Displaying 20 results from an estimated 2000 matches similar to: "Samba Internal DNS vs. BIND_DLZ"
2015 Aug 27
6
Samba Internal DNS vs. BIND_DLZ
On 08/27/2015 04:18 PM, Marc Muehlfeld wrote:
> Hello Jim,
>
> Am 27.08.2015 um 21:49 schrieb Jim Seymour:
>> BIND would be the auth nameserver for example.com and delegate
>> the samdom.example.com zone to the Samba DNS running on the second
>> (virtual) interface
>>
>> Samba is the auth nameserver for samdom.example.com
> If
2015 Aug 27
4
Samba Internal DNS vs. BIND_DLZ
On 08/27/2015 04:52 PM, Rowland Penny wrote:
> On 27/08/15 21:42, Robert Moskowitz wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 08/27/2015 04:37 PM, Rowland Penny wrote:
>>> On 27/08/15 21:23, Robert Moskowitz wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 08/27/2015 04:18 PM, Marc Muehlfeld wrote:
>>>>> Hello Jim,
>>>>>
>>>>> Am
2015 Aug 27
2
Samba Internal DNS vs. BIND_DLZ
On 08/27/2015 04:37 PM, Rowland Penny wrote:
> On 27/08/15 21:23, Robert Moskowitz wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 08/27/2015 04:18 PM, Marc Muehlfeld wrote:
>>> Hello Jim,
>>>
>>> Am 27.08.2015 um 21:49 schrieb Jim Seymour:
>>>> BIND would be the auth nameserver for example.com and delegate
>>>> the samdom.example.com zone to
2015 Aug 31
4
Samba AD PDC , LDAP and Single-Sign-On (was: re: Samba Internal DNS vs. BIND_DLZ)
On Thu, 27 Aug 2015 23:03:39 -0400
Robert Moskowitz <rgm at htt-consult.com> wrote:
>
> On 08/27/2015 08:45 PM, Jim Seymour wrote:
> > On Thu, 27 Aug 2015 17:00:28 -0400
> > Robert Moskowitz <rgm at htt-consult.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Ah, LDAP is included within Samba, I find. Don't install provided
> >> one...
[snip]
> >
>
2016 Jul 26
6
NT4-Style Auth & Roaming Profiles Only?
Hi There,
Tried a Samba AD. Didn't work out. Please do not suggest. Thanks!
Here's what we have:
Ubuntu Linux 14.04.4 LTS
Samba 4.3.9-Ubuntu
Using OpenLDAP for authentication
Using nscd to speed things up
*Not* running winbind
*Not* running Kerberos
The problem is the company purchased a product that, *despite* the
vendor being told "We don't have
2013 Jun 06
6
Best Axxium Pro, Model Series 0650?
Hi There,
We have this rather large-ish floor-standing Best Axxium Pro, Model
Series 0650.
I tried using both the "bestups" and "blazer_ser" drivers with it, but
no go. So before I go any further: *Should* one of these work with it
and, if not, do I have any options? (E.g.: Modify a current driver,
resuscitate one that was started and abandoned, etc.? I can code.)
My test
2015 Aug 27
2
Samba Internal DNS vs. BIND_DLZ
On 27/08/15 22:00, Robert Moskowitz wrote:
> Ah, LDAP is included within Samba, I find. Don't install provided one...
>
> I suppose I will have to find what schemas, particularly if the bind
> dlz schema is included?
ER, you don't actually need to add any extra schemas, it is all built
into samba4 when run as an AD DC, if you are struggling to understand
this, just think a
2015 Sep 03
3
BIND 9.9 apparmor rules with Samba
Hi
Current wiki suggestion
(https://wiki.samba.org/index.php/Configure_BIND_as_backend_for_Samba_AD#Interaction_with_AppArmor_or_SELinux)
is to add the following to /etc/apparmor.d/local/usr.sbin.named
# Samba4 DLZ and Active Directory Zones (default source installation)
/usr/local/samba/lib/** rm,
/usr/local/samba/private/dns.keytab r,
/usr/local/samba/private/named.conf r,
2015 Sep 08
3
Samba AD DC, DHCP & Address Assignments
NOTE: Please honour the "Reply-To" and do not "Reply-All". I'm reading
the mailing list. I wouldn't be posting to it if I was not and I don't
need two copies. Thanks!
On Tue, 8 Sep 2015 10:32:33 -0400
Robert Moskowitz <rgm at htt-consult.com> wrote:
>
[snip]
>
> Oops. I missed that you had missed this! When you said flat zone
> file, I took
2015 Sep 08
2
Samba AD DC, DHCP & Address Assignments
On Tue, 8 Sep 2015 09:19:22 -0400
Robert Moskowitz <rgm at htt-consult.com> wrote:
>
> On 09/08/2015 09:04 AM, Jim Seymour wrote:
>
[snip]
> >
> > And the zone file on deepthought might read something like...
> >
> > somepc IN A 192.168.0.10
[snip]
> > Problem with the AD DC is that it lives in a sub-domain,
> >
2015 Oct 08
4
Samba AD PDC , LDAP and Single-Sign-On (was: re: Samba Internal DNS vs. BIND_DLZ)
I'm very confused. I have a Samba4 AD/DC which works great for Windows
Authentication with our Windows 7 workstations.
Now, I am trying to implement single-sign-on for our coming-soon Linux workstations.
All web documentation I've so far found on this references OpenLDAP as the server
and describes server-side commands such as kadmin and slapd-config to get things
set up on the
2015 Sep 08
4
Samba AD DC, DHCP & Address Assignments
Hi All,
I should have considered this beforehand... Assumed the info would be
in the Wiki somewhere. Cannot find.
The way our LAN has been working is clients use DHCP, but all address
assignments are static. Thus, when a given PC asks "what's my
address?", the DHCP server looks at the MAC address and asks the
configured resolver what is the IP address for the hostname for that
2016 Jul 26
2
NT4-Style Auth & Roaming Profiles Only?
On Tue, 26 Jul 2016 16:09:10 +0100
Rowland penny <rpenny at samba.org> wrote:
> On 26/07/16 15:31, Jim Seymour wrote:
> > Hi There,
> >
> > Tried a Samba AD. Didn't work out. Please do not suggest.
> > Thanks!
>
> Why didn't Samba AD work, what problems did you have, it might be
> easier to fix them.
It's a long and ugly story, which
2015 Sep 03
2
samba_dlz: Failed to configure zone... already exists
Hi All,
Finally got BIND_DLZ going. Last errors were:
samba_dlz: Failed to configure zone 'example.com'
loading configuration: already exists
exiting (due to fatal error)
samba_dlz: shutting down
And, indeed, I had, in /etc/bind/named.local.conf:
zone "example.com" in {
type master;
file "named.hosts";
};
Commenting that out
2015 Sep 03
4
samba_dlz: Failed to configure zone... already exists
On Thu, 3 Sep 2015 16:18:21 +0100
Rowland Penny <rowlandpenny241155 at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 03/09/15 15:57, Jim Seymour wrote:
> > On Thu, 3 Sep 2015 15:07:37 +0100
> > Rowland Penny <rowlandpenny241155 at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > [snip]
> >> The kerberos default_realm must be the samba AD DC domain name and
> >> usually
> > So if
2015 Sep 03
3
samba_dlz: Failed to configure zone... already exists
On Thu, 3 Sep 2015 15:07:37 +0100
Rowland Penny <rowlandpenny241155 at gmail.com> wrote:
[snip]
>
> The kerberos default_realm must be the samba AD DC domain name and
> usually
So if I put the Samba AD DC in, say, "addc.example.com,"
"addc.example.com" must be the Kerberos default_realm?
> the samba DNS server (internal or bind) is just the dns
>
2016 Jul 26
2
NT4-Style Auth & Roaming Profiles Only?
On Tue, 26 Jul 2016 17:40:47 +0100
Rowland penny <rpenny at samba.org> wrote:
[snip]
>
> I remember it now, it started last September ( see here:
> https://lists.samba.org/archive/samba/2015-September/194047.html) and
> it could have been the longest running thread on here and you still
> couldn't get it to work.
More accurately: Couldn't get it to work the way
2001 Apr 20
2
Could not load host key
Hi All,
So I tried to upgrade to 2.5.2p2 today. Got this when I stopped/started
sshd:
Disabling protocol version 2. Could not load host key
Re-installed 2.3.0p1 and all was well again.
This look familiar to anybody?
Thanks,
Jim
--
Jim Seymour | PGP Public Key available at:
jseymour at jimsun.LinxNet.com | http://www.uk.pgp.net/pgpnet/pks-commands.html
2015 Aug 28
5
Samba Internal DNS vs. BIND_DLZ
Hai Jim, (and Robert, saw your last post, read this also for samba with bind9_DLZ )
i just search back in the post, and what i noticed was your first post.
http://www.tiltingatlinux.com/2014/04/basic-samba4-domain-controler-on-ubuntu.html
i went over this link ..
This setup has some faults.
sudo nano /etc/hosts
127.0.0.1 localhost
127.0.1.1 pdc.mydomain.local pdc < remove this line.
2015 Aug 28
1
Samba Internal DNS vs. BIND_DLZ
On Thu, 27 Aug 2015 17:00:28 -0400
Robert Moskowitz <rgm at htt-consult.com> wrote:
> Ah, LDAP is included within Samba, I find. Don't install provided
> one...
[remainder snipped]
Yikes!
I thought it awfully suspicious that Samba required so few additional
packages and so little "glue work" to get an AD PDC going. Now I
know why.
We *require*, not desire, but