samba - Aug 2011 - a new world | smb2

Hi Samba list!

I was very excited that SMB2 is finally working with samba 3.6.0 - great 
job!!

I just know that SMB2 has a smaller command set compared to SMB1 and 
this, beside
many other rebuilds of the code makes it faster

As I am completely new to the file transfer protocol world, I want to 
ask a few basic things:

  - is Samba backward compatible ... xp can't use SMB2 as far as I read, 
but the shares
    are still working...
  - how  do I see that a windows client is using SMB2 and not SMB1
  - Do I need XFS or ext4 for better performance in combination with 
SMB2 or
    is this irrelevant
  - Is SMB2 more "secure" than SMB1?

regards
Martin

On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 08:03:13AM +0200, Martin Hochreiter
wrote:
> Hi Samba list!
> 
> I was very excited that SMB2 is finally working with samba 3.6.0 -
> great job!!
> 
> I just know that SMB2 has a smaller command set compared to SMB1 and
> this, beside
> many other rebuilds of the code makes it faster
> 
> As I am completely new to the file transfer protocol world, I want
> to ask a few basic things:
> 
>  - is Samba backward compatible ... xp can't use SMB2 as far as I
> read, but the shares
>    are still working...
SMB2 is an option that client and server negotiate at
connection setup. XP just does not negotiate it.
>  - how  do I see that a windows client is using SMB2 and not SMB1
At this moment you need to look at network traces using
wireshark.
>  - Do I need XFS or ext4 for better performance in combination with
> SMB2 or
>    is this irrelevant
It should be irrelevant. Semantically both protocols are
very similar, it might just be that clients show different
behaviour that is better being served by XFS or ext4.
>  - Is SMB2 more "secure" than SMB1?
No.

Volker

-- 
SerNet GmbH, Bahnhofsallee 1b, 37081 G?ttingen
phone: +49-551-370000-0, fax: +49-551-370000-9
AG G?ttingen, HRB 2816, GF: Dr. Johannes Loxen