On 12/10/15 14:52, Rowland Penny wrote:> On 12/10/15 13:16, buhorojo wrote: >> >> So you are recommending lowering the clarity of samba configuration?. >> You wish to keep looking at the smb.conf which users post here guess >> that which they wish to achieve? >> >> > > Nope, what I saying is that adding 'server role' anywhere but on a DC > is causing problems. If 'server role' isn't added, the problems don't > appear, so the cure is simple, don't have it in the sample smb.conf > and beef up the comments on the smb.conf manpage to say that you do > not need to use 'server role' and to rely on the default. > It is either that or get every samba howto on the internet changed, > are you volunteering to do that buhorojo? > > Rowland > >Dunno. The vote here is to keep it. It would help people like you determine what type of server users who post to the list are talking about. And anyway, it says it's '[...] very important' to have it [...]. Give up.
Stéphane PURNELLE
2015-Oct-12 13:50 UTC
[Samba] invalid value 'netbios backup domain controller'
Hi, My question is : is the "netbios backup domain controller" role exist ? if you try to put this as a server role, I think that this is not work, because don't exist. if your network is a network with AD controler, this is not exist because DC work as multi-master if your network is a network with NT4 like controller, server role is not used like this. just in case ... "samba" <samba-bounces at lists.samba.org> a écrit sur 12/10/2015 15:39:04 :> De : buhorojo <buhorojo.lcb at gmail.com> > A : samba at lists.samba.org, > Date : 12/10/2015 15:44 > Objet : Re: [Samba] invalid value 'netbios backup domain controller' > Envoyé par : "samba" <samba-bounces at lists.samba.org> > > On 12/10/15 14:52, Rowland Penny wrote: > > On 12/10/15 13:16, buhorojo wrote: > >> > >> So you are recommending lowering the clarity of samba configuration?. > >> You wish to keep looking at the smb.conf which users post here guess > >> that which they wish to achieve? > >> > >> > > > > Nope, what I saying is that adding 'server role' anywhere but on a DC > > is causing problems. If 'server role' isn't added, the problems don't > > appear, so the cure is simple, don't have it in the sample smb.conf > > and beef up the comments on the smb.conf manpage to say that you do > > not need to use 'server role' and to rely on the default. > > It is either that or get every samba howto on the internet changed, > > are you volunteering to do that buhorojo? > > > > Rowland > > > > > Dunno. The vote here is to keep it. It would help people like you > determine what type of server users who post to the list are talking > about. And anyway, it says it's '[...] very important' to have it [...]. > > Give up. > > > -- > To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the > instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba
Rowland Penny
2015-Oct-12 13:52 UTC
[Samba] invalid value 'netbios backup domain controller'
On 12/10/15 14:39, buhorojo wrote:> On 12/10/15 14:52, Rowland Penny wrote: >> On 12/10/15 13:16, buhorojo wrote: >>> >>> So you are recommending lowering the clarity of samba >>> configuration?. You wish to keep looking at the smb.conf which users >>> post here guess that which they wish to achieve? >>> >>> >> >> Nope, what I saying is that adding 'server role' anywhere but on a DC >> is causing problems. If 'server role' isn't added, the problems don't >> appear, so the cure is simple, don't have it in the sample smb.conf >> and beef up the comments on the smb.conf manpage to say that you do >> not need to use 'server role' and to rely on the default. >> It is either that or get every samba howto on the internet changed, >> are you volunteering to do that buhorojo? >> >> Rowland >> >> > Dunno. The vote here is to keep it. It would help people like you > determine what type of server users who post to the list are talking > about. And anyway, it says it's '[...] very important' to have it [...]. > > Give up. > >Well no, you are entitled to your opinion as I am entitled to mine, but if it is 'very important to have it' , why are the only complaints about it being in smb.conf. Nobody (as far as I am aware) has every complained about messages in the logs saying 'server role' not found. Rowland
On 12/10/15 15:52, Rowland Penny wrote:> On 12/10/15 14:39, buhorojo wrote: >> On 12/10/15 14:52, Rowland Penny wrote: >>> On 12/10/15 13:16, buhorojo wrote: >>>> >>>> So you are recommending lowering the clarity of samba >>>> configuration?. You wish to keep looking at the smb.conf which >>>> users post here guess that which they wish to achieve? >>>> >>>> >>> >>> Nope, what I saying is that adding 'server role' anywhere but on a >>> DC is causing problems. If 'server role' isn't added, the problems >>> don't appear, so the cure is simple, don't have it in the sample >>> smb.conf and beef up the comments on the smb.conf manpage to say >>> that you do not need to use 'server role' and to rely on the default. >>> It is either that or get every samba howto on the internet changed, >>> are you volunteering to do that buhorojo? >>> >>> Rowland >>> >>> >> Dunno. The vote here is to keep it. It would help people like you >> determine what type of server users who post to the list are talking >> about. And anyway, it says it's '[...] very important' to have it [...]. >> >> Give up. >> >> > > Well no, you are entitled to your opinion as I am entitled to mine, > but if it is 'very important to have it' , why are the only complaints > about it being in smb.conf. Nobody (as far as I am aware) has every > complained about messages in the logs saying 'server role' not found. > > Rowland > >What do you put in smb.conf for server role = if it is not a server? We volunteer 'not a server'. HTH