix this problem (perhaps in HEAD?). If someone has tried to track it down before, and was unsucessful, would it be possible to at least include something the next release so that I can give nmbd a kick in the butt, and tell it "Hey! Renew yourself in the WINS, now!"? Thanks. -------------- next part -------------- HTML attachment scrubbed and removed
Jeremy Allison
2002-Mar-27 15:19 UTC
[Samba] Re: problem with nmbd renewing WINS registration
On Wed, Mar 27, 2002 at 01:56:44PM -0700, Jason Barker wrote:> Hello again everyone, > We've got a Samba 2.2.3a server (Red Hat 7.2) running here, and it works > great, even winbind. We have had a slight problem ever since setting it up > though. A few weeks after setup was finished, and a bunch of stuff had been > moved onto it, some people could not access the server from the Network > Nieghboorhood. Pinging worked fine, as did connecting directly to it's IP > (\\aaa.bbb.ccc.ddd). Being in a hurry (Friday, you know), I restarted the > server really quick and everything was OK. So, I said "Huh, we'll see if it > happens again." > Well, a couple of weeks later, it did happen again. After doing some poking > around, the server's entry in DNS was OK, but it was no longer registered in > the WINS. I ran some searches on the mailing list, and there are quite a few > people who have reported the same problem in the past. It would seem the > nmbd is not renewing it's WINS registration before/after the release > timeout. This time, instead of restarting the entire server, I just > restarted the nmbd daemon, and poof, it registered itself with the WINS. > Now I know what to do to take care of the problem next time, but it is not a > very nice solution. I was wondering if there has been any work done to fix > this problem (perhaps in HEAD?). If someone has tried to track it down > before, and was unsucessful, would it be possible to at least include > something the next release so that I can give nmbd a kick in the butt, and > tell it "Hey! Renew yourself in the WINS, now!"?nmbd should be renewing its WINS registrations. Check out the function : refresh_my_names() in nmbd/nmbd_mynames.c which is called periodically from the main loop. To get nmbd to dump the name information (which should include death time, refresh time etc.) hit nmbd with a SIGHUP signal. It will dump all this information into a file called namelist.debug in the var/locks directory. This should help you track down the problem. Jeremy.
Jason Barker
2002-Mar-27 17:21 UTC
[Samba] RE: problem with nmbd renewing WINS registration
Hmmm... namelist.debug lists quite a few entries, all of which are very close to: (Name = is different and Source = is different for other entries) Name = DEFIANT<00> Source = PERMANENT_NAME b_flags = 46 death_time = PERMANENT refresh_time = Wed Mar 27 10:25:40 2002 number of IPS = 1 172.16.128.50 It would seem that nmbd thinks that it doesn't have to renew it's name with the WINS...but it will have to renew in a few weeks... The time displayed was the time that I restarted nmbd this morning. -----Original Message----- From: jra@samba.org [mailto:jra@samba.org] Sent: Wednesday, March 27, 2002 2:55 PM To: Jason Barker Cc: samba@lists.samba.org; jra@samba.org Subject: Re: problem with nmbd renewing WINS registration On Wed, Mar 27, 2002 at 01:56:44PM -0700, Jason Barker wrote:> Hello again everyone, > We've got a Samba 2.2.3a server (Red Hat 7.2) running here, and it works > great, even winbind. We have had a slight problem ever since setting it up > though. A few weeks after setup was finished, and a bunch of stuff hadbeen> moved onto it, some people could not access the server from the Network > Nieghboorhood. Pinging worked fine, as did connecting directly to it's IP > (\\aaa.bbb.ccc.ddd). Being in a hurry (Friday, you know), I restarted the > server really quick and everything was OK. So, I said "Huh, we'll see ifit> happens again." > Well, a couple of weeks later, it did happen again. After doing somepoking> around, the server's entry in DNS was OK, but it was no longer registeredin> the WINS. I ran some searches on the mailing list, and there are quite afew> people who have reported the same problem in the past. It would seem the > nmbd is not renewing it's WINS registration before/after the release > timeout. This time, instead of restarting the entire server, I just > restarted the nmbd daemon, and poof, it registered itself with the WINS. > Now I know what to do to take care of the problem next time, but it is nota> very nice solution. I was wondering if there has been any work done to fix > this problem (perhaps in HEAD?). If someone has tried to track it down > before, and was unsucessful, would it be possible to at least include > something the next release so that I can give nmbd a kick in the butt, and > tell it "Hey! Renew yourself in the WINS, now!"?nmbd should be renewing its WINS registrations. Check out the function : refresh_my_names() in nmbd/nmbd_mynames.c which is called periodically from the main loop. To get nmbd to dump the name information (which should include death time, refresh time etc.) hit nmbd with a SIGHUP signal. It will dump all this information into a file called namelist.debug in the var/locks directory. This should help you track down the problem. Jeremy. -------------- next part -------------- HTML attachment scrubbed and removed
On Wed, 27 Mar 2002, Jason Barker wrote:> Well, a couple of weeks later, it did happen again. After doing some poking > around, the server's entry in DNS was OK, but it was no longer registered in > the WINS. I ran some searches on the mailing list, and there are quite a few > people who have reported the same problem in the past. It would seem the > nmbd is not renewing it's WINS registration before/after the release > timeout. This time, instead of restarting the entire server, I just > restarted the nmbd daemon, and poof, it registered itself with the WINS. > Now I know what to do to take care of the problem next time, but it is not a > very nice solution. I was wondering if there has been any work done to fix > this problem (perhaps in HEAD?). If someone has tried to track it down > before, and was unsucessful, would it be possible to at least include > something the next release so that I can give nmbd a kick in the butt, and > tell it "Hey! Renew yourself in the WINS, now!"?Hmmm....I thought we already fixed this before the 2.2.3 release. I'll look into it. You're sure that the binaries you are using are 2.2.3a right? Are you using a Samba WINS server or an NT WINS server? cheers, jerry --------------------------------------------------------------------- Hewlett-Packard http://www.hp.com SAMBA Team http://www.samba.org -- http://www.plainjoe.org "Sam's Teach Yourself Samba in 24 Hours" 2ed. ISBN 0-672-32269-2 --"I never saved anything for the swim back." Ethan Hawk in Gattaca--
Yes, Samba 2.2.3a. WINS server = Win2000 -----Original Message----- From: Gerald Carter [mailto:jerry@samba.org] Sent: Thursday, March 28, 2002 6:41 AM To: Jason Barker Cc: samba@lists.samba.org; jra@samba.org Subject: Re: [Samba] problem with nmbd renewing WINS registration On Wed, 27 Mar 2002, Jason Barker wrote:> Well, a couple of weeks later, it did happen again. After doing somepoking> around, the server's entry in DNS was OK, but it was no longer registeredin> the WINS. I ran some searches on the mailing list, and there are quite afew> people who have reported the same problem in the past. It would seem the > nmbd is not renewing it's WINS registration before/after the release > timeout. This time, instead of restarting the entire server, I just > restarted the nmbd daemon, and poof, it registered itself with the WINS. > Now I know what to do to take care of the problem next time, but it is nota> very nice solution. I was wondering if there has been any work done to fix > this problem (perhaps in HEAD?). If someone has tried to track it down > before, and was unsucessful, would it be possible to at least include > something the next release so that I can give nmbd a kick in the butt, and > tell it "Hey! Renew yourself in the WINS, now!"?Hmmm....I thought we already fixed this before the 2.2.3 release. I'll look into it. You're sure that the binaries you are using are 2.2.3a right? Are you using a Samba WINS server or an NT WINS server? cheers, jerry --------------------------------------------------------------------- Hewlett-Packard http://www.hp.com SAMBA Team http://www.samba.org -- http://www.plainjoe.org "Sam's Teach Yourself Samba in 24 Hours" 2ed. ISBN 0-672-32269-2 --"I never saved anything for the swim back." Ethan Hawk in Gattaca-- -------------- next part -------------- HTML attachment scrubbed and removed
Jason Barker
2002-Mar-28 08:45 UTC
[Samba] RE: problem with nmbd renewing WINS registration
Here is the full length namelist.debug: (The times are now around 16:34-16:54 instead of 10:25 as was in the earlier post, that is because I restarted nmbd again yesterday in order to change it's log level to 2.) Subnet 172.16.128.50 ---------------------- Name = *<00> Source = PERMANENT_NAME b_flags = 44 death_time = PERMANENT refresh_time = Wed Mar 27 16:34:21 2002 number of IPS = 1 172.16.128.50 Name = *<20> Source = PERMANENT_NAME b_flags = 44 death_time = PERMANENT refresh_time = Wed Mar 27 16:34:21 2002 number of IPS = 1 172.16.128.50 Name = DEFIANT<00> Source = SELF_NAME b_flags = 46 death_time = PERMANENT refresh_time = Wed Mar 27 16:34:25 2002 number of IPS = 1 172.16.128.50 Name = DEFIANT<03> Source = SELF_NAME b_flags = 46 death_time = PERMANENT refresh_time = Wed Mar 27 16:34:25 2002 number of IPS = 1 172.16.128.50 Name = DEFIANT<20> Source = SELF_NAME b_flags = 46 death_time = PERMANENT refresh_time = Wed Mar 27 16:34:25 2002 number of IPS = 1 172.16.128.50 Name = PROGRAMMING<00> Source = SELF_NAME b_flags = c4 death_time = PERMANENT refresh_time = Wed Mar 27 16:34:25 2002 number of IPS = 1 172.16.128.50 Name = PROGRAMMING<1e> Source = SELF_NAME b_flags = c4 death_time = PERMANENT refresh_time = Wed Mar 27 16:34:25 2002 number of IPS = 1 172.16.128.50 Name = __SAMBA__<00> Source = PERMANENT_NAME b_flags = 44 death_time = PERMANENT refresh_time = Wed Mar 27 16:34:21 2002 number of IPS = 1 172.16.128.50 Name = __SAMBA__<20> Source = PERMANENT_NAME b_flags = 44 death_time = PERMANENT refresh_time = Wed Mar 27 16:34:21 2002 number of IPS = 1 172.16.128.50 Subnet UNICAST_SUBNET ---------------------- Name = *<00> Source = PERMANENT_NAME b_flags = 44 death_time = PERMANENT refresh_time = Wed Mar 27 16:34:21 2002 number of IPS = 1 172.16.128.50 Name = *<20> Source = PERMANENT_NAME b_flags = 44 death_time = PERMANENT refresh_time = Wed Mar 27 16:34:21 2002 number of IPS = 1 172.16.128.50 Name = DEFIANT<00> Source = PERMANENT_NAME b_flags = 46 death_time = PERMANENT refresh_time = Wed Mar 27 16:54:21 2002 number of IPS = 1 172.16.128.50 Name = DEFIANT<03> Source = PERMANENT_NAME b_flags = 46 death_time = PERMANENT refresh_time = Wed Mar 27 16:54:21 2002 number of IPS = 1 172.16.128.50 Name = DEFIANT<20> Source = PERMANENT_NAME b_flags = 46 death_time = PERMANENT refresh_time = Wed Mar 27 16:54:21 2002 number of IPS = 1 172.16.128.50 Name = PROGRAMMING<00> Source = PERMANENT_NAME b_flags = c4 death_time = PERMANENT refresh_time = Wed Mar 27 16:54:21 2002 number of IPS = 1 172.16.128.50 Name = PROGRAMMING<1e> Source = PERMANENT_NAME b_flags = c4 death_time = PERMANENT refresh_time = Wed Mar 27 16:54:21 2002 number of IPS = 1 172.16.128.50 Name = __SAMBA__<00> Source = PERMANENT_NAME b_flags = 44 death_time = PERMANENT refresh_time = Wed Mar 27 16:34:21 2002 number of IPS = 1 172.16.128.50 Name = __SAMBA__<20> Source = PERMANENT_NAME b_flags = 44 death_time = PERMANENT refresh_time = Wed Mar 27 16:34:21 2002 number of IPS = 1 172.16.128.50 Subnet REMOTE_BROADCAST_SUBNET ---------------------- Name = *<00> Source = PERMANENT_NAME b_flags = 44 death_time = PERMANENT refresh_time = Wed Mar 27 16:34:21 2002 number of IPS = 1 172.16.128.50 Name = *<20> Source = PERMANENT_NAME b_flags = 44 death_time = PERMANENT refresh_time = Wed Mar 27 16:34:21 2002 number of IPS = 1 172.16.128.50 Name = __SAMBA__<00> Source = PERMANENT_NAME b_flags = 44 death_time = PERMANENT refresh_time = Wed Mar 27 16:34:21 2002 number of IPS = 1 172.16.128.50 Name = __SAMBA__<20> Source = PERMANENT_NAME b_flags = 44 death_time = PERMANENT refresh_time = Wed Mar 27 16:34:21 2002 number of IPS = 1 172.16.128.50 -----Original Message----- From: jra@samba.org [mailto:jra@samba.org] Sent: Wednesday, March 27, 2002 6:37 PM To: Jason Barker Cc: jra@samba.org; samba@lists.samba.org Subject: Re: problem with nmbd renewing WINS registration On Wed, Mar 27, 2002 at 04:38:53PM -0700, Jason Barker wrote:> Hmmm... > namelist.debug lists quite a few entries, all of which are very close to: > (Name = is different and Source = is different for other entries) > > Name = DEFIANT<00> Source = PERMANENT_NAME > b_flags = 46 death_time = PERMANENT refresh_time = Wed Mar 27 10:25:40 > 2002 > > number of IPS = 1 172.16.128.50 > > It would seem that nmbd thinks that it doesn't have to renew it's namewith> the WINS...but it will have to renew in a few weeks... > The time displayed was the time that I restarted nmbd this morning.This is strange. nmbd only registers a "PERMANENT_NAME" for the names : *#0 *#20 __SAMBA__#0 __SAMBA__#20 All the other netbios names are registered as "SELF_NAMES" (or should be). I've just done a HUP here against an nmbd registering itself with a WINS server and I get (not only the UNICAST_SUBNET matters as that's the subnet used to talk to the WINS server): Subnet UNICAST_SUBNET ---------------------- Name = __MSBROWSE__<01> Source = PERMANENT_NAME b_flags = c4 death_time = PERMANENT refresh_time = Wed Mar 27 13:58:34 2002 number of IPS = 1 172.16.124.1 Name = *<00> Source = PERMANENT_NAME b_flags = 44 death_time = PERMANENT refresh_time = Wed Mar 27 13:53:16 2002 number of IPS = 2 3.7.80.10 172.16.124.1 Name = *<20> Source = PERMANENT_NAME b_flags = 44 death_time = PERMANENT refresh_time = Wed Mar 27 13:53:16 2002 number of IPS = 2 3.7.80.10 172.16.124.1 Name = JRATEST<00> Source = SELF_NAME b_flags = 46 death_time = Sat Mar 30 17:13:27 2002 refresh_time = Wed Mar 27 17:33:27 2002 number of IPS = 2 3.7.80.10 172.16.124.1 Name = JRATEST<03> Source = SELF_NAME b_flags = 46 death_time = Sat Mar 30 17:13:27 2002 refresh_time = Wed Mar 27 17:33:27 2002 number of IPS = 2 3.7.80.10 172.16.124.1 Name = JRATEST<20> Source = SELF_NAME b_flags = 46 death_time = Sat Mar 30 17:13:31 2002 refresh_time = Wed Mar 27 17:33:31 2002 number of IPS = 2 3.7.80.10 172.16.124.1 Note that all the SELF_NAMES have a non permanent death and refresh time. Can you check again on one particular name such as NAME#20 on the UNICAST_SUBNET. Jeremy. -------------- next part -------------- HTML attachment scrubbed and removed
MCCALL,DON (HP-USA,ex1)
2002-Mar-28 08:56 UTC
[Samba] problem with nmbd renewing WINS registration
Hi Jerry, Here's the fix, as I remember it - Jeremy applied this some time ago, and it DOES still appear to be in the current CVS for 2.2.x... don Index: nmbd/nmbd_nameregister.c ==================================================================RCS file: /data/cvs/samba/source/nmbd/nmbd_nameregister.c,v retrieving revision 1.12.4.1 diff -u -r1.12.4.1 nmbd_nameregister.c --- nmbd/nmbd_nameregister.c 30 Jul 2001 17:52:24 -0000 1.12.4.1 +++ nmbd/nmbd_nameregister.c 8 Oct 2001 19:37:09 -0000 @@ -211,6 +211,7 @@ if(rrec->repeat_interval > (5 * 60)) rrec->repeat_interval = (5 * 60); rrec->repeat_time = time(NULL) + rrec->repeat_interval; + rrec->in_expiration_processing = False; DEBUG(5,("register_name_timeout_response: increasing WINS timeout to %d seconds.\n", (int)rrec->repeat_interval)); -----Original Message----- From: Gerald Carter [mailto:jerry@samba.org] Sent: Thursday, March 28, 2002 8:41 AM To: Jason Barker Cc: samba@lists.samba.org; jra@samba.org Subject: Re: [Samba] problem with nmbd renewing WINS registration On Wed, 27 Mar 2002, Jason Barker wrote:> Well, a couple of weeks later, it did happen again. After doing somepoking> around, the server's entry in DNS was OK, but it was no longer registeredin> the WINS. I ran some searches on the mailing list, and there are quite afew> people who have reported the same problem in the past. It would seem the > nmbd is not renewing it's WINS registration before/after the release > timeout. This time, instead of restarting the entire server, I just > restarted the nmbd daemon, and poof, it registered itself with the WINS. > Now I know what to do to take care of the problem next time, but it is nota> very nice solution. I was wondering if there has been any work done to fix > this problem (perhaps in HEAD?). If someone has tried to track it down > before, and was unsucessful, would it be possible to at least include > something the next release so that I can give nmbd a kick in the butt, and > tell it "Hey! Renew yourself in the WINS, now!"?Hmmm....I thought we already fixed this before the 2.2.3 release. I'll look into it. You're sure that the binaries you are using are 2.2.3a right? Are you using a Samba WINS server or an NT WINS server? cheers, jerry --------------------------------------------------------------------- Hewlett-Packard http://www.hp.com SAMBA Team http://www.samba.org -- http://www.plainjoe.org "Sam's Teach Yourself Samba in 24 Hours" 2ed. ISBN 0-672-32269-2 --"I never saved anything for the swim back." Ethan Hawk in Gattaca-- -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
Jason Barker
2002-Mar-28 14:27 UTC
[Samba] RE: problem with nmbd renewing WINS registration
OK, thanks for all your help. If you need any more information, let me know. -----Original Message----- From: jra@samba.org [mailto:jra@samba.org] Sent: Thursday, March 28, 2002 3:13 PM To: Jason Barker Cc: jra@samba.org; Gerald Carter; samba@lists.samba.org Subject: Re: problem with nmbd renewing WINS registration On Thu, Mar 28, 2002 at 09:50:01AM -0700, Jason Barker wrote:> Here is the full length namelist.debug: > (The times are now around 16:34-16:54 instead of 10:25 as was in theearlier> post, that is because I restarted nmbd again yesterday in order to change > it's log level to 2.) > > Subnet UNICAST_SUBNET > ---------------------- > > Name = DEFIANT<00> Source = PERMANENT_NAME > b_flags = 46 death_time = PERMANENT refresh_time = Wed Mar 27 16:54:21 > 2002 > > number of IPS = 1 172.16.128.50 > > Name = DEFIANT<03> Source = PERMANENT_NAME > b_flags = 46 death_time = PERMANENT refresh_time = Wed Mar 27 16:54:21 > 2002 > > number of IPS = 1 172.16.128.50 > > Name = DEFIANT<20> Source = PERMANENT_NAME > b_flags = 46 death_time = PERMANENT refresh_time = Wed Mar 27 16:54:21 > 2002Ok - these 3 are very strange...... Looking in the code I really can't see how a "PERMANENT_NAME" can get added to any name registered with the WINS server. I'll look more. Jeremy. -------------- next part -------------- HTML attachment scrubbed and removed
Jason Barker
2002-Mar-29 13:00 UTC
[Samba] RE: problem with nmbd renewing WINS registration
Well, that seems to have fixed the problem. Far as I can tell, everything looks OK in namelist.debug now. Thank you. A lot. namelist.debug after applying patch: Subnet 172.16.128.50 ---------------------- Name = *<00> Source = PERMANENT_NAME b_flags = 44 death_time = PERMANENT refresh_time = Fri Mar 29 13:49:09 2002 number of IPS = 1 172.16.128.50 Name = *<20> Source = PERMANENT_NAME b_flags = 44 death_time = PERMANENT refresh_time = Fri Mar 29 13:49:09 2002 number of IPS = 1 172.16.128.50 Name = DEFIANT<00> Source = SELF_NAME b_flags = 46 death_time = PERMANENT refresh_time = Fri Mar 29 13:49:13 2002 number of IPS = 1 172.16.128.50 Name = DEFIANT<03> Source = SELF_NAME b_flags = 46 death_time = PERMANENT refresh_time = Fri Mar 29 13:49:13 2002 number of IPS = 1 172.16.128.50 Name = DEFIANT<20> Source = SELF_NAME b_flags = 46 death_time = PERMANENT refresh_time = Fri Mar 29 13:49:13 2002 number of IPS = 1 172.16.128.50 Name = PROGRAMMING<00> Source = SELF_NAME b_flags = c4 death_time = PERMANENT refresh_time = Fri Mar 29 13:49:13 2002 number of IPS = 1 172.16.128.50 Name = PROGRAMMING<1e> Source = SELF_NAME b_flags = c4 death_time = PERMANENT refresh_time = Fri Mar 29 13:49:13 2002 number of IPS = 1 172.16.128.50 Name = __SAMBA__<00> Source = PERMANENT_NAME b_flags = 44 death_time = PERMANENT refresh_time = Fri Mar 29 13:49:09 2002 number of IPS = 1 172.16.128.50 Name = __SAMBA__<20> Source = PERMANENT_NAME b_flags = 44 death_time = PERMANENT refresh_time = Fri Mar 29 13:49:09 2002 number of IPS = 1 172.16.128.50 Subnet UNICAST_SUBNET ---------------------- Name = *<00> Source = PERMANENT_NAME b_flags = 44 death_time = PERMANENT refresh_time = Fri Mar 29 13:49:09 2002 number of IPS = 1 172.16.128.50 Name = *<20> Source = PERMANENT_NAME b_flags = 44 death_time = PERMANENT refresh_time = Fri Mar 29 13:49:09 2002 number of IPS = 1 172.16.128.50 Name = DEFIANT<00> Source = SELF_NAME b_flags = 46 death_time = Thu Apr 4 13:49:09 2002 refresh_time = Fri Mar 29 14:09:09 2002 number of IPS = 1 172.16.128.50 Name = DEFIANT<03> Source = SELF_NAME b_flags = 46 death_time = Thu Apr 4 13:49:09 2002 refresh_time = Fri Mar 29 14:09:09 2002 number of IPS = 1 172.16.128.50 Name = DEFIANT<20> Source = SELF_NAME b_flags = 46 death_time = Thu Apr 4 13:49:09 2002 refresh_time = Fri Mar 29 14:09:09 2002 number of IPS = 1 172.16.128.50 Name = PROGRAMMING<00> Source = SELF_NAME b_flags = c4 death_time = Thu Apr 4 13:49:09 2002 refresh_time = Fri Mar 29 14:09:09 2002 number of IPS = 1 172.16.128.50 Name = PROGRAMMING<1e> Source = SELF_NAME b_flags = c4 death_time = Thu Apr 4 13:49:09 2002 refresh_time = Fri Mar 29 14:09:09 2002 number of IPS = 1 172.16.128.50 Name = __SAMBA__<00> Source = PERMANENT_NAME b_flags = 44 death_time = PERMANENT refresh_time = Fri Mar 29 13:49:09 2002 number of IPS = 1 172.16.128.50 Name = __SAMBA__<20> Source = PERMANENT_NAME b_flags = 44 death_time = PERMANENT refresh_time = Fri Mar 29 13:49:09 2002 number of IPS = 1 172.16.128.50 Subnet REMOTE_BROADCAST_SUBNET ---------------------- Name = *<00> Source = PERMANENT_NAME b_flags = 44 death_time = PERMANENT refresh_time = Fri Mar 29 13:49:09 2002 number of IPS = 1 172.16.128.50 Name = *<20> Source = PERMANENT_NAME b_flags = 44 death_time = PERMANENT refresh_time = Fri Mar 29 13:49:09 2002 number of IPS = 1 172.16.128.50 Name = __SAMBA__<00> Source = PERMANENT_NAME b_flags = 44 death_time = PERMANENT refresh_time = Fri Mar 29 13:49:09 2002 number of IPS = 1 172.16.128.50 Name = __SAMBA__<20> Source = PERMANENT_NAME b_flags = 44 death_time = PERMANENT refresh_time = Fri Mar 29 13:49:09 2002 number of IPS = 1 172.16.128.50 -----Original Message----- From: jra@samba.org [mailto:jra@samba.org] Sent: Thursday, March 28, 2002 5:57 PM To: Jason Barker Cc: jra@samba.org; Gerald Carter; samba@lists.samba.org Subject: Re: problem with nmbd renewing WINS registration On Thu, Mar 28, 2002 at 09:50:01AM -0700, Jason Barker wrote:> Here is the full length namelist.debug: > (The times are now around 16:34-16:54 instead of 10:25 as was in theearlier> post, that is because I restarted nmbd again yesterday in order to change > it's log level to 2.)Try this patch please. I think I may have nailed it.... Jeremy. -------------- next part -------------- HTML attachment scrubbed and removed