search for: samba_internal_dns_back_end

...DHCP to update DNS (Bind9) which worked great for hostnames (reported from clients) and IP addresses (allocated from DHCP server). I've read through these wiki's but cannot determine how to choose. https://wiki.samba.org/index.php/BIND9_DLZ_DNS_Back_End https://wiki.samba.org/index.php/Samba_Internal_DNS_Back_End https://wiki.samba.org/index.php/Configure_DHCP_to_update_DNS_records_with_BIND9 My questions are: 1) Which DNS implementation should I use? 2) Will I be able to have the non-AD devices register their hostnames and IP addresses in the same domain that Samba AD is using? (mine will be the reco...

Hi, We are in the process of migrating our samba AD (4.1.0pre1-GIT-6be458d) to the latest 4.7.0 release. In the process we want to switch from the BIND_DLZ to the internal dns server. I have done some experiments in our test environment and everything seems to work ok, but I'm not sure how to handle the dns backend change. Is it just the case of running samba_upgradedns

...more to it? >> >> Any advice would be appreciated. >> >> Regards >> >> Lukasz >> >> > A little bit more. See > https://wiki.samba.org/index.php/Changing_the_DNS_Back_End_of_a_Samba_AD_DC > > Also see here https://wiki.samba.org/index.php/Samba_Internal_DNS_Back_End > Hi James Thanks for the links. I have already looked at those but wanted to double check if there is anything else that I might need to do. Regards Lukasz

> > The internal DNS is NOT supporting round robin. As Rowland said use Bind9 > That's news to me! If so, then the internal DNS backed is not suitable for multiple DC's. (Though, I could've sworn it worked on versions 4.2+ < 4.7. It's on my to-do list to explore this further with different versions.)

Hi, I see https://wiki.samba.org/index.php/Samba_Internal_DNS_Back_End#Limitations The internal DNS does not support: * acting as a caching resolver * recursive queries * shared-key transaction signature (TSIG) * stub zones * zone transfers * Round Robin load balancing among DC's but this was relevant for 2018-2019. What limitations remain now? For...

..._tcp.Default-First-Site-Name._sites.ForestDnsZones.lfa.ls plfa1.lfa.ls 389 (add) Successfully obtained Kerberos ticket to DNS/plfa1.lfa.ls as PLFA1$ Failed nsupdate: 2 Failed update of 29 entries ########################################################## The wiki (https://wiki.samba.org/index.php/Samba_Internal_DNS_Back_End) says that the internal dns of samba does not support shared-key transaction signature (TSIG) To be honest, I don't know if TSIG is related to my problem. Would be really happy about an answer .... and .... many thanks, blubberbaer

...h worked great for hostnames (reported from clients) > and IP addresses (allocated from DHCP server). > > I've read through these wiki's but cannot determine how to choose. > > https://wiki.samba.org/index.php/BIND9_DLZ_DNS_Back_End > > https://wiki.samba.org/index.php/Samba_Internal_DNS_Back_End > > https://wiki.samba.org/index.php/Configure_DHCP_to_update_DNS_records_with_BIND9 > > > My questions are: > > 1) Which DNS implementation should I use? > > 2) Will I be able to have the non-AD devices register their hostnames > and IP addresses in the same domain...

...ch worked great for hostnames (reported from > clients) and IP addresses (allocated from DHCP server). > > I've read through these wiki's but cannot determine how to choose. > > https://wiki.samba.org/index.php/BIND9_DLZ_DNS_Back_End > > https://wiki.samba.org/index.php/Samba_Internal_DNS_Back_End > > https://wiki.samba.org/index.php/Configure_DHCP_to_update_DNS_records_with_BIND9 > >My questions are: > > 1) Which DNS implementation should I use? if you have a domain with more than a few dozen boxes, you definitly should go with Bind-DLZ. Bind-DLZ samba module integration...

...(reported from >> clients) and IP addresses (allocated from DHCP server). >> >> I've read through these wiki's but cannot determine how to choose. >> >> https://wiki.samba.org/index.php/BIND9_DLZ_DNS_Back_End >> >> https://wiki.samba.org/index.php/Samba_Internal_DNS_Back_End >> >> https://wiki.samba.org/index.php/Configure_DHCP_to_update_DNS_records_with_BIND9 >> >> >> My questions are: >> >> 1) Which DNS implementation should I use? >> >> 2) Will I be able to have the non-AD devices register their hostnames >&...

On 5/1/24 17:51, Peter Carlson via samba wrote: > > On 5/1/24 17:32, Peter Carlson via samba wrote: >> >>>>>> In an ideal world, the Samba dns server (be it the internal or >>>>>> Bind9) should just be responsible for the AD domain and forward >>>>>> anything unknown to another dns server (which is how dns servers

...s (reported from >> clients) and IP addresses (allocated from DHCP server). >> >> I've read through these wiki's but cannot determine how to choose. >> >> https://wiki.samba.org/index.php/BIND9_DLZ_DNS_Back_End >> >> https://wiki.samba.org/index.php/Samba_Internal_DNS_Back_End >> >> https://wiki.samba.org/index.php/Configure_DHCP_to_update_DNS_records_with_BIND9 >> >> >> My questions are: >> >> 1) Which DNS implementation should I use? > > if you have a domain with more than a few dozen boxes, you definitly > should go...

I am planning up upgrading my AD/DC from Samba version 4.8.2 to the most recent version in my Slackware distro which is currently 4.15.13. In previous threads in this maillist I was advised that the best route to achieve this was to add a 2nd domain controller, then promote that one and demote the original. I'm in the process of setting up a 2nd DC to that end. I thought I ask questions as I