samba - Dec 2018 - After upgrade to 4.9.4, internal DNS no longer working

On Thu, 27 Dec 2018 11:07:08 +0100
"L.P.H. van Belle via samba" <samba at lists.samba.org> wrote:
> Gooood morning Rowland, :-) 
> 
> Your late ;-).. 
> What i also did see, so its more clear for others also. 
> 
> > Dez 22 21:08:31 dc1 systemd[1]: Starting Samba AD Daemon...
> > Dez 22 21:08:31 dc1 kernel: audit: type=1131
> > audit(1545509311.984:52): pid=1 uid=0 auid=4294967295
> > ses=4294967295 msg='unit=samba comm="systemd"
> > exe="/usr/lib/systemd/systemd" hostname=? addr=? terminal=?
> > res=failed' Dez 22 21:08:32 dc1 samba[733]: root process[733]:
> > [2018/12/22
> 
> This line:  exe="/usr/lib/systemd/systemd" hostname=? addr=?
> terminal=? res=failed' 
> 
> So incorrect hostname/resolving resulting in this problem. 
I actually think it could be a symptom and not the root cause. It
could be that two main things happened, systemd was upgraded and with
it 'resolved' was installed and smbclient wasn't upgraded.

I think that if 'resolved' is removed and ALL Samba packages are
upgraded, he might get it to work again.

Rowland

Hi Louis and Rowland, 

Thanks for all your input. In answer to your questions, yes, all packages were
upgraded to 4.9.4 so that was not the issue – the error messages you’ve seen in
this regard are from during the upgrade. I can only guess that something was
removed too early. Also both hostname and resolv.conf were set up correctly. 
But these points seem moot now as I was able to solve the issue.

I didn’t touch the base system which was upgraded but I did downgrade Samba and
dependencies (samba, smbclient, libwbclient) back to v4.7.4, I then just
overwrote the Samba folder (/var/lib/samba) which contains private and sysvol
with a recent backup – and everything works again. Users can log in, GPOs are
being distributed. I have not yet tried to upgrade again, I’ll leave this for
some other day.

samba-tool dbcheck isn’t showing any errors. samba-tool ntacl sysvolcheck does
complain about an incorrect db acl on a gpo directory so I ran sysvolreset. The
error remains but doesn’t seem to bother the AD otherwise. Still, to be safe,
here is the error:

$ sudo samba-tool ntacl sysvolcheck
ERROR(<class 'samba.provision.ProvisioningError'>): uncaught
exception - ProvisioningError: DB ACL on GPO directory
/var/lib/samba/sysvol/samdom.example.com/Policies/{31B2F340-016D-11D2-945F-00C04FB984F9}
O:LAG:DAD:P(A;OICI;0x001f01ff;;;DA)(A;OICI;0x001f01ff;;;EA)(A;OICIIO;0x001f01ff;;;CO)(A;OICI;0x001f01ff;;;DA)(A;OICI;0x001f01ff;;;SY)(A;OICI;0x001200a9;;;AU)(A;OICI;0x001200a9;;;ED)
does not match expected value
O:DAG:DAD:P(A;OICI;0x001f01ff;;;DA)(A;OICI;0x001f01ff;;;EA)(A;OICIIO;0x001f01ff;;;CO)(A;OICI;0x001f01ff;;;DA)(A;OICI;0x001f01ff;;;SY)(A;OICI;0x001200a9;;;AU)(A;OICI;0x001200a9;;;ED)
from GPO object
  File "/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/samba/netcmd/__init__.py",
line 176, in _run
    return self.run(*args, **kwargs)
  File "/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/samba/netcmd/ntacl.py", line
270, in run
    lp)
  File "/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/samba/provision/__init__.py",
line 1723, in checksysvolacl
    direct_db_access)
  File "/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/samba/provision/__init__.py",
line 1674, in check_gpos_acl
    domainsid, direct_db_access)
  File "/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/samba/provision/__init__.py",
line 1621, in check_dir_acl
    raise ProvisioningError('%s ACL on GPO directory %s %s does not match
expected value %s from GPO object' % (acl_type(direct_db_access), path,
fsacl_sddl, acl))

Any advice on how to take care of this error, or can this be safely ignored? 

Thanks, 
Viktor


From: Rowland Penny via samba
Sent: Donnerstag, 27. Dezember 2018 11:29
To: samba at lists.samba.org
Subject: Re: [Samba] After upgrade to 4.9.4, internal DNS no longer working

On Thu, 27 Dec 2018 11:07:08 +0100
"L.P.H. van Belle via samba" <samba at lists.samba.org> wrote:
> Gooood morning Rowland, :-) 
> 
> Your late ;-).. 
> What i also did see, so its more clear for others also. 
> 
> > Dez 22 21:08:31 dc1 systemd[1]: Starting Samba AD Daemon...
> > Dez 22 21:08:31 dc1 kernel: audit: type=1131
> > audit(1545509311.984:52): pid=1 uid=0 auid=4294967295
> > ses=4294967295 msg='unit=samba comm="systemd"
> > exe="/usr/lib/systemd/systemd" hostname=? addr=? terminal=?
> > res=failed' Dez 22 21:08:32 dc1 samba[733]: root process[733]:
> > [2018/12/22
> 
> This line:  exe="/usr/lib/systemd/systemd" hostname=? addr=?
> terminal=? res=failed' 
> 
> So incorrect hostname/resolving resulting in this problem. 
I actually think it could be a symptom and not the root cause. It
could be that two main things happened, systemd was upgraded and with
it 'resolved' was installed and smbclient wasn't upgraded.

I think that if 'resolved' is removed and ALL Samba packages are
upgraded, he might get it to work again.

Rowland

-- 
To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the
instructions:  https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba

Hai, 

> I didn’t touch the base system which was upgraded  
Ah.., so you OS was upgraded, as i suspected. 

Then i really suggest, goto my points and make sure your resolving is 100%
correct.
You probely missed a (few) thing(s) after your OS upgrade.... 
As i missed these when i upgrade my Jessie to Stretch.. 

I can check it for you, then can post the output/content of these. 

/etc/hostname
/etc/hosts
/etc/resolv.conf
/etc/nsswitch 

hostnamectl --static
hostnamectl --transient
resolvectl status


And :  sudo samba-tool ntacl sysvolcheck
For now you can still ignore it safely. 


Greetz, 

Louis



> -----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
> Van: samba [mailto:samba-bounces at lists.samba.org] Namens 
> Viktor Trojanovic via samba
> Verzonden: donderdag 27 december 2018 11:58
> Aan: Rowland Penny; samba at lists.samba.org
> Onderwerp: Re: [Samba] After upgrade to 4.9.4, internal DNS 
> no longer working
> 
> Hi Louis and Rowland, 
> 
> Thanks for all your input. In answer to your questions, yes, 
> all packages were upgraded to 4.9.4 so that was not the issue 
> – the error messages you’ve seen in this regard are from 
> during the upgrade. I can only guess that something was 
> removed too early. Also both hostname and resolv.conf were 
> set up correctly.  But these points seem moot now as I was 
> able to solve the issue. 
> 
> I didn’t touch the base system which was upgraded but I did 
> downgrade Samba and dependencies (samba, smbclient, 
> libwbclient) back to v4.7.4, I then just overwrote the Samba 
> folder (/var/lib/samba) which contains private and sysvol 
> with a recent backup – and everything works again. Users can 
> log in, GPOs are being distributed. I have not yet tried to 
> upgrade again, I’ll leave this for some other day. 
> 
> samba-tool dbcheck isn’t showing any errors. samba-tool ntacl 
> sysvolcheck does complain about an incorrect db acl on a gpo 
> directory so I ran sysvolreset. The error remains but doesn’t 
> seem to bother the AD otherwise. Still, to be safe, here is 
> the error: 
> 
> $ sudo samba-tool ntacl sysvolcheck
> ERROR(<class 'samba.provision.ProvisioningError'>): uncaught 
> exception - ProvisioningError: DB ACL on GPO directory 
> /var/lib/samba/sysvol/samdom.example.com/Policies/{31B2F340-01
> 6D-11D2-945F-00C04FB984F9} 
> O:LAG:DAD:P(A;OICI;0x001f01ff;;;DA)(A;OICI;0x001f01ff;;;EA)(A;
> OICIIO;0x001f01ff;;;CO)(A;OICI;0x001f01ff;;;DA)(A;OICI;0x001f0
> 1ff;;;SY)(A;OICI;0x001200a9;;;AU)(A;OICI;0x001200a9;;;ED) 
> does not match expected value 
> O:DAG:DAD:P(A;OICI;0x001f01ff;;;DA)(A;OICI;0x001f01ff;;;EA)(A;
> OICIIO;0x001f01ff;;;CO)(A;OICI;0x001f01ff;;;DA)(A;OICI;0x001f0
> 1ff;;;SY)(A;OICI;0x001200a9;;;AU)(A;OICI;0x001200a9;;;ED) 
> from GPO object
>   File 
> "/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/samba/netcmd/__init__.py", 
> line 176, in _run
>     return self.run(*args, **kwargs)
>   File 
> "/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/samba/netcmd/ntacl.py", 
> line 270, in run
>     lp)
>   File 
> "/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/samba/provision/__init__.py"
> , line 1723, in checksysvolacl
>     direct_db_access)
>   File 
> "/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/samba/provision/__init__.py"
> , line 1674, in check_gpos_acl
>     domainsid, direct_db_access)
>   File 
> "/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/samba/provision/__init__.py"
> , line 1621, in check_dir_acl
>     raise ProvisioningError('%s ACL on GPO directory %s %s 
> does not match expected value %s from GPO object' % 
> (acl_type(direct_db_access), path, fsacl_sddl, acl))
> 
> Any advice on how to take care of this error, or can this be 
> safely ignored? 
> 
> Thanks, 
> Viktor
> 
> 
> From: Rowland Penny via samba
> Sent: Donnerstag, 27. Dezember 2018 11:29
> To: samba at lists.samba.org
> Subject: Re: [Samba] After upgrade to 4.9.4, internal DNS no 
> longer working
> 
> On Thu, 27 Dec 2018 11:07:08 +0100
> "L.P.H. van Belle via samba" <samba at lists.samba.org>
wrote:
> 
> > Gooood morning Rowland, :-) 
> > 
> > Your late ;-).. 
> > What i also did see, so its more clear for others also. 
> > 
> > > Dez 22 21:08:31 dc1 systemd[1]: Starting Samba AD Daemon...
> > > Dez 22 21:08:31 dc1 kernel: audit: type=1131
> > > audit(1545509311.984:52): pid=1 uid=0 auid=4294967295
> > > ses=4294967295 msg='unit=samba comm="systemd"
> > > exe="/usr/lib/systemd/systemd" hostname=? addr=?
terminal=?
> > > res=failed' Dez 22 21:08:32 dc1 samba[733]: root
process[733]:
> > > [2018/12/22
> > 
> > This line:  exe="/usr/lib/systemd/systemd" hostname=? addr=?
> > terminal=? res=failed' 
> > 
> > So incorrect hostname/resolving resulting in this problem. 
> 
> I actually think it could be a symptom and not the root cause. It
> could be that two main things happened, systemd was upgraded and with
> it 'resolved' was installed and smbclient wasn't upgraded.
> 
> I think that if 'resolved' is removed and ALL Samba packages are
> upgraded, he might get it to work again.
> 
> Rowland
> 
> -- 
> 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
>

Ps. 

I forgot, to ask. 
Which is used : systemd-networkd or NetworkManager? 

The why is shown here: 
https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Systemd-resolved 

The wiki of arch is very good, i do use these these often. ( yes even for my
debian servers ).

Greetz, 

Louis
 
> -----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
> Van: samba [mailto:samba-bounces at lists.samba.org] Namens 
> Viktor Trojanovic via samba
> Verzonden: donderdag 27 december 2018 11:58
> Aan: Rowland Penny; samba at lists.samba.org
> Onderwerp: Re: [Samba] After upgrade to 4.9.4, internal DNS 
> no longer working
> 
> Hi Louis and Rowland, 
> 
> Thanks for all your input. In answer to your questions, yes, 
> all packages were upgraded to 4.9.4 so that was not the issue 
> – the error messages you’ve seen in this regard are from 
> during the upgrade. I can only guess that something was 
> removed too early. Also both hostname and resolv.conf were 
> set up correctly.  But these points seem moot now as I was 
> able to solve the issue. 
> 
> I didn’t touch the base system which was upgraded but I did 
> downgrade Samba and dependencies (samba, smbclient, 
> libwbclient) back to v4.7.4, I then just overwrote the Samba 
> folder (/var/lib/samba) which contains private and sysvol 
> with a recent backup – and everything works again. Users can 
> log in, GPOs are being distributed. I have not yet tried to 
> upgrade again, I’ll leave this for some other day. 
> 
> samba-tool dbcheck isn’t showing any errors. samba-tool ntacl 
> sysvolcheck does complain about an incorrect db acl on a gpo 
> directory so I ran sysvolreset. The error remains but doesn’t 
> seem to bother the AD otherwise. Still, to be safe, here is 
> the error: 
> 
> $ sudo samba-tool ntacl sysvolcheck
> ERROR(<class 'samba.provision.ProvisioningError'>): uncaught 
> exception - ProvisioningError: DB ACL on GPO directory 
> /var/lib/samba/sysvol/samdom.example.com/Policies/{31B2F340-01
> 6D-11D2-945F-00C04FB984F9} 
> O:LAG:DAD:P(A;OICI;0x001f01ff;;;DA)(A;OICI;0x001f01ff;;;EA)(A;
> OICIIO;0x001f01ff;;;CO)(A;OICI;0x001f01ff;;;DA)(A;OICI;0x001f0
> 1ff;;;SY)(A;OICI;0x001200a9;;;AU)(A;OICI;0x001200a9;;;ED) 
> does not match expected value 
> O:DAG:DAD:P(A;OICI;0x001f01ff;;;DA)(A;OICI;0x001f01ff;;;EA)(A;
> OICIIO;0x001f01ff;;;CO)(A;OICI;0x001f01ff;;;DA)(A;OICI;0x001f0
> 1ff;;;SY)(A;OICI;0x001200a9;;;AU)(A;OICI;0x001200a9;;;ED) 
> from GPO object
>   File 
> "/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/samba/netcmd/__init__.py", 
> line 176, in _run
>     return self.run(*args, **kwargs)
>   File 
> "/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/samba/netcmd/ntacl.py", 
> line 270, in run
>     lp)
>   File 
> "/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/samba/provision/__init__.py"
> , line 1723, in checksysvolacl
>     direct_db_access)
>   File 
> "/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/samba/provision/__init__.py"
> , line 1674, in check_gpos_acl
>     domainsid, direct_db_access)
>   File 
> "/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/samba/provision/__init__.py"
> , line 1621, in check_dir_acl
>     raise ProvisioningError('%s ACL on GPO directory %s %s 
> does not match expected value %s from GPO object' % 
> (acl_type(direct_db_access), path, fsacl_sddl, acl))
> 
> Any advice on how to take care of this error, or can this be 
> safely ignored? 
> 
> Thanks, 
> Viktor
> 
> 
> From: Rowland Penny via samba
> Sent: Donnerstag, 27. Dezember 2018 11:29
> To: samba at lists.samba.org
> Subject: Re: [Samba] After upgrade to 4.9.4, internal DNS no 
> longer working
> 
> On Thu, 27 Dec 2018 11:07:08 +0100
> "L.P.H. van Belle via samba" <samba at lists.samba.org>
wrote:
> 
> > Gooood morning Rowland, :-) 
> > 
> > Your late ;-).. 
> > What i also did see, so its more clear for others also. 
> > 
> > > Dez 22 21:08:31 dc1 systemd[1]: Starting Samba AD Daemon...
> > > Dez 22 21:08:31 dc1 kernel: audit: type=1131
> > > audit(1545509311.984:52): pid=1 uid=0 auid=4294967295
> > > ses=4294967295 msg='unit=samba comm="systemd"
> > > exe="/usr/lib/systemd/systemd" hostname=? addr=?
terminal=?
> > > res=failed' Dez 22 21:08:32 dc1 samba[733]: root
process[733]:
> > > [2018/12/22
> > 
> > This line:  exe="/usr/lib/systemd/systemd" hostname=? addr=?
> > terminal=? res=failed' 
> > 
> > So incorrect hostname/resolving resulting in this problem. 
> 
> I actually think it could be a symptom and not the root cause. It
> could be that two main things happened, systemd was upgraded and with
> it 'resolved' was installed and smbclient wasn't upgraded.
> 
> I think that if 'resolved' is removed and ALL Samba packages are
> upgraded, he might get it to work again.
> 
> Rowland
> 
> -- 
> 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
>

Hi Louis,

Please keep in mind that this was just an incremental upgrade of an
otherwise working AD DC. Files such as /etc/hostname, /etc/nsswitch.conf
and /etc/resolv.conf were not affected by the upgrade. But yes, I double
checked, and they are all correct as I've shown in previous emails.

hostname is DC1, confirmed by hostnamectl, resolv.conf has just two
entries: nameserver (own IP), and search samdom.example.com. Same as it is
now, so this all works.

resolvectl is no longer showing anything because I disabled
systemd-resolved in the meantime. I don't think that was necessary but I
did it either way, just to be on the safe side. I'm actually pretty sure it
would have been sufficient to just set DNSStubListener=No in
/etc/systemd/resolved.conf.

As for managing the network, I'm using systemd-network and my network file
looks as follows (no changes in years):

[Match]
Name=br-lxc

[Network]
Address=192.168.1.1/24   <---- = DC1
DNS=192.168.1.1
IPForward=ipv4
Domains=samdom.example.com
Gateway=192.168.1.2   <------ = Router
UseDomains=yes

And yes, I agree, the Arch Wiki is great resource.

Cheers,
Viktor


On Thu, 27 Dec 2018 at 12:19, L.P.H. van Belle via samba <
samba at lists.samba.org> wrote:
> Ps.
>
> I forgot, to ask.
> Which is used : systemd-networkd or NetworkManager?
>
> The why is shown here:
> https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Systemd-resolved
>
> The wiki of arch is very good, i do use these these often. ( yes even for
> my debian servers ).
>
> Greetz,
>
> Louis
>
>
> > -----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
> > Van: samba [mailto:samba-bounces at lists.samba.org] Namens
> > Viktor Trojanovic via samba
> > Verzonden: donderdag 27 december 2018 11:58
> > Aan: Rowland Penny; samba at lists.samba.org
> > Onderwerp: Re: [Samba] After upgrade to 4.9.4, internal DNS
> > no longer working
> >
> > Hi Louis and Rowland,
> >
> > Thanks for all your input. In answer to your questions, yes,
> > all packages were upgraded to 4.9.4 so that was not the issue
> > – the error messages you’ve seen in this regard are from
> > during the upgrade. I can only guess that something was
> > removed too early. Also both hostname and resolv.conf were
> > set up correctly.  But these points seem moot now as I was
> > able to solve the issue.
> >
> > I didn’t touch the base system which was upgraded but I did
> > downgrade Samba and dependencies (samba, smbclient,
> > libwbclient) back to v4.7.4, I then just overwrote the Samba
> > folder (/var/lib/samba) which contains private and sysvol
> > with a recent backup – and everything works again. Users can
> > log in, GPOs are being distributed. I have not yet tried to
> > upgrade again, I’ll leave this for some other day.
> >
> > samba-tool dbcheck isn’t showing any errors. samba-tool ntacl
> > sysvolcheck does complain about an incorrect db acl on a gpo
> > directory so I ran sysvolreset. The error remains but doesn’t
> > seem to bother the AD otherwise. Still, to be safe, here is
> > the error:
> >
> > $ sudo samba-tool ntacl sysvolcheck
> > ERROR(<class 'samba.provision.ProvisioningError'>):
uncaught
> > exception - ProvisioningError: DB ACL on GPO directory
> > /var/lib/samba/sysvol/samdom.example.com/Policies/{31B2F340-01
> <http://samdom.example.com/Policies/%7B31B2F340-01>
> > 6D-11D2-945F-00C04FB984F9}
> > O:LAG:DAD:P(A;OICI;0x001f01ff;;;DA)(A;OICI;0x001f01ff;;;EA)(A;
> > OICIIO;0x001f01ff;;;CO)(A;OICI;0x001f01ff;;;DA)(A;OICI;0x001f0
> > 1ff;;;SY)(A;OICI;0x001200a9;;;AU)(A;OICI;0x001200a9;;;ED)
> > does not match expected value
> > O:DAG:DAD:P(A;OICI;0x001f01ff;;;DA)(A;OICI;0x001f01ff;;;EA)(A;
> > OICIIO;0x001f01ff;;;CO)(A;OICI;0x001f01ff;;;DA)(A;OICI;0x001f0
> > 1ff;;;SY)(A;OICI;0x001200a9;;;AU)(A;OICI;0x001200a9;;;ED)
> > from GPO object
> >   File
> > "/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/samba/netcmd/__init__.py",
> > line 176, in _run
> >     return self.run(*args, **kwargs)
> >   File
> > "/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/samba/netcmd/ntacl.py",
> > line 270, in run
> >     lp)
> >   File
> >
"/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/samba/provision/__init__.py"
> > , line 1723, in checksysvolacl
> >     direct_db_access)
> >   File
> >
"/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/samba/provision/__init__.py"
> > , line 1674, in check_gpos_acl
> >     domainsid, direct_db_access)
> >   File
> >
"/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/samba/provision/__init__.py"
> > , line 1621, in check_dir_acl
> >     raise ProvisioningError('%s ACL on GPO directory %s %s
> > does not match expected value %s from GPO object' %
> > (acl_type(direct_db_access), path, fsacl_sddl, acl))
> >
> > Any advice on how to take care of this error, or can this be
> > safely ignored?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Viktor
> >
> >
> > From: Rowland Penny via samba
> > Sent: Donnerstag, 27. Dezember 2018 11:29
> > To: samba at lists.samba.org
> > Subject: Re: [Samba] After upgrade to 4.9.4, internal DNS no
> > longer working
> >
> > On Thu, 27 Dec 2018 11:07:08 +0100
> > "L.P.H. van Belle via samba" <samba at
lists.samba.org> wrote:
> >
> > > Gooood morning Rowland, :-)
> > >
> > > Your late ;-)..
> > > What i also did see, so its more clear for others also.
> > >
> > > > Dez 22 21:08:31 dc1 systemd[1]: Starting Samba AD Daemon...
> > > > Dez 22 21:08:31 dc1 kernel: audit: type=1131
> > > > audit(1545509311.984:52): pid=1 uid=0 auid=4294967295
> > > > ses=4294967295 msg='unit=samba comm="systemd"
> > > > exe="/usr/lib/systemd/systemd" hostname=? addr=?
terminal=?
> > > > res=failed' Dez 22 21:08:32 dc1 samba[733]: root
process[733]:
> > > > [2018/12/22
> > >
> > > This line:  exe="/usr/lib/systemd/systemd" hostname=?
addr=?
> > > terminal=? res=failed'
> > >
> > > So incorrect hostname/resolving resulting in this problem.
> >
> > I actually think it could be a symptom and not the root cause. It
> > could be that two main things happened, systemd was upgraded and with
> > it 'resolved' was installed and smbclient wasn't upgraded.
> >
> > I think that if 'resolved' is removed and ALL Samba packages
are
> > upgraded, he might get it to work again.
> >
> > Rowland
> >
> > --
> > 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

Hai Viktor, 
 
Yes, i did keep that in mind that it was an upgrade, that exact why im
responding. ;-)
 
If in the base  /etc/hostname, /etc/nsswitch.conf and /etc/resolv.conf or
systemd  cointains wrong settings, you might inherit these.
So it might be that a previous samba was accepting these settings, but a latest
samba not.
Or a previous systemd version accepted these and a newer not.. 
 
Setting : DNSStubListener=No in /etc/systemd/resolved.conf. 
is correct also, yes, its what you preffer, i mask the needed services. 
 
>hostname is DC1, confirmed by hostnamectl, resolv.conf has just two entries:
nameserver (own IP), and search samdom.example.com. Same as it is now, so this
all works.
Just that because it works, that does not tell you if its correct. 
 
 
I dont expect that this problem is a samba problem, because we would have seen
moch more messages.
i still say, the upgrade problem is due your setup.  ( sorry ) 
 
Now, if you going to upgrade, i suggest review you setup closely. 
And keep Rowland and my advice in mind. 
 
 
Greetz, 
 
Louis