similar to: Perf enhancements in Samba4.1 related to SMB2.1 / SMB3.0 protocol

hi Michael, Sorry for taking so long to reply, I just get back on vacation. Your advice is very helpful. Our purpose is no IO interrupted with Window 7 cifs client accessing the shared folder when virtual IP taken over by another node. SMB3.0 or newer protocol do meet that demand, but Window 7 cifs client only supports SMB2.1 protocol and previous versions. So we need implement a

hi Michael： We want to implement the ‘persistent handle’ function under Windows 7(SMB 2.1), which has only local ‘durable handle’. For now my plan is just to synchronize the following files between cluster nodes: smbXsrv_open_global.tdb.0 smbXsrv_session_global.tdb.0 smbXsrv_tcon_global.tdb.0 locking.tdb.0 It probably won’t be completed, so I’m writing to ask for your advice. Any help would be

Hi All: I am an newcomer,I have a question that the lastest version of samba can suport the SMB3.0 ? Can suport SMB3.0's persistent File Handles feature? I am test the SMB3.0 Transparent Failover in winserver 2012. Docs says that Failover need client and server all surport SMB3.0. Can I user samba instead of SMB server? Thanks Jiademing

We have a project about Microsoft Hyper-V by using our storage. We want to use Samba to share our storage to Hyper-V. And we know from Microsoft homepage hyper-v(windows 2012) only support smb3.0 protocol, but right now the newest version of Samba don?t? fully support SMB3.0 protocol. I tried the version of Samba4.0.6, Samba3.6.9, but both failed to create virtual hosts using Hyper-V.

Hi, I bet this question was asked several times, but I'm honestly not able to find a solution. My samba4.1 (running on FreeBSD10) is part of a larger network/AD where I only have very restricted rights. Our network consists of a "toplevel" AD-Domain (top.foo.bar) and several "subdomains" (in my case: sub1.top.foo.bar), which have their own domaincontrollers (MS Windows

Trying to get a linux samba file server using samba 4.0.3 (compiled on the machine) running on ubuntu 3.8rc6 kernel to share out and negotiate with a linux client running the same kernel and smbd compiled from 4.0.3 samba source. Using wireshark to view the negotiations, I only see NT LM 0.12 (SMB v. 1). Tried forcing the file server via "min protocol = SMB2" in the

Hi all, Behavior described in this email is identical whether I try to mount at 192.168.100.2, my desktop and location of my Samba server, or 192.168.100.239, my laptop that is remote from my desktop with Samba server... I want to mount a share defined on my Linux desktop, on my Linux laptop, as a better alternative than sshfs or NFS. I want this mount to happen as version 2.x or 3.x, not as

Hi All, I have a recvfile patch for samba4.1. This patch is working with linux client, But if am trying this with windows client am getting following error in my server. " Unexpected RPC Fragment size! (0)" In client side am getting "Remote procedure call failed and did not execute" And the samba share not mounted. So far i tried regedit with Lanman workstation

Sorry for a rather 'unifornative' subject, but i've little o no clue on this. I'm using at work 'pam_mount' with a rather standard configuration to mount via CIFS/SMB user's home directory, from a samba AD member server. This configuration is a bit 'old' (mint sonya, AKA Ubuntu 16.04 as a client, so samba 4.3; debian and samba 4.8 as a server), but work

Thanks for the reply. I was checking this with several IT professionals and the consensus was that it should never be exposed over the internet (even SMB3.0) and they all recommended to use it over SSH or VPN. A couple of people said there are more security professionals venting/using/supporting SSH which is why they recommend using that. I was just wondering, would this just be the leftover

Dear Samba team In my lab: Windows XP/7/8 joined Samba4.1 AD DC OK! I don't change any password policy (all are default!) But when users logged on sucessfully, they *pressed ctrl + alt + del* in order to change their passwords (new password included over 8 characters, complexity...), but they failed I also read this link: https://lists.samba.org/archive/samba/2010-September/158171.html

Hi All, My doubts are for Samba4.1 performance related enhancements.Following is the comparison result samba 3.6.8 + samba4.1.3. Following number is robocopy 2 flow result. 3.6.8 Read/Write (speed MB/sec) : 210/*202* 4.1 Read/Write: (speed MB/sec) : 220/*192* In case of read am getting better throughput for samba 4.1 but write always less. How can i improve the write throughput? Am not

Recently, i scanned my samba4.1 server by Nessus (a vulnerability scanner tool - http://www.tenable.com/products/nessus) Nessus says that Samba4 is vulnerable to "LDAP NULL BASE Search Access" as "The remote LDAP server may disclose sensitive information." Further it says that - The remote LDAP server supports search requests with a null, or empty, base object. This allows

At the risk of having my inbox flooded with another 10,000 Emails from "Microsoft" proporting the "latest security update".. Now that smb3.0 is out and about, I'd really like to use it for authenticating windows users / PDC (With BDC in the plans) My problem is that there seems to be little to zero up to date documentation on how to integrate Samba and LDAP, the most I

I want to have SMB server to authenticate all my users. Problem is that I have 8 Win98SE workstations and 2 XP Home laptops. I know XP Home won't do domain log-ons. What are my options (I would realy hate giving M$ more money by upgrading laptops to PRO)? How can I do user based log-ins in that kind of environment? Thanks, Apollo

I need a client for Solaris 10 u11 that will allow me to mount encrypted shares located on a EMC VNXe3200 Thank you for your time ! Charles Corpany Charles.Corpany at ngc.com<mailto:Charles.Corpany at ngc.com> Information Systems Sector, Civil Division - VITA Program Northrop Grumman Corporation Virginia Department of Health Datacenter James Madison Bld, Upper Basement, UB20E 109

Hi, I am running samba-4.1.4 on my Fedora OS. I have provided the "client max protocol = SMB3" and "server max protocol = SMB3" parameters in smb.conf file I'm able to get only SMB2.1 packets using wireshark after fileshare access from my windows 7 machine. And not SMB3 packets. SMB2->NegotiateProtocol Response 0x0202 0x0210 Samba-4.1.4 is supporting SMB3 also. So

Hi, I am trying to figure out what features in terms of protocols (SMB/CIFS, SMB2, SMB2.1, SMB3) a client uses when being connected to a Samba server (v4.1.17). Is there any tool like smbstatus that shows which protocol version (and possibly which features) a client is using in a connection? (Feature in the sense of 'using encryption' for example). Thanks, Adi

On 2016-09-28 at 12:50 +0000, Weidong wrote: > hi Michael： Hi Weidong, Thank you for your message! > We want to implement the ‘persistent handle’ function under > Windows 7(SMB 2.1), which has only local ‘durable handle’. Hmm. As you say: Windows 7 / SMB 2.1 does _not_ support presistent handles. This requires SMB 3.0 or newer. Windows 7 supports durable handles, which is already

> > Unless you upload a network capture of you mounting and doing the ls -lR > on the client it's hard to say what really goes on. I understand you > might not want to make it public.. but if you do > This is the last thing I'll try after I've exhausted all the other options. How are you mounting your share (which mount options)? > Something weird is going on with