Hi, I'm curious about this remark on the wiki[1] : "do NOT use NONE as the DNS backend, it is not supported and will be removed in a future Samba version." Why is this being removed? I would prefer to manually add the records that would be generated by BIND9_FLATFILE to my domain's zone file. We have automation that controls records in the domain's zone file that I would prefer to keep as is if possible. Thanks, Andy [1] https://wiki.samba.org/index.php/Setting_up_Samba_as_an_Active_Directory_Domain_Controller -- http://www.uplevelsystems.com <http://www.uplevelsystems.com>
On 28/08/2019 19:49, Andy Strohman via samba wrote:> Hi, > > I'm curious about this remark on the wiki[1] : > "do NOT use NONE as the DNS backend, it is not supported and will be > removed in a future Samba version." > > Why is this being removed? > > I would prefer to manually add the records that would be generated by > BIND9_FLATFILE to my domain's zone file. We have automation that controls > records in the domain's zone file that I would prefer to keep as is if > possible. > > Thanks, > > Andy > > [1] > https://wiki.samba.org/index.php/Setting_up_Samba_as_an_Active_Directory_Domain_Controller >The DC has to be the dns server, this means that you have to use the internal dns server or BIND_DLZ, nothing else. Rowland
On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 11:57 AM Rowland penny via samba < samba at lists.samba.org> wrote:> On 28/08/2019 19:49, Andy Strohman via samba wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I'm curious about this remark on the wiki[1] : > > "do NOT use NONE as the DNS backend, it is not supported and will be > > removed in a future Samba version." > > > > Why is this being removed? > > > > I would prefer to manually add the records that would be generated by > > BIND9_FLATFILE to my domain's zone file. We have automation that > controls > > records in the domain's zone file that I would prefer to keep as is if > > possible. > > > > Thanks, > > > > Andy > > > > [1] > > > https://wiki.samba.org/index.php/Setting_up_Samba_as_an_Active_Directory_Domain_Controller > > > The DC has to be the dns server, this means that you have to use the > internal dns server or BIND_DLZ, nothing else. >Thanks for the response Rowland. Could you please go into more detail on why this is?> > Rowland > > > > -- > To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the > instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba >-- http://www.uplevelsystems.com <http://www.uplevelsystems.com>
On Wed, 2019-08-28 at 11:49 -0700, Andy Strohman via samba wrote:> Hi, > > I'm curious about this remark on the wiki[1] : > "do NOT use NONE as the DNS backend, it is not supported and will be > removed in a future Samba version." > > Why is this being removed? > > I would prefer to manually add the records that would be generated by > BIND9_FLATFILE to my domain's zone file. We have automation that controls > records in the domain's zone file that I would prefer to keep as is if > possible.Honestly, because we have two many 'supported' modes of operation already. We will likely keep NONE around for the join as it helps work around some of these domain join issues (but someone still has to pull in the partition manually later and get the records for the DC going). But the work we do to set up DNS in the domain during the join by default needs in-directory DNS, and that in turn is what makes a Samba domain join much more robust than a Windows AD join, we don't want to present the awful options as equal to the THINGS THAT WILL JUST WORK. We know that there are some, for whom Samba is that great flexible tool that can be carefully tuned into a very specific place, that also lead Samba's file server to have so many combinations it is incredibly difficult to maintain and is overwhelming for many users (see eg that user who asked for 'something simpler' recently. We are not good as removing things, but the first step is those warnings, eg in the wiki and 4.11 release notes. I'm still trying to get rid of the code to support an abandoned OpenLDAP backend that I stopped working on a decade ago! (this is more complex, there is a proposal to revive, but I'm making a rhetorical point) I trust this clarifies. It isn't personal, just trade-offs. 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