I have built 4.4.3 on CentOS 6, with a fairly minimalist smb.conf, 
provisioned the domain as per the wiki [1], and cannot get past test one:
[root at frodo ~]# smbclient -L localhost -U%
Domain=[ADTEST] OS=[Windows 6.1] Server=[Samba 4.4.3]
tree connect failed: NT_STATUS_CONNECTION_DISCONNECTED
I can get output if I specify a username, and give a password, but 
anonymous access seems to be blocked.
[root at frodo etc]# smbclient -L localhost -Ugeoff
Enter geoff's password:
Domain=[ADTEST] OS=[Windows 6.1] Server=[Samba 4.4.3]
         Sharename       Type      Comment
         ---------       ----      -------
         netlogon        Disk
         sysvol          Disk
         big             Disk
         IPC$            IPC       IPC Service (Samba 4.4.3)
Domain=[ADTEST] OS=[Windows 6.1] Server=[Samba 4.4.3]
         Server               Comment
         ---------            -------
         Workgroup            Master
         ---------            -------
My smb.conf, such as it is (I have redacted the domain name):
[root at frodo etc]# cat smb.conf
# Global parameters
[global]
         netbios name = FRODO
         realm = ADTEST.XXXX.CO.UK
         workgroup = ADTEST
         dns forwarder = 212.23.3.100
         server role = active directory domain controller
         idmap_ldb:use rfc2307 = yes
         log level = 1
         guest ok = yes
[netlogon]
         path = /usr/local/samba/var/locks/sysvol/adtest.xxxx.co.uk/scripts
         read only = No
[sysvol]
         path = /usr/local/samba/var/locks/sysvol
         read only = No
[big]
         path = /big
         read only = No
Am I misunderstanding the wiki?  Or is this test unimportant, and I 
should just move on?  Thanks for any light anyone can shed.
-- 
       Tom Yates  -  http://www.teaparty.net
[1] 
https://wiki.samba.org/index.php/Setup_a_Samba_Active_Directory_Domain_Controller
On 13/05/16 13:34, Tom Yates wrote:> I have built 4.4.3 on CentOS 6, with a fairly minimalist smb.conf, > provisioned the domain as per the wiki [1], and cannot get past test one: > > [root at frodo ~]# smbclient -L localhost -U% > Domain=[ADTEST] OS=[Windows 6.1] Server=[Samba 4.4.3] > tree connect failed: NT_STATUS_CONNECTION_DISCONNECTED > > I can get output if I specify a username, and give a password, but > anonymous access seems to be blocked. > > [root at frodo etc]# smbclient -L localhost -Ugeoff > Enter geoff's password: > Domain=[ADTEST] OS=[Windows 6.1] Server=[Samba 4.4.3] > > Sharename Type Comment > --------- ---- ------- > netlogon Disk > sysvol Disk > big Disk > IPC$ IPC IPC Service (Samba 4.4.3) > Domain=[ADTEST] OS=[Windows 6.1] Server=[Samba 4.4.3] > > Server Comment > --------- ------- > > Workgroup Master > --------- ------- > > My smb.conf, such as it is (I have redacted the domain name): > > [root at frodo etc]# cat smb.conf > # Global parameters > [global] > netbios name = FRODO > realm = ADTEST.XXXX.CO.UK > workgroup = ADTEST > dns forwarder = 212.23.3.100 > server role = active directory domain controller > idmap_ldb:use rfc2307 = yes > log level = 1 > guest ok = yes > > [netlogon] > path = > /usr/local/samba/var/locks/sysvol/adtest.xxxx.co.uk/scripts > read only = No > > [sysvol] > path = /usr/local/samba/var/locks/sysvol > read only = No > > [big] > path = /big > read only = No > > > Am I misunderstanding the wiki? Or is this test unimportant, and I > should just move on? Thanks for any light anyone can shed. > >Might be a stupid question, but have you started Samba? Rowland
On Fri, 13 May 2016, Rowland penny wrote:> Might be a stupid question, but have you started Samba?> On 13/05/16 13:34, Tom Yates wrote: >> >> [root at frodo etc]# smbclient -L localhost -Ugeoff >> Enter geoff's password: >> Domain=[ADTEST] OS=[Windows 6.1] Server=[Samba 4.4.3] >> >> Sharename Type Comment >> --------- ---- ------- >> netlogon Disk >> sysvol Disk >> big Disk >> IPC$ IPC IPC Service (Samba 4.4.3) >> Domain=[ADTEST] OS=[Windows 6.1] Server=[Samba 4.4.3] >> >> Server Comment >> --------- ------- >> >> Workgroup Master >> --------- -------I think that shows it's running, no? -- Tom Yates - http://www.teaparty.net