Displaying 4 results from an estimated 4 matches for "_automagically_".
2015 May 19
4
preexec and msdfs proxy
Hi,
Thank you for you input!
We tried that already. That, however, doesn't do the same thing. It is then simply a DFS server and not the "magical" msdfs proxy - yes the user can now click on a link to get to the desired spot, but the proxy function _automagically_ sends the user, when they access the msdfs share, to the netapp's readonly share without the extra click. And it is that extra click that is our show-stopper: our users have sadly over many many years used a paricular server name in their office documents & co., of course also with lots an...
2015 May 21
1
preexec and msdfs proxy
...,
>
> Thank you for you input!
>
> We tried that already. That, however, doesn't do the same thing. It is
> then simply a DFS server and not the "magical" msdfs proxy - yes the user
> can now click on a link to get to the desired spot, but the proxy function
> _automagically_ sends the user, when they access the msdfs share, to the
> netapp's readonly share without the extra click. And it is that extra
> click that is our show-stopper: our users have sadly over many many years
> used a paricular server name in their office documents & co., of course
&g...
2015 May 21
0
preexec and msdfs proxy
...Hi,
>
> Thank you for you input!
>
> We tried that already. That, however, doesn't do the same thing. It is
> then simply a DFS server and not the "magical" msdfs proxy - yes the user
> can now click on a link to get to the desired spot, but the proxy function
> _automagically_ sends the user, when they access the msdfs share, to the
> netapp's readonly share without the extra click. And it is that extra
> click that is our show-stopper: our users have sadly over many many years
> used a paricular server name in their office documents & co., of course
&g...
2015 May 18
5
preexec and msdfs proxy
On Mon, May 18, 2015 at 03:31:55PM +0200, Greg Enlow wrote:
> Hi,
>
> The Server to which the msdfs is pointing is a netapp. Though we theoretically can access the shell on it then begin to mess around there, we would really like to avoid that. Warranty and such make it a bit of a legal issue. That is the reason we went with a separate instance in the first place and now wonder why the