Chenyehua
2017-Jan-22 10:04 UTC
[Samba] 答复: ??????: Is the "\\x.x.x.x" type tree connect request a client related feature?
Thanks for your reply, Louis
However, I am still blocked by this problem now. !-_-
I tried to set the samba server as the DNS server and visit the shared folder by
input "\\aaa.bb.com" at windows 7 client. In some cases it works and
will not fail.
However the similar abnormal phenomenon also occasionally happens (especially at
changing the authentication, such as local to ldap):
1) I can pass the authentication and see the shared folder, but when I try to
open the folder , it fails with a windows error message like "cannot find
the route to the network". It may recover to normal later (means I can open
that folder)
2) I have collected the wireshark record and find it may due to the same reason:
NT_STATUS_BAD_NETWORK_NAME
Part records in the Wireshark:
> Tree connect request Tree\\aaa.bb.com\IPC$
> Tree connect response : SUCCESS
> Tree connect request Tree \\aaa.bb.com
> Tree connect response : NT_STATUS_BAD_NETWORK_NAME
> Tree connect request Tree \\aaa.bb.com
Tree connect response : NT_STATUS_BAD_NETWORK_NAME
...
...
In your last email, you mentioned that "after the "badlock"
patches, MS applies some checks. ".
1) Do you mean that sending "\\serverpath" type tree connect request
is some kind of check sent by windows 7 relevant to the badlock patches? And
What does this check for?
2) Are those checks reasonable and normal? As they have affected the normal use
of the samba share in my case.
3) Are there any solutions to my problem?
4) the badlock bug -- do you mean the bug which was discovered by Stefan
Metzmacher, disclosed in 2016-04-12, and referenced by CVE-2016-2118 for samba,
CVE-2016-0128/ MS16-047 for windows ?
Thanks
Best wishes
-----邮件原件-----
发件人: samba [mailto:samba-bounces at lists.samba.org] 代表 L.P.H. van Belle via
samba
发送时间: 2016年12月30日 16:44
收件人: samba at lists.samba.org
主题: Re: [Samba] ??????: Is the "\\x.x.x.x" type tree connect request a
client related feature?
> the tree connect requests of the abnormal case may follow like this order:
>
> Tree connect request Tree \\172.16.37.96\IPC$
>
> Tree connect request Tree \\172.16.37.96
>
> Tree connect request Tree \\172.16.37.96
After the "badlock" patches, MS applies some checks.
( and this is default as of windows server 2008)
1) make user HOSTNAME and IP are correct in DNS. And hosts file.
2) Dont use \\hostname or \\ip if you dont have a REVERSE dns setup.
3) use \\hostname.domain.tld
4) If you want to use \\hostname then make user DNS A and PTR records are there.
( so the hostname resolves back to ) \\hostname.domain.tld
Now point 4. If you setup like this and you really correct.
\\ip
\\hostname
\\hostname.domain.tld
Will all work by default if you logged in with a domain joined pc and user.
Its all in nameing and DNS related problems.
Greetz,
Louis
> -----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
> Van: samba [mailto:samba-bounces at lists.samba.org] Namens Gaiseric
> Vandal via samba
> Verzonden: donderdag 29 december 2016 15:42
> Aan: Chenyehua
> CC: 'samba at lists.samba.org'
> Onderwerp: Re: [Samba] ??????: Is the "\\x.x.x.x" type tree
connect
> request a client related feature?
>
> It seems like you have two problems going on at once with your server
>
> 1. User authentication following a change to LDAP (as per other
> posts)
> 2. Accessing shares
>
>
> I suggest you resolve your LDAP backend issues first.
>
>
> In Windows, the "net view" and "net use" commands may
help with
> diagnosing problems.
>
> I don't know if Samba tries to do a reverse DNS lookup on the IP
> addresses of the client PC's. I try to make sure I have DNS entries
> for all system even DHCP clients (e.g.
> dhcpclient-192.168.10.10 at mydomain.com.)
>
>
> What is your "name resolve order" parameter set to ? I think the
> default is as follows
>
> name resolve order = host wins bcast
>
>
> My issues with SMB2 was that I could get the first network connection
> from a Windows 7 PC or Windows 2008 server to a samba server share BUT
> seconndary connections would fail. I would try downgrading to NT1 ,
> making sure everything works, then switching back to SMB2.
>
>
> On 12/29/16 04:42, Chenyehua wrote:
> > Thanks for your attention, Gaiseric.
> > Sorry , but I had a little confused. Did you mean that the problem
> > was
> something relevant with the DNS? However in my impression, I might not
> do anything about the DNS.
> >
> > I have some clues that might be helped:
> > 1) First of all, my samba server version set is "max protocol
> > SMB2",
> and the final protocol according to the negotiation result is smb2.10.
> The problem is more likely to appear when the authentication
> changes(like
> user->ldap) or the password changes.
> > 2)The direct fact that leading to the failure may be the bad tree
> connect request with the format of "\\x.x.x.x", which should be
> "\\x.x.x.x\xx" required by SMB2 protocol
> > 3)So my key questions are:
> > a???When and why does the windows 7 sometimes sends the tree
> > connect
> request (like \\x.x.x.x, which is not accepted by SMB2 protocol) to
> the samba server?
> > b???Is this a win7 bug or a problem with the relevant options
> > set? Or
> anything else?
> > c???How to solve this problem???
> >
> > -----????????????-----
> > ?????????: samba [mailto:samba-bounces at lists.samba.org] ??????
> > Gaiseric
> Vandal via samba
> > ????????????: 2016???12???27??? 23:32
> > ?????????: samba at lists.samba.org
> > ??????: Re: [Samba] Is the "\\x.x.x.x" type tree connect
request a
> client related feature?
> >
> > Is the samba server a domain controller? Is this a classic domain
> > or an
> Active Directory domain.
> >
> > If you are using a classic domain you probably want a WINS server
> > configured. I find it works better if the primary domain
controller
> > is also the WINS server. In a classic domain, keep the
"smb
> > ports" as the default ( "smb ports = 445 139.")
What is the "max
> > protocol" version set ? I had trouble with SMB2 so I set
"max
> > protocol = NT1."
> >
> > Do you have forward and reverse DNS entries for all servers
("A"
> > host
> and "PTR" records.)
> >
> > I also found that connections to
"myservername.mydomain.com\myshare"
> > would be treated differently on windows 7 clients that connections to
> > "myservername\myshare" in a classic domain. If the Samba
domain name
> > is "MYDOMAIN" then connections to
"myservername.mydomain.com" would
> result in a conflict of the samba domain name with the DNS domain name.
> > This caused problems with Microsoft Excel and Powerpoint not
> > trusting
> documents from an "insecure" source.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On 12/27/16 05:44, Chenyehua via samba wrote:
> >> Hi folks
> >>
> >> I face a problem when using the samba share, Here is the
detail:
> >>
> >> 1) Phenomenon
> >>
> >> In windows 7, sometimes, I type the samba server ip address
> >> and can see the shared folder. (the samba version is 4.3.11)
> >>
> >> a???However when I try to open the shared folder, it fails with a
> windows error message like “please check the spelling of the name, or
> some problem may related to the network”, and returns the error code
> 0x80070035(cannot find the network path).
> >>
> >> The shared folder may be opened successfully in a while. Or it
will
> >> always fail in a long period with the error returned above(not
sure
> >> if it will automatically recover finally)
> >>
> >> b???The problem in a may be client-related and occasionally
appeared.
> At
> >> some other windows 7 environments, it may never happen(at least I
> >> have tried dozens of times, but it turns out normal each time)
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> 2) Analysis
> >>
> >> a??? Something abnormal can be found in the samba log as below:
> >>
> >> [2016/12/26 22:15:35.238956, 0, pid=605906, effective(0, 0),
> >> real(0, 0)]
> >> ../source3/param/loadparm.c:3240(process_usershare_file)
> >>
> >> process_usershare_file: share name //172.16.37.96 contains
> >> invalid characters (any of %<>*?|/\+=;:",)
> >>
> >> [2016/12/26 22:15:35.238973, 3, pid=605906, effective(0, 0),
> >> real(0, 0)] ../source3/param/service.c:249(find_service)
> >>
> >> find_service() failed to find service //172.16.37.96
> >>
> >> [2016/12/26 22:15:35.238985, 3, pid=605906, effective(0, 0),
> >> real(0, 0)]
../source3/smbd/smb2_tcon.c:266(smbd_smb2_tree_connect)
> >>
> >> smbd_smb2_tree_connect: couldn't find service
//172.16.37.96
> >>
> >> [2016/12/26 22:15:35.239004, 50, pid=605906, effective(0, 0),
> >> real(0, 0), class=tevent]
> >> ../lib/util/tevent_debug.c:66(samba_tevent_debug)
> >>
> >> s3_tevent: Schedule immediate event
"tevent_req_trigger":
> >> 0x56007af6bd80
> >>
> >> [2016/12/26 22:15:35.239021, 50, pid=605906, effective(0, 0),
> >> real(0, 0), class=tevent]
> >> ../lib/util/tevent_debug.c:66(samba_tevent_debug)
> >>
> >> s3_tevent: Cancel immediate event 0x56007af6bd80
> "tevent_req_trigger"
> >>
> >> [2016/12/26 22:15:35.239035, 10, pid=605906, effective(0, 0),
> >> real(0, 0)]
> >> ../source3/smbd/smb2_server.c:2789(smbd_smb2_request_error_ex)
> >>
> >> smbd_smb2_request_error_ex: idx[1]
> >> status[NT_STATUS_BAD_NETWORK_NAME] || at
> >> ../source3/smbd/smb2_tcon.c:135
> >>
> >> [2016/12/26 22:15:35.239053, 10, pid=605906, effective(0, 0),
> >> real(0, 0)]
> >> ../source3/smbd/smb2_server.c:2680(smbd_smb2_request_done_ex)
> >>
> >> smbd_smb2_request_done_ex: idx[1]
> >> status[NT_STATUS_BAD_NETWORK_NAME] body[8] dyn[yes:1] at
> >> ../source3/smbd/smb2_server.c:2837
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> b???Something abnormal may also be observed in the wireshark:
> >>
> >> the tree connect requests of the normal case may follow like this
> order:
> >>
> >> Tree connect request Tree \\172.16.37.96\IPC$
> >>
> >> Tree connect request Tree \\172.16.37.96\sharedfolder1
> >>
> >> Tree connect request Tree \\172.16.37.96\sharedfolder2
> >>
> >> …
> >>
> >> …
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> the tree connect requests of the abnormal case may follow like
this
> order:
> >>
> >> Tree connect request Tree \\172.16.37.96\IPC$
> >>
> >> Tree connect request Tree \\172.16.37.96
> >>
> >> Tree connect request Tree \\172.16.37.96
> >>
> >> …
> >>
> >> …
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> 3) Confused
> >>
> >> I am confused about the abnormal facts above and have some
questions:
> >>
> >> When and Why does the windows 7 sometimes send a pure ip address
> >> tree
> connect request (like \\x.x.x.x) to the samba server after the IPC$
> request?
> >>
> >> Is it fine for the samba 4.3.11 to accept the pure ip address tree
> connect request?
> >>
> >> Is this really a client-related phenomenon?
> >>
> >> Are there any solutions about this problem?
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Thanks
> >>
> >> Best regards!
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
-------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> ---
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------
> >>
> ??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
> ??????????????????????????????????????????????
> >>
> ??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
> ??????????????????????????????????????????????
> >>
> ??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
> ??????????????????????????????????????????????
> >> ?????????
> >> This e-mail and its attachments contain confidential information
> >> from H3C, which is intended only for the person or entity whose
> >> address is listed above. Any use of the information contained
> >> herein in any way (including, but not limited to, total or partial
> >> disclosure, reproduction, or dissemination) by persons other than
> >> the intended
> >> recipient(s) is prohibited. If you receive this e-mail in error,
> >> please notify the sender by phone or email immediately and delete
it!
> >
> >
> > --
> > To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the
> > instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba
>
>
>
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the
> instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba
--
To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the
instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
本邮件及其附件含有杭州华三通信技术有限公司的保密信息，仅限于发送给上面地址中列出
的个人或群组。禁止任何其他人以任何形式使用（包括但不限于全部或部分地泄露、复制、
或散发）本邮件中的信息。如果您错收了本邮件，请您立即电话或邮件通知发件人并删除本
邮件！
This e-mail and its attachments contain confidential information from H3C, which
is
intended only for the person or entity whose address is listed above. Any use of
the
information contained herein in any way (including, but not limited to, total or
partial
disclosure, reproduction, or dissemination) by persons other than the intended
recipient(s) is prohibited. If you receive this e-mail in error, please notify
the sender
by phone or email immediately and delete it!
Rowland Penny
2017-Jan-22 11:46 UTC
[Samba] 答复: ??????: Is the "\\x.x.x.x" type tree connect request a client related feature?
On Sun, 22 Jan 2017 10:04:29 +0000 Chenyehua via samba <samba at lists.samba.org> wrote:> Thanks for your reply, Louis > However, I am still blocked by this problem now. !-_- > I tried to set the samba server as the DNS server and visit the > shared folder by input "\\aaa.bb.com" at windows 7 client. In some > cases it works and will not fail. However the similar abnormal > phenomenon also occasionally happens (especially at changing the > authentication, such as local to ldap): 1) I can pass the > authentication and see the shared folder, but when I try to open the > folder , it fails with a windows error message like "cannot find the > route to the network". It may recover to normal later (means I can > open that folder) 2) I have collected the wireshark record and find > it may due to the same reason: NT_STATUS_BAD_NETWORK_NAME Part > records in the Wireshark: > > Tree connect request Tree\\aaa.bb.com\IPC$ > > Tree connect response : SUCCESS > > Tree connect request Tree \\aaa.bb.com > > Tree connect response : NT_STATUS_BAD_NETWORK_NAME > > Tree connect request Tree \\aaa.bb.com > Tree connect response : NT_STATUS_BAD_NETWORK_NAME > ... > ... > > In your last email, you mentioned that "after the "badlock" patches, > MS applies some checks. ". 1) Do you mean that sending "\\serverpath" > type tree connect request is some kind of check sent by windows 7 > relevant to the badlock patches? And What does this check for? 2) Are > those checks reasonable and normal? As they have affected the normal > use of the samba share in my case. 3) Are there any solutions to my > problem? 4) the badlock bug -- do you mean the bug which was > discovered by Stefan Metzmacher, disclosed in 2016-04-12, and > referenced by CVE-2016-2118 for samba, CVE-2016-0128/ MS16-047 for > windows ? >Though there have been references to individual smb.conf lines, it seems that the full smb.conf hasn't been posted. From what has been posted, I still don't know how Samba is being run, so I think the next step is for the OP to post their full smb.conf. Rowland
Chenyehua
2017-Feb-08 12:10 UTC
[Samba] 转发: 答复: ??????: Is the "\\x.x.x.x" type tree connect request a client related feature?
Thanks for your response, Rowland. Sorry for the late reply. Here is my smb.conf: [global] workgroup = grouptest1 server string = %h server (Samba NAS) dns proxy = no log file = /var/log/samba/log.%m max log size = 10000 syslog = 0 panic action = /usr/share/samba/panic-action %d server role = standalone server obey pam restrictions = yes unix password sync = yes passwd program = /usr/bin/passwd %u passwd chat = *Enter\snew\s*\spassword:* %n\n *Retype\snew\s*\spassword:* %n\n *password\supdated\ssuccessfully* . pam password change = yes map to guest = bad password usershare allow guests = yes max protocol = SMB3 large readwrite = yes use sendfile = yes aio read size = 1024 oplocks = no deadtime = 10 aio write behind = true load printers = no clustering = yes idmap config *:backend = tdb2 store dos attributes = yes vfs objects = acl_xattr idmap config *:range = 1000000-1999999 acl_xattr:ignore system acls = yes socket options = TCP_NODELAY SO_RCVBUF=131072 SO_SNDBUF=131072 netbios name = netaaa1 ctdbd socket = /var/run/ctdb/ctdbd.socket log level = 2 security = user Best regards! -----邮件原件----- 发件人: samba [mailto:samba-bounces at lists.samba.org] 代表 Rowland Penny via samba 发送时间: 2017年1月22日 19:47 收件人: samba at lists.samba.org 主题: Re: [Samba] 答复: ??????: Is the "\\x.x.x.x" type tree connect request a client related feature? On Sun, 22 Jan 2017 10:04:29 +0000 Chenyehua via samba <samba at lists.samba.org> wrote:> Thanks for your reply, Louis > However, I am still blocked by this problem now. !-_- I tried to set > the samba server as the DNS server and visit the shared folder by > input "\\aaa.bb.com" at windows 7 client. In some cases it works and > will not fail. However the similar abnormal phenomenon also > occasionally happens (especially at changing the authentication, such > as local to ldap): 1) I can pass the authentication and see the shared > folder, but when I try to open the folder , it fails with a windows > error message like "cannot find the route to the network". It may > recover to normal later (means I can open that folder) 2) I have > collected the wireshark record and find it may due to the same reason: > NT_STATUS_BAD_NETWORK_NAME Part records in the Wireshark: > > Tree connect request Tree\\aaa.bb.com\IPC$ > > Tree connect response : SUCCESS > > Tree connect request Tree \\aaa.bb.com > > Tree connect response : NT_STATUS_BAD_NETWORK_NAME > > Tree connect request Tree \\aaa.bb.com > Tree connect response : NT_STATUS_BAD_NETWORK_NAME > ... > ... > > In your last email, you mentioned that "after the "badlock" patches, > MS applies some checks. ". 1) Do you mean that sending "\\serverpath" > type tree connect request is some kind of check sent by windows 7 > relevant to the badlock patches? And What does this check for? 2) Are > those checks reasonable and normal? As they have affected the normal > use of the samba share in my case. 3) Are there any solutions to my > problem? 4) the badlock bug -- do you mean the bug which was > discovered by Stefan Metzmacher, disclosed in 2016-04-12, and > referenced by CVE-2016-2118 for samba, CVE-2016-0128/ MS16-047 for > windows ? >Though there have been references to individual smb.conf lines, it seems that the full smb.conf hasn't been posted. From what has been posted, I still don't know how Samba is being run, so I think the next step is for the OP to post their full smb.conf. Rowland -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba On Sun, 22 Jan 2017 10:04:29 +0000 Chenyehua via samba <samba at lists.samba.org> wrote: Thanks for your reply, Louis However, I am still blocked by this problem now. !-_- I tried to set the samba server as the DNS server and visit the shared folder by input "\\aaa.bb.com" at windows 7 client. In some cases it works and will not fail. However the similar abnormal phenomenon also occasionally happens (especially at changing the authentication, such as local to ldap): 1) I can pass the authentication and see the shared folder, but when I try to open the folder , it fails with a windows error message like "cannot find the route to the network". It may recover to normal later (means I can open that folder) 2) I have collected the wireshark record and find it may due to the same reason: NT_STATUS_BAD_NETWORK_NAME Part records in the Wireshark: > Tree connect request Tree\\aaa.bb.com\IPC$ > Tree connect response : SUCCESS > Tree connect request Tree \\aaa.bb.com > Tree connect response : NT_STATUS_BAD_NETWORK_NAME > Tree connect request Tree \\aaa.bb.com Tree connect response : NT_STATUS_BAD_NETWORK_NAME ... ... In your last email, you mentioned that "after the "badlock" patches, MS applies some checks. ". 1) Do you mean that sending "\\serverpath" type tree connect request is some kind of check sent by windows 7 relevant to the badlock patches? And What does this check for? 2) Are those checks reasonable and normal? As they have affected the normal use of the samba share in my case. 3) Are there any solutions to my problem? 4) the badlock bug -- do you mean the bug which was discovered by Stefan Metzmacher, disclosed in 2016-04-12, and referenced by CVE-2016-2118 for samba, CVE-2016-0128/ MS16-047 for windows ? Thanks Best wishes -----邮件原件----- 发件人: samba [mailto:samba-bounces at lists.samba.org] 代表 L.P.H. van Belle via samba 发送时间: 2016年12月30日 16:44 收件人: samba at lists.samba.org 主题: Re: [Samba] ??????: Is the "\\x.x.x.x" type tree connect request a client related feature?> the tree connect requests of the abnormal case may follow like this order: > > Tree connect request Tree \\172.16.37.96\IPC$ > > Tree connect request Tree \\172.16.37.96 > > Tree connect request Tree \\172.16.37.96After the "badlock" patches, MS applies some checks. ( and this is default as of windows server 2008) 1) make user HOSTNAME and IP are correct in DNS. And hosts file. 2) Dont use \\hostname or \\ip if you dont have a REVERSE dns setup. 3) use \\hostname.domain.tld 4) If you want to use \\hostname then make user DNS A and PTR records are there. ( so the hostname resolves back to ) \\hostname.domain.tld Now point 4. If you setup like this and you really correct. \\ip \\hostname \\hostname.domain.tld Will all work by default if you logged in with a domain joined pc and user. Its all in nameing and DNS related problems. Greetz, Louis> -----Oorspronkelijk bericht----- > Van: samba [mailto:samba-bounces at lists.samba.org] Namens Gaiseric > Vandal via samba > Verzonden: donderdag 29 december 2016 15:42 > Aan: Chenyehua > CC: 'samba at lists.samba.org' > Onderwerp: Re: [Samba] ??????: Is the "\\x.x.x.x" type tree connect > request a client related feature? > > It seems like you have two problems going on at once with your server > > 1. User authentication following a change to LDAP (as per other > posts) > 2. Accessing shares > > > I suggest you resolve your LDAP backend issues first. > > > In Windows, the "net view" and "net use" commands may help with > diagnosing problems. > > I don't know if Samba tries to do a reverse DNS lookup on the IP > addresses of the client PC's. I try to make sure I have DNS entries > for all system even DHCP clients (e.g. > dhcpclient-192.168.10.10 at mydomain.com.) > > > What is your "name resolve order" parameter set to ? I think the > default is as follows > > name resolve order = host wins bcast > > > My issues with SMB2 was that I could get the first network connection > from a Windows 7 PC or Windows 2008 server to a samba server share BUT > seconndary connections would fail. I would try downgrading to NT1 , > making sure everything works, then switching back to SMB2. > > > On 12/29/16 04:42, Chenyehua wrote: > > Thanks for your attention, Gaiseric. > > Sorry , but I had a little confused. Did you mean that the problem > > was > something relevant with the DNS? However in my impression, I might not > do anything about the DNS. > > > > I have some clues that might be helped: > > 1) First of all, my samba server version set is "max protocol > > SMB2", > and the final protocol according to the negotiation result is smb2.10. > The problem is more likely to appear when the authentication > changes(like > user->ldap) or the password changes. > > 2)The direct fact that leading to the failure may be the bad tree > connect request with the format of "\\x.x.x.x", which should be > "\\x.x.x.x\xx" required by SMB2 protocol > > 3)So my key questions are: > > a???When and why does the windows 7 sometimes sends the tree > > connect > request (like \\x.x.x.x, which is not accepted by SMB2 protocol) to > the samba server? > > b???Is this a win7 bug or a problem with the relevant options > > set? Or > anything else? > > c???How to solve this problem??? > > > > -----????????????----- > > ?????????: samba [mailto:samba-bounces at lists.samba.org] ?????? > > Gaiseric > Vandal via samba > > ????????????: 2016???12???27??? 23:32 > > ?????????: samba at lists.samba.org > > ??????: Re: [Samba] Is the "\\x.x.x.x" type tree connect request a > client related feature? > > > > Is the samba server a domain controller? Is this a classic domain > > or an > Active Directory domain. > > > > If you are using a classic domain you probably want a WINS server > > configured. I find it works better if the primary domain controller > > is also the WINS server. In a classic domain, keep the "smb > > ports" as the default ( "smb ports = 445 139.") What is the "max > > protocol" version set ? I had trouble with SMB2 so I set "max > > protocol = NT1." > > > > Do you have forward and reverse DNS entries for all servers ("A" > > host > and "PTR" records.) > > > > I also found that connections to "myservername.mydomain.com\myshare" > > would be treated differently on windows 7 clients that connections to > > "myservername\myshare" in a classic domain. If the Samba domain name > > is "MYDOMAIN" then connections to "myservername.mydomain.com" would > result in a conflict of the samba domain name with the DNS domain name. > > This caused problems with Microsoft Excel and Powerpoint not > > trusting > documents from an "insecure" source. > > > > > > > > > > > > On 12/27/16 05:44, Chenyehua via samba wrote: > >> Hi folks > >> > >> I face a problem when using the samba share, Here is the detail: > >> > >> 1) Phenomenon > >> > >> In windows 7, sometimes, I type the samba server ip address > >> and can see the shared folder. (the samba version is 4.3.11) > >> > >> a???However when I try to open the shared folder, it fails with a > windows error message like “please check the spelling of the name, or > some problem may related to the network”, and returns the error code > 0x80070035(cannot find the network path). > >> > >> The shared folder may be opened successfully in a while. Or it will > >> always fail in a long period with the error returned above(not sure > >> if it will automatically recover finally) > >> > >> b???The problem in a may be client-related and occasionally appeared. > At > >> some other windows 7 environments, it may never happen(at least I > >> have tried dozens of times, but it turns out normal each time) > >> > >> > >> > >> 2) Analysis > >> > >> a??? Something abnormal can be found in the samba log as below: > >> > >> [2016/12/26 22:15:35.238956, 0, pid=605906, effective(0, 0), > >> real(0, 0)] > >> ../source3/param/loadparm.c:3240(process_usershare_file) > >> > >> process_usershare_file: share name //172.16.37.96 contains > >> invalid characters (any of %<>*?|/\+=;:",) > >> > >> [2016/12/26 22:15:35.238973, 3, pid=605906, effective(0, 0), > >> real(0, 0)] ../source3/param/service.c:249(find_service) > >> > >> find_service() failed to find service //172.16.37.96 > >> > >> [2016/12/26 22:15:35.238985, 3, pid=605906, effective(0, 0), > >> real(0, 0)] ../source3/smbd/smb2_tcon.c:266(smbd_smb2_tree_connect) > >> > >> smbd_smb2_tree_connect: couldn't find service //172.16.37.96 > >> > >> [2016/12/26 22:15:35.239004, 50, pid=605906, effective(0, 0), > >> real(0, 0), class=tevent] > >> ../lib/util/tevent_debug.c:66(samba_tevent_debug) > >> > >> s3_tevent: Schedule immediate event "tevent_req_trigger": > >> 0x56007af6bd80 > >> > >> [2016/12/26 22:15:35.239021, 50, pid=605906, effective(0, 0), > >> real(0, 0), class=tevent] > >> ../lib/util/tevent_debug.c:66(samba_tevent_debug) > >> > >> s3_tevent: Cancel immediate event 0x56007af6bd80 > "tevent_req_trigger" > >> > >> [2016/12/26 22:15:35.239035, 10, pid=605906, effective(0, 0), > >> real(0, 0)] > >> ../source3/smbd/smb2_server.c:2789(smbd_smb2_request_error_ex) > >> > >> smbd_smb2_request_error_ex: idx[1] > >> status[NT_STATUS_BAD_NETWORK_NAME] || at > >> ../source3/smbd/smb2_tcon.c:135 > >> > >> [2016/12/26 22:15:35.239053, 10, pid=605906, effective(0, 0), > >> real(0, 0)] > >> ../source3/smbd/smb2_server.c:2680(smbd_smb2_request_done_ex) > >> > >> smbd_smb2_request_done_ex: idx[1] > >> status[NT_STATUS_BAD_NETWORK_NAME] body[8] dyn[yes:1] at > >> ../source3/smbd/smb2_server.c:2837 > >> > >> > >> > >> b???Something abnormal may also be observed in the wireshark: > >> > >> the tree connect requests of the normal case may follow like this > order: > >> > >> Tree connect request Tree \\172.16.37.96\IPC$ > >> > >> Tree connect request Tree \\172.16.37.96\sharedfolder1 > >> > >> Tree connect request Tree \\172.16.37.96\sharedfolder2 > >> > >> … > >> > >> … > >> > >> > >> > >> the tree connect requests of the abnormal case may follow like this > order: > >> > >> Tree connect request Tree \\172.16.37.96\IPC$ > >> > >> Tree connect request Tree \\172.16.37.96 > >> > >> Tree connect request Tree \\172.16.37.96 > >> > >> … > >> > >> … > >> > >> > >> > >> 3) Confused > >> > >> I am confused about the abnormal facts above and have some questions: > >> > >> When and Why does the windows 7 sometimes send a pure ip address > >> tree > connect request (like \\x.x.x.x) to the samba server after the IPC$ > request? > >> > >> Is it fine for the samba 4.3.11 to accept the pure ip address tree > connect request? > >> > >> Is this really a client-related phenomenon? > >> > >> Are there any solutions about this problem? > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> Thanks > >> > >> Best regards! > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> ------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> --- > >> --------------------------------------------------------------- > >> > ?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? > ?????????????????????????????????????????????? > >> > ?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? > ?????????????????????????????????????????????? > >> > ?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? > ?????????????????????????????????????????????? > >> ????????? > >> This e-mail and its attachments contain confidential information > >> from H3C, which is intended only for the person or entity whose > >> address is listed above. Any use of the information contained > >> herein in any way (including, but not limited to, total or partial > >> disclosure, reproduction, or dissemination) by persons other than > >> the intended > >> recipient(s) is prohibited. If you receive this e-mail in error, > >> please notify the sender by phone or email immediately and delete it! > > > > > > -- > > To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the > > instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba > > > > -- > To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the > instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba-- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 本邮件及其附件含有杭州华三通信技术有限公司的保密信息，仅限于发送给上面地址中列出 的个人或群组。禁止任何其他人以任何形式使用（包括但不限于全部或部分地泄露、复制、 或散发）本邮件中的信息。如果您错收了本邮件，请您立即电话或邮件通知发件人并删除本 邮件！ This e-mail and its attachments contain confidential information from H3C, which is intended only for the person or entity whose address is listed above. Any use of the information contained herein in any way (including, but not limited to, total or partial disclosure, reproduction, or dissemination) by persons other than the intended recipient(s) is prohibited. If you receive this e-mail in error, please notify the sender by phone or email immediately and delete it!
Rowland Penny
2017-Feb-08 13:22 UTC
[Samba] 转发: 答复: ??????: Is the "\\x.x.x.x" type tree connect request a client related feature?
On Wed, 8 Feb 2017 12:10:00 +0000 Chenyehua via samba <samba at lists.samba.org> wrote:> Thanks for your response, Rowland. > Sorry for the late reply. > Here is my smb.conf: > > [global] > workgroup = grouptest1 > > server string = %h server (Samba NAS) > > dns proxy = no > > log file = /var/log/samba/log.%m > > max log size = 10000 > > syslog = 0 > > panic action = /usr/share/samba/panic-action %d > > server role = standalone server > > obey pam restrictions = yes > > unix password sync = yes > > passwd program = /usr/bin/passwd %u > passwd chat = *Enter\snew\s*\spassword:* %n\n > *Retype\snew\s*\spassword:* %n\n *password\supdated\ssuccessfully* . > > pam password change = yes > map to guest = bad password > > usershare allow guests = yes > max protocol = SMB3 > large readwrite = yes > use sendfile = yes > aio read size = 1024 > oplocks = no > deadtime = 10 > aio write behind = true > load printers = no > clustering = yes > idmap config *:backend = tdb2 > store dos attributes = yes > vfs objects = acl_xattr > idmap config *:range = 1000000-1999999 > acl_xattr:ignore system acls = yes > socket options = TCP_NODELAY SO_RCVBUF=131072 SO_SNDBUF=131072 > netbios name = netaaa1 > ctdbd socket = /var/run/ctdb/ctdbd.socket > log level = 2 > security = user >Ok, this is a standalone server, so I suggest you remove these lines: idmap config *:backend = tdb2 idmap config *:range = 1000000-1999999 socket options = TCP_NODELAY SO_RCVBUF=131072 SO_SNDBUF=131072 But I think your problem is being caused by this line (and possibly fat fingers): map to guest = bad password If you read 'man smb.conf' you will find this: · Bad Password - Means user logins with an invalid password are treated as a guest login and mapped into the guest account. Note that this can cause problems as it means that any user incorrectly typing their password will be silently logged on as "guest" - and will not know the reason they cannot access files they think they should - there will have been no message given to them that they got their password wrong. Helpdesk services will hate you if you set the map to guest parameter this way :-). This means if the users windows password isn't the same as the one on the Samba server, they will get logged in, but as the 'Guest' user. Rowland
Chenyehua
2017-Feb-09 02:21 UTC
[Samba] 转发: 转发: 答复: ??????: Is the "\\x.x.x.x" type tree connect request a client related feature?
Well, I have changed the line "map to guest = bad password" to
"map to guest = bad user"
However the problem still exists:
1) I can pass the authentication and see the shared folder, but when I try to
open the folder , it fails with a windows error message like "cannot find
the route to the network". It may recover to normal later (means I can open
that folder)
2) I have collected the wireshark record and find that windows 7 keeps sending
unacceptable format("\\server", lack "\share") tree connect
request until it recovers to normal:
> Tree connect request Tree\\aaa.bb.com\IPC$
> Tree connect response : SUCCESS
> Tree connect request Tree \\aaa.bb.com
> Tree connect response : NT_STATUS_BAD_NETWORK_NAME
> Tree connect request Tree \\aaa.bb.com
Tree connect response : NT_STATUS_BAD_NETWORK_NAME
...
...
3) Louis once mentioned that it may due to the check after applying the MS
"bad lock" patch. I am confused about this and doubt why windows 7
will send the unacceptable "\\server" format tree connect request to
check.
4) The "\\server" format tree connect request may not meet the smb2
protocol request:(lack "\share")
"The SMB2 TREE_CONNECT Request MUST be initialized as follows:
The target share path, including server name, in the format
"\\server\share", is copied into the Buffer field of the request.
PathOffset and PathLength MUST be set to describe the location and length of the
target share path in the request."
--- extracted from "[MS-SMB2]:Server Message Block (SMB) Protocol
Versions 2 and 3"
Is this reasonable?
-----邮件原件-----
发件人: samba [mailto:samba-bounces at lists.samba.org] 代表 Rowland Penny via samba
发送时间: 2017年2月8日 21:23
收件人: samba at lists.samba.org
主题: Re: [Samba] 转发: 答复: ??????: Is the "\\x.x.x.x" type tree connect
request a client related feature?
On Wed, 8 Feb 2017 12:10:00 +0000
Chenyehua via samba <samba at lists.samba.org> wrote:
> Thanks for your response, Rowland.
> Sorry for the late reply.
> Here is my smb.conf:
>
> [global]
> workgroup = grouptest1
>
> server string = %h server (Samba NAS)
>
> dns proxy = no
>
> log file = /var/log/samba/log.%m
>
> max log size = 10000
>
> syslog = 0
>
> panic action = /usr/share/samba/panic-action %d
>
> server role = standalone server
>
> obey pam restrictions = yes
>
> unix password sync = yes
>
> passwd program = /usr/bin/passwd %u
> passwd chat = *Enter\snew\s*\spassword:* %n\n
> *Retype\snew\s*\spassword:* %n\n *password\supdated\ssuccessfully* .
>
> pam password change = yes
> map to guest = bad password
>
> usershare allow guests = yes
> max protocol = SMB3
> large readwrite = yes
> use sendfile = yes
> aio read size = 1024
> oplocks = no
> deadtime = 10
> aio write behind = true
> load printers = no
> clustering = yes
> idmap config *:backend = tdb2
> store dos attributes = yes
> vfs objects = acl_xattr
> idmap config *:range = 1000000-1999999
> acl_xattr:ignore system acls = yes
> socket options = TCP_NODELAY SO_RCVBUF=131072 SO_SNDBUF=131072
> netbios name = netaaa1
> ctdbd socket = /var/run/ctdb/ctdbd.socket
> log level = 2
> security = user
>
Ok, this is a standalone server, so I suggest you remove these lines:
idmap config *:backend = tdb2
idmap config *:range = 1000000-1999999
socket options = TCP_NODELAY SO_RCVBUF=131072 SO_SNDBUF=131072
But I think your problem is being caused by this line (and possibly fat
fingers):
map to guest = bad password
If you read 'man smb.conf' you will find this:
· Bad Password - Means user logins with an invalid password are
treated as a guest login and mapped into the guest account.
Note that this can cause problems as it means that any user
incorrectly typing their password will be silently logged on as
"guest" - and will not know the reason they cannot
access files
they think they should - there will have been no message given
to them that they got their password wrong. Helpdesk services
will hate you if you set the map to guest parameter this way
:-).
This means if the users windows password isn't the same as the one on the
Samba server, they will get logged in, but as the 'Guest' user.
Rowland
--
To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the
instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
本邮件及其附件含有杭州华三通信技术有限公司的保密信息，仅限于发送给上面地址中列出
的个人或群组。禁止任何其他人以任何形式使用（包括但不限于全部或部分地泄露、复制、
或散发）本邮件中的信息。如果您错收了本邮件，请您立即电话或邮件通知发件人并删除本
邮件！
This e-mail and its attachments contain confidential information from H3C, which
is
intended only for the person or entity whose address is listed above. Any use of
the
information contained herein in any way (including, but not limited to, total or
partial
disclosure, reproduction, or dissemination) by persons other than the intended
recipient(s) is prohibited. If you receive this e-mail in error, please notify
the sender
by phone or email immediately and delete it!
Seemingly Similar Threads
- 答复: ??????: Is the "\\x.x.x.x" type tree connect request a client related feature?
- ??????: Is the "\\x.x.x.x" type tree connect request a client related feature?
- 答复: Is the "\\x.x.x.x" type tree connect request a client related feature?
- Is the "\\x.x.x.x" type tree connect request a client related feature?
- 转发: 转发: 答复: ??????: Is the "\\x.x.x.x" type tree connect request a client related feature?