samba - Jul 2015 - Internal DNS CNAME To Amazon Web Services Problem

Hello Samba Mailing List

Well, the companies I contacted about this problem said that they could not help
because it was an actual Samba code issue, and not a configuration issue.

I have "got around it" for now by changing the internal CNAME to an A
record which points to another in-house server running Apache and then creating
a quick internal web site for the www.domain.com in question which then serves
an .htaccess file with the following:-

Redirect 301 / http://path.to.amazon.s3.site.com

e.g.     PC > DC > Apache Server > .htaccess > Amazon

Not great, but it'll do for now, so the boss can see what the rest of the
world sees at the Amazon Web Services.

I don't really want to bother with all the hassle of changing to BIND for
this tiny thing, so I am hoping the Samba developers can either fix the
recursive CNAME bug or put back the smb.conf option...

...fingers and toes crossed!

Thanks and regards,

Paul

On 29/06/15 10:09, Paul Littlefield wrote:
> Hello Samba Mailing List
>
> Well, the companies I contacted about this problem said that they 
> could not help because it was an actual Samba code issue, and not a 
> configuration issue.
>
> I have "got around it" for now by changing the internal CNAME to
an A
> record which points to another in-house server running Apache and then 
> creating a quick internal web site for the www.domain.com in question 
> which then serves an .htaccess file with the following:-
>
> Redirect 301 / http://path.to.amazon.s3.site.com
>
> e.g.     PC > DC > Apache Server > .htaccess > Amazon
>
> Not great, but it'll do for now, so the boss can see what the rest of 
> the world sees at the Amazon Web Services.
>
> I don't really want to bother with all the hassle of changing to BIND 
> for this tiny thing, so I am hoping the Samba developers can either 
> fix the recursive CNAME bug or put back the smb.conf option...
I 'think' this was what Volker was advising you to do, pay somebody to 
'fix' the samba code.
It probably will get fixed eventually, but there are other things that 
need fixing with higher priority, so if you need it fixing quickly, pay 
someone to do it, but as you have found a workaround, it probably wont 
happen. :'(

Rowland
>
> ...fingers and toes crossed!
>
> Thanks and regards,
>
> Paul
>

On Mon, 2015-06-29 at 10:09 +0100, Paul Littlefield
wrote:
> Hello Samba Mailing List
> 
> Well, the companies I contacted about this problem said that they could not
help because it was an actual Samba code issue, and not a configuration issue.
I suggest contacting the companies on this list:

https://www.samba.org/samba/support/globalsupport.html

Sadly there are not many Samba consulting/development companies
worldwide that offer services direct to clients, but two I am aware of
are listed on that page.  

Thanks,

Andrew Bartlett

-- 
Andrew Bartlett                       http://samba.org/~abartlet/
Authentication Developer, Samba Team  http://samba.org
Samba Developer, Catalyst IT          http://catalyst.net.nz/services/samba

On 02/07/15 22:13, Andrew Bartlett wrote:
> I suggest contacting the companies on this list:
>
> https://www.samba.org/samba/support/globalsupport.html
>
> Sadly there are not many Samba consulting/development companies
> worldwide that offer services direct to clients, but two I am aware of
> are listed on that page.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Andrew Bartlett

Hello Andrew

Thank you for your message.

One of the companies I contacted suggested switching to BIND for DNS, which
would fix the problem, and it is an option for the far future.

We are living with my workaround for now using an A record and a 301 Redirect on
another internal server.

It's not ideal, but it works for now.

May I thank you for your continued major work on Samba, which allows us to run
Linux servers at our company.

Regards,

Paul Littlefield