similar to: Which version do I need for SMB2?

Andreas, On Thu, Aug 24, 2017 at 03:37:07PM +0200, awl1 via samba wrote: > Before I follow your advice to move this whole issue/topic to the > samba-technical alias and start over there with a clean description of the > scenario and the findings, I have two simple questions: > > 1) I plan to use a new, reproducible test scenario with 2000 random small > files with a file length

Hi everyone, I'm having the following situation: I need to migrate all SMB file services to a new appliance that only supports the SMB2+ protocol. Unfortunately, there are still some very old Linux clients ("modinfo cifs" says version 1.60) that do only speak SMB1 and need to access these shares after the migration. Is it possible to have a Linux with a modern Samba

I have a classic NT4 domain with the PDC also the wins server. With the recent ransomware problem, we're trying to remove SMB1 and below protocols. However when I do this, the browse list is gone. Hosts can access properly the shares, but they have to know exactly \\machine\share in order to to connect. The same thing from a linux client: smbclient -L {PDC} -m SMB2 Domain=[{MYDOMAIN}]

Hi Samba list! I was very excited that SMB2 is finally working with samba 3.6.0 - great job!! I just know that SMB2 has a smaller command set compared to SMB1 and this, beside many other rebuilds of the code makes it faster As I am completely new to the file transfer protocol world, I want to ask a few basic things: - is Samba backward compatible ... xp can't use SMB2 as far as I

Hi all, At the moment we are running Debian squeeze with stock samba 3.5.6. and are testing some new samba installations from ubuntu 12.04, centos 6.4 and debian wheezy. All running in a VM on a XenServer. The samba servers are member of a 2008R2 domain, using smb1 protocol all are running fine and we get a constant 90MB/s (big file transfer) on our 1GB network. We would like to enable smb2

Hi forks: I've been testing SMB2 with samba 3.6.4 performance these days, and I find a weird benchmark that SMB2 write performance is slower than SMB1 in 10Gb ethernet network. Server ----------------------- Linux: Redhat Enterprise 6.1 x64 Kernel: 2.6.31 x86_64 Samba: 3.6.4 (almost using the default configuration) Network: Chelsio T4 T420-SO-CR 10GbE network adapter RAID: Adaptec 51645 RAID

We have a 10G network with a mix of Windows 10 and MacOS 10.12 machines, and a CentOS 7 machine. Copying large files "fast" from the CentOS machine to Windows, using SMB2 or SMB3 fails almost every time, at the end of the copy. - With SMB1, it seems to work, but is much slower. - Copying to a smb share on a Mac seems to work, but is also much slower. - Using a normal Gigabit network

Hi, I'm using libsmbclient library built from source3 directory of samba-3.6.7. When I connect to a vista/2008 server using this libsmbclient library, communication is happening in SMB1 protocol and NOT in SMB2. Please note that I've enabled SMB2 by adding following line to smb.conf max protocol = SMB2 Does libsmbclient library built from source3 directory of samba-3.6.7 supports SMB2?

Hello, This is situation: * [netApps SMB-server] [RHEL-7.1-Client]* | =SMB 2/3= | | sending data>65k Fail | sending data<65k Passes Max Write/Read Size[65535]

hi All, We have a glusterfs cluster with 5 nodes on Ubuntu 12.04 amd64. We use this smb.conf: [global] socket options = IPTOS_THROUGHPUT TCP_NODELAY IPTOS_LOWDELAY SO_SNDBUF=131072 SO_RCVBUF=131072 read raw = yes server string = %h write raw = yes #oplocks = yes max xmit = 131072 dead time = 15 getwd cache = yes use sendfile=yes block size = 131072 load printers = no aio read size

Hello, Thank you ! I add server min protocol = SMB2_02 to smb.cnf All clients are now using SMB2_10 as minimum protocol version May you indicate me the difference between "client min protocol" and "server min protocol" ? "server min protocol" is to use on a domain member "client min protocol" is to use in which case ? Should I also set client min

Hi Samba Users, I'm in the process of building a Samba4 CTDB /GPFS Cluster joined as a member server to AD that also supports ACL's . It has taken some time but almost everything is working now :) . My one outstanding issue is editing files using Excel 2007 on Windows 7 results in a 'Document not saved' error. I believe this is an issue with the SMB2 protocol as I can edit the same

>> - smbclient [no -m option] is OK and slow (uses default SMB1/NT1?) >> - mount.cifs -o vers=1.0 is OK and slow >> - smbclient -m SMB2 (or -m SMB3) fails > The above is the interesting case, as this is much > easier to debug (in user space) than the kernel > client. > > Can you give more details on *exactly* HOW smbclient -mSMB3 > fails ? This is really

Hi Jeremy, Hi Steve, Hi Ronnie, thanks for your replies and the profound discussion. I think, it's best to demonstrate my problem case along an real world example: The following log of a console sesssion shows how I am doing the mounts on behalf Linux Kernel CIFS-FS Module on the client side against a Samba 4.5 file server (both running on Debian Stretch 9.8) via SMB/CIFS resp. SMB2 protocol:

Hi We've got drbd going between 2 nodes:) ATM there is un-partitioned space on each node but (we think) they are syncing OK. It looks as though it has synced the whole partition (2GB) from the primary node 1 to the other node: node 1 smb1:/home/steve # cat /proc/drbd version: 8.4.4 (api:1/proto:86-101) GIT-hash: 3c1f46cb19993f98b22fdf7e18958c21ad75176d build by SuSE Build Service 1:

Hi Team, Workaround for CVE-2017-12151 :- client max protocol = NT1 and CVE-2017-12163 :- server min protocol = SMB2_02 are contradicting to each other. CVE-2017-12151 impacts on SMB3 protocol but workaound suggst to use NT1. I have below queries regarding this. Is SMB2 protocol also impacted by CVE-2017-12151 ? Can i use client max protocol = SMB2 so that it does not contradict with

I conducted many tests and I noticed that I lose the domain-join on SMB1 soon as I joined SMB2 in the domain. Step 1: SMB1 "net ads join -Uadministrator" -> OK Step 2: SMB1 "net ads testjoin" -> OK Step 3: SMB2 "net ads join -Uadministrator" -> OK Step 4: SMB2 "net ads testjoin" -> OK Step 5: SMB1 "net ads testjoin" ->

Hello, I currently run samba with server min protocol = NT1 but I need to move towards server min protocol = SMB2 is there any way I can detect which clients still use the older protocol versions? I would like to estimate the impact of the change before i do close NT1/SMB1. Thank and kind regards, Heiner Billich

Hai, ... > > As I said, where is the fault, is it something that Windows 10 is or > isn't doing, or is it Samba ? > > Well, we cannot change Windows, so on that basis, I think you should > make a Samba bug report and let it work through the system. > > Rowland Well, yes, we can change windows, by allowing/disallowing SMB1. Which might help in detecting whats

Hi again, Jeremy, and hi to all commercial customers of Samba supporting companies on this list, ;-) Am 18.08.2017 um 20:18 schrieb Jeremy Allison: > What I mean is what you're asking is interesting, and I might get time > to look at this, but I can't give any guarentees. Work priorities and > any security issues always have to come first. If people *need* a > guaranteed