samba - May 2005 - Are the following cockups in ldap entries or normal behaviour now ?

When doing a vampire all my PC's are shown in the resulting log as being
members of the Domain Users group and none of my "real users" are
shown yet
in Ldap all my users are shown with memberUid in the domain users group and
no computers are shown eg:

dn: cn=Domain Users,ou=Groups,<snip>
objectClass: posixGroup
objectClass: sambaGroupMapping
gidNumber: 513
cn: Domain Users
<snip>
description: All domain users
memberUid: administrator
memberUid: deloitte
memberUid: iusr_guests
memberUid: template


My machines all have a SID that ends in 513 the domain users RID:
sambaPrimaryGroupSID: S-1-5-21-<snip>-513

My users have no passwords set eg:

dn: uid=deloitte,ou=Users
<snip>
sambaLMPassword: XXX
sambaPrimaryGroupSID: S-1-5-21-<snip>-513
sambaNTPassword: XXX


Is this expected behaviour when vampiring from an NT server using the
smbldap-tools-0.8.8.tgz ?

Or does it appear that I have stuffed up badly?

Regards Geoff Scott

On Tuesday 10 May 2005 01:58, Geoff Scott wrote:
> When doing a vampire all my PC's are shown in the resulting log as
being
> members of the Domain Users group and none of my "real users" are
shown yet
> in Ldap all my users are shown with memberUid in the domain users group and
> no computers are shown eg:
>
> dn: cn=Domain Users,ou=Groups,<snip>
> objectClass: posixGroup
> objectClass: sambaGroupMapping
> gidNumber: 513
> cn: Domain Users
> <snip>
> description: All domain users
> memberUid: administrator
> memberUid: deloitte
> memberUid: iusr_guests
> memberUid: template
>
>
> My machines all have a SID that ends in 513 the domain users RID:
> sambaPrimaryGroupSID: S-1-5-21-<snip>-513
>
> My users have no passwords set eg:
>
> dn: uid=deloitte,ou=Users
> <snip>
> sambaLMPassword: XXX
> sambaPrimaryGroupSID: S-1-5-21-<snip>-513
> sambaNTPassword: XXX
>
>
> Is this expected behaviour when vampiring from an NT server using the
> smbldap-tools-0.8.8.tgz ?
>
> Or does it appear that I have stuffed up badly?
Geoff,

See the answer to the previous question I posted a reply to. I do not 
understand why migrations are at times most variable in completeness. It is 
possible that Samba-3's protocols are missing some security protocol
function
call that only gets used by NT4 under certain situations.

- John T.