similar to: redirector timeout ?

Gregory Hosler <greg@camelot.eno.ericsson.se> wrote: > Everything was running smoothly, and then I applied the solaris "y2k" patches. > Now, most accesses to samba will hang for a minute or 2, before completing. In > the event log I see messages like: > > The redirector has times out a request to <server name> > > This did not used to happen.

On Mon, 18 Jan 1999 samba@samba.org wrote: > Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1999 14:55:42 +0730 (SST) > From: Gregory Hosler <gregory.hosler@eno.ericsson.se> > To: samba@samba.org, samba-bugs@samba.org, btenison@dibbs.net > Subject: request_oplock_break - a clue - what does it mean ? > Message-ID: <XFMail.990117145542.gregory.hosler@eno.ericsson.se> > > Hi all, > > I

What is the intended implementation of "don't descend". a) treat all files that are in the "don't descend hierarchy as "no such file" (or equivelent) or b) disable opendir() on "don't descent directories", but allow (for example) stats on files that are in the "don't descend directories" I would have expected the 1st. Sambe

Hi all, I increased the log level, and found something very interesting out. I know now what causes a sbmd to go into infinite hibernation on Solaris. I do not know why, it is probably something Solaris specific, I thought that a "dont descend" would have resolved my problem, but it has not. details at the end. Scenerio: solaris 2.5.1 running samba 2.0.0 (happens w/ several if not

I found a post from a year ago which matches my current situation almost exactly, except that we are using samba 2.09. Anyone resolve this yet? Here's the previous text... *********************************** I'm running NT 4.0 Terminal Server (Service Pack 4) with Citrix MetaFrame 1.8 on a PC, and Samba 2.0.3 on an HP-UX box. We've been having occasional problems with files not

Hello, As I mentionned in a previous mail, I cannot connect to Samba 1.9.18p7 using a basic dos redirector and security set to user. I works with share security level or with the full dos redirector which takes 90 k more precious memory ... I got a answer telling me that the dos basic redirector is a piece of ... because it always encrypt the password, even if instructed to use plain text ...

CentOS Errata and Enhancement Advisory 2010:0460 Upstream details at : https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHEA-2010-0460.html The following updated files have been uploaded and are currently syncing to the mirrors: ( md5sum Filename ) x86_64: c268c72e77eb82acd082eed5b1ccf341 kmod-spice-usb-redirector-4.5-2.el5_5.x86_64.rpm 2d7522f13423c046574e79f47b3fdf2f

> It turns out that the MS Network Client for DOS Basic Redirector _always_ > sends a 24 byte password. So, I guessed at encryption, got 'libdes', > recompiled my smbd (again), found a 'spare' Silicon Graphics server and > installed Encryption on it. (ENCRYPTION.txt is very good). Yep, good guess. All encrypted passwords in SMB are 24 bytes long. The "basic

CentOS Errata and Enhancement Advisory 2010:0460 Upstream details at : https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHEA-2010-0460.html The following updated files have been uploaded and are currently syncing to the mirrors: ( md5sum Filename ) i386: 1468f8b5a570b76cf202d7890d0b5dab kmod-spice-usb-redirector-4.5-2.el5_5.i386.rpm 27073b872577aa31c7229702cd0c118c spice-usb-redirector-4.5-2.el5_5.i386.rpm

If you have the need to implement 5 asterisk boxes each one handling only 100 ulaw calls (same dialplan,etc.) logging to a six MYSQL server , what do you use in *front* of the asterisks? Codecs, hardware,etc is not important. The thing that Im trying to figure out is how do I present the asterisk servers to a bunch of phones and/or FXStoSIP boxes. a sip proxy is not the solution because the sip

Hi, I've the following error when I want to create a conditionnal redirector in samba 4 : " server complex operation 'IpValidate' not implemented  " Version : Version 4.6.7-Ubuntu Not using bind9 but Samba 4 DNS internal Must I user bind 9 ? My goal is to create un approbation between AD2016 et samba 4. Regard -- *Hervé* *HÉNOCH* *Responsable informatique* Tél. :

thubert@nv.blm.gov wrote: > > Since installing 2.0.3 on an AIX platform and using the PDC for > authentication, our BDC logs are filling up with the following error: > > "The redirector received an SMB that was too short" > > Our smb.conf is minimal in nature and we are unsure where to search for > the problems or solution. I have fixed this in the 2.0.4

Hi, I am running Samba 2.0.4b under Solaris 2.5.1 on a SPARC20. I have several NT users accessing the system and a few are getting redirect errors. Under the event viewer, NT reports "The redirector received an SMB that was too short." The errors occur upon accessing the file system. It's a new one on me and I'm not sure where to begin troubleshooting. Any ideas? Thanks.

Hi, I'm in the process of trying to convince my organization to move from an exchange server, to a samba solution, while retaining their original windows environments, including Outlook clients. I thought I had all my issues covered, and suddenly I'm facing a show stopper. it turns out that a lot of my users "documentation" has been stored on "public folders" on the

Hello, I'm new to this list. The NT folk here, are concerned about some timeout errors and stuff that appear in their event viewer. They are building a case to convince management that unless these "samba" errors are fixed, we should move to NT file shares. I think this is a bad idea. Can anyone help me out here. We are running samba 2.0.6 (1st msg) and 2.0.5a (2nd err msg)

>From nfs-admin@lists.sourceforge.net Thu Feb 1 03:51:36 2001 >Return-Path: <nfs-admin@lists.sourceforge.net> Received: from usw-sf-list1.sourceforge.net (usw-outbound.sourceforge.net [216.136.171.194]) by gateway.camelot.jp (8.9.3/8.9.3/Debian 8.9.3-21) with ESMTP id DAA11596 for <jareth@camelot.co.jp>; Thu, 1 Feb 2001 03:51:35 +0900 X-Authentication-Warning:

>From nfs-admin@lists.sourceforge.net Wed Jan 31 09:21:55 2001 >Return-Path: <nfs-admin@lists.sourceforge.net> Received: from usw-sf-list1.sourceforge.net (usw-outbound.sourceforge.net [216.136.171.194]) by gateway.camelot.jp (8.9.3/8.9.3/Debian 8.9.3-21) with ESMTP id JAA03106 for <jareth@camelot.co.jp>; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 09:21:53 +0900 X-Authentication-Warning:

While discussing unexpected timeouts on a slow (auto-restored from tape) filesystem, or on a slow network, a colleague referred me to the attached snippit of an MS manual: Has anyone tried this, and if so, was it usefull? --dave --------------- Error 3013, "The redirector has timed out to SERVERNAME" usually means that the Server that you are attempting to connect to is: Either

Hello Jeremy, > OH - that's *really* interesting ! I wonder how it is > changing the SMB3+ redirector to do this ? It looks like applications could do something and give a hint to SMB3+ redirector, so far not quite sure how to make it, per process monitor (procmon) could show that write I/O size seems could be pass from the application layers,

list: cvsuped and build world failed today on pflogd. cc -O2 -fno-strict-aliasing -pipe -Wall -Wmissing-prototypes -Wno-uninitialized -Wstrict-prototypes -I/usr/src/sbin/pfctl/../../contrib/pf/pfctl -DENABLE_ALTQ -Wsystem-headers -Werror -Wall -Wno-format-y2k -Wno-uninitialized -c /usr/src/sbin/pfctl/../../contrib/pf/pfctl/pfctl_radix.c cc -O2 -fno-strict-aliasing -pipe -Wall -Wmissing-prototypes