search for: bridgeheads

...9;t aware of this. Thank you for the info. If I was to delete the >> incorrect respsFrom/repsTo attributes, wouldn't the KCC just >> regenerate them over time once the KCC check and ISTG check kicked in? > > As long as the topology doesn't change or DCs which are not > bridgeheads do not go offline, there should be basically zero > additional reps over time. How often they build up over time is an > open question (when DCs do go offline), I can't test every setup and > I'm sure there are edge cases. However if there are these additional > links for wh...

Hi Louis, Move up to 4.7 is planned soon but I'm little scared to update bridgehead if it actually had performance problem. I would like to fix all problem before updating. My smb.conf is really simple: [global] workgroup = PR realm = pr.educationetformation.fr netbios name = DC000 server role = active directory domain controller bind interfaces only

Hi everybody ! I am encountering performance problem on my bridgehead DC. I have 19 DC (Debian Stretch / Samba 4.6.7 from Tranquil.it repo) and they all synchronized on a main bridgehead DC. This performance problem first appears when the bridgehead DC was on Debian Jessie and kernel was updated with meltdown/spectre patch from Debian (3.16.51-3+deb8u1) I added "nopti" option to grub

Jessie also has the problem, even before the meltdown patches. The kernel 3.16.x had ksoftirqd probems, eating up cpu cicles. Make sure you use kernel 4.9.0-6 And i suggest move up to samba 4.7.x or 4.7.4 from debian/buster, Or use my 4.6.12/4.7.6 packages for stretch, or ask if Tranquil.it can make them. The 4.6.14 is still in the make atm for stretch, 4.6.14 for jessie is done. And last,

On 9/24/2016 7:32 AM, Denis Cardon wrote: > > the job of the samba_kcc script is to create the ntdsConnection > objects. Afterward the repsFrom/repsTo attribute are created in > accordance with the ntdsConnection objects (you can force the creation > using samba-tool drs replicate although). You can check that the > process is asynchronous when you join a new DC, the INBOUND

On Thu, 17 May 2018 18:01:48 -0300 Carlos <carlos.hollow at gmail.com> wrote: > I dont have DC4... > But, i shutdown DC1(manutenção) > i created user in DC2, this user doesn't exist in DC3, never > replication... is not problem? > > Regards... > > On 17-05-2018 17:49, Rowland Penny wrote: > > On Thu, 17 May 2018 17:37:28 -0300 > > Carlos

On 23/09/16 00:59, lingpanda101 at gmail.com wrote: > For clarification I'll add a few things. > > I initially deleted all the NTDS site links for each site and allowed > the new KCC to create them. However it did not create them I believe > correctly. By that I mean it defined what appeared to be a bridgehead > server at each site. So I disabled the new KCC >

Everyone, Progress was slow today. I started out well, but then I ran into Documentation.htm. Progress slowed considerably, as I analyzed the document structure. I''m up to /etc/shorewall/hosts Configuration. I hope to finish Documentation.xml by tomorrow evening. Converted documents: 6to4.xml CorpNetwork.xml FAQ.xml Please post feedback, if you see any problems with the converted

On 9/21/2016 11:32 PM, Garming Sam wrote: > I would have assumed that deleting all the NTDS connections for all the > DCs would have remedied this issue. I'll write a patch to try to avoid > this error in any case. > > Ignoring this error and answering your earlier question, it's often hard > to tell if the KCC is doing what is expected or not. To figure that out, >

> > Wasn't aware of this. Thank you for the info. If I was to delete the > incorrect respsFrom/repsTo attributes, wouldn't the KCC just > regenerate them over time once the KCC check and ISTG check kicked in? As long as the topology doesn't change or DCs which are not bridgeheads do not go offline, there should be basically zero additional reps over time. How often they build up over time is an open question (when DCs do go offline), I can't test every setup and I'm sure there are edge cases. However if there are these additional links for when you have spurious...

Thank  very much you for the explanations!! I'm sorry for one more question... What is wrong in DCs in mode " full mesh topology" ? I don't understand why not... Regards; On 17-05-2018 18:30, Rowland Penny wrote: > On Thu, 17 May 2018 18:01:48 -0300 > Carlos <carlos.hollow at gmail.com> wrote: > >> I dont have DC4... >> But, i shutdown DC1(manutenção)

On Thu, 17 May 2018 17:37:28 -0300 Carlos <carlos.hollow at gmail.com> wrote: > Matriz site Filial site > DC1 -------(OPENVPN)-------- DC3 > | > | > DC2 > > DC1 -> DC2 = OK > DC1 -> DC3 = OK > > DC2 -> DC1 = OK > DC2 -> DC3 = NO > > DC3 -> DC1 = OK > DC3 -> DC2 =

On Mon, Jul 20, 2020 at 08:24:45PM -0700, Peter Moody wrote: > I wrote something a lot like this when I was at uber > > https://github.com/pmoody-/pam-ussh > > (the uber version is here: https://github.com/uber/pam-ussh) Needing PAM auth via ssh-agent is not so uncommon and yet using sshd is not necessarily the first (or best) solution to come to mind. Having it available as

On 9/22/2016 6:31 PM, Garming Sam wrote: > On 23/09/16 00:59, lingpanda101 at gmail.com wrote: >> For clarification I'll add a few things. >> >> I initially deleted all the NTDS site links for each site and allowed >> the new KCC to create them. However it did not create them I believe >> correctly. By that I mean it defined what appeared to be a bridgehead

Hi everybody, I'm playing with the new Improved KCC of samba 4.3.X Here is my network's topology : - DC : smb4dc located on Default-First-site-Name - DC : dc110 located on PetitQuevilly - DC : dc113 located on SaintEtienne - DC : dc120 located on Barentin - Etc.... (total of 15 DC) I want smb4dc acting as a bridge head for all others

On 2016-09-24 06:53, lingpanda101 at gmail.com wrote: > On 9/22/2016 6:31 PM, Garming Sam wrote: >> On 23/09/16 00:59, lingpanda101 at gmail.com wrote: >>> For clarification I'll add a few things. >>> >>> I initially deleted all the NTDS site links for each site and allowed >>> the new KCC to create them. However it did not create them I believe

Hi, James, yes, I set up sites through the sites and services tool. It's not that it's fully connected replication, but that the RepsTo attribute, under equal conditions with windows, is not filled on the samba side, which in turn entails that the outbound neighbors are not displayed on the samba side . But let me clarify that I even made each server (there is only one in each site) a

Adam, When you have one DC in a site, the sole DC automatically considers itself a bridgehead server to other DC?s once the site links have been setup. Should be no need to manually configure this. I see you have NTDS connections for WIN2019-2 and Samba on each DC. In theory you shouldn?t be having an issue with no outbound neighbors. What I would do is delete the automatically generated

Hi Adam, I reviewed your images but those don?t appear to be from the Microsoft tool Active Directory Sites and Services. Have you used this tool specifically to configure your sites? Can you attach images from this tool on how you configured your sites? Specifically, the NTDS settings and subnets? -James From: Adam Abramson <abramsona30 at gmail.com> Sent: Friday, October 11,

OK, I'm sending a screenshot specifically from win2019-2 . Looking at all the connections, they are of course displayed https://ibb.co/Qbz3PZz On Fri, Oct 11, 2024 at 5:36?PM James Atwell via samba < samba at lists.samba.org> wrote: > Thanks for the images, however I need to see your NTDS settings for server > WIN2019-2. If you open this, you should see automatically generated