similar to: PCs connecting via IPv4 and IPv6

# smbd -Fi -d 2 smbd version 3.5.4-62.fc13 started. Copyright Andrew Tridgell and the Samba Team 1992-2010 uid=0 gid=0 euid=0 egid=0 rlimit_max: rlimit_max (1024) below minimum Windows limit (16384) Registered MSG_REQ_POOL_USAGE Registered MSG_REQ_DMALLOC_MARK and LOG_CHANGED rlimit_max: rlimit_max (1024) below minimum Windows limit (16384) Processing section "[homes]" Processing section

Hi, At my provider (xs4all) I've got an ipv6 tunnel working. Now I would like to distribute ipv6 via the tinc tunnel. My tinc.conf: ------------ Name=server AddressFamily=ipv4 Device=/dev/net/tun PrivateKeyFile=/etc/tinc/fvhglobalnet/rsa_key.priv GraphDumpFile=|/usr/bin/dot -Tpng -o /var/www/htdocs.keetweej.vanheusden.com/stats/tinc-fvh-network-graph.png Mode=switch KeyExpire=299

Hello Samba Community, I've couple of questions regarding IPv6 link-local address support with Samba4. Is Samba4 suppose to listen on IPv6 link-local address? With following lines in smb.conf, smbd listens on IPv4 and IPv6 global address but not on IPv6 link-local address assigned on eth0. bind interfaces only = yes interfaces = lo eth0 On the same Linux box, Samba-3.5 used

On Tue, 11 Jul 2017 17:33:51 +0200 "Stefan G. Weichinger" <lists at xunil.at> wrote: > Am 2017-07-11 um 14:57 schrieb Rowland Penny: > > >> # smbclient \\\\server\\daten -Usgw%PW > >> session setup failed: NT_STATUS_UNSUCCESSFUL > > > > Restart all the Samba binaries on the DM > > > > Then check that the OS knows your user with:

On 22.05.19 15:31, L.P.H. van Belle wrote: > Hai, > > Well, good that your more relax and releaved in pressure.. > Apoligies accepted. ;-), i know the fealing but do understand, we are trying to help out.. > > As you know, it very frustration to ask the same things again, and you showing them again > But now as you showed with all the configs. It is needed.. (sorry)

Am 2017-07-11 um 14:57 schrieb Rowland Penny: >> # smbclient \\\\server\\daten -Usgw%PW >> session setup failed: NT_STATUS_UNSUCCESSFUL > > Restart all the Samba binaries on the DM > > Then check that the OS knows your user with: > > getent passwd sgw libnss_winbind was missing! Now both results are the same user-names in /etc/passwd ... rmed now I was 100%

Hai, Well, good that your more relax and releaved in pressure.. Apoligies accepted. ;-), i know the fealing but do understand, we are trying to help out.. As you know, it very frustration to ask the same things again, and you showing them again But now as you showed with all the configs. It is needed.. (sorry) So I had a quick look, and you up to some changes. All are fixable, no worries,

Hi All, I need to establish an IPSec tunnel between two FreeBSD systems, using IPv6 addresses.The connetcion is host-to-host between two FreeBSD( RELEASE 4.11) systems with KAME IPSec implementation. I tried to establish the connection, but it has some problems which are explained below. |----------------->| host1-[mohan]| |host2-[ram]

Hi All, I need to establish an IPSec tunnel between two FreeBSD systems using IPv6 addresses.The connetcion is host-to-host between two FreeBSD( RELEASE 4.11) systems with KAME IPSec implementation. |----------------->| host1-[mohan]| |host2-[ram] |<-----------------| host1 IPv6 address : fe80::2b0:d0ff:fe6f:dfa0 host2 IPv6 address :

Hi folks, I'm having the problem that my guests are most of the time not reachable via IPv6 and cant connect to IPv6 hosts, but if I ping the public IPv6-Adress of my bridge, the host can use IPv6 again. This is for incomming and outgoing traffic. I've attached my network xml file. virsh version reports this: Compiled against library: libvirt 1.2.4 Using library: libvirt 1.2.4 Using

sorry i mean dnsupdate, if i use bind9 with samba dlz dnsupdate does not work, so i have to leave it out. my problem is that i got 2 interfaces and still it 2 dual stack ip addresses, the 192.168.78.0/24 is correct. the 192.168.81.0/24 is giving 192.168.81.120 instead of 192.168.81.20. i found the whole root since "/" with grep there is no 192.168.81.120 at all. only in my router there

On 04/10/14 21:13, The Cop wrote: > > On 10/4/2014 8:46 PM, Bhasker C V wrote: >> On 04/10/14 15:36, The Cop wrote: >>> Hello, >>> >>> I am trying to assign an IPv6 address to one of my guests. I followed the >>> following guide, unsuccessfully: >>> >

Hi All, In the previous mail, I have sent is only the problem that occurs, because of using IPv6 addresses. But the connection works with IPv4 addresses without any problem. Thanx, Mohan. __________________________________________________________ How much free photo storage do you get? Store your friends 'n family snaps for FREE with Yahoo! Photos http://in.photos.yahoo.com

As you may remember I went through a classic-upgrade a few months ago. I have a second domain to migrate and I am again/still scared to attack that ;-) As I prepare my test VM and try to remember all those details the customer has purchase 2 new Windows 10 PCs and I was asked to take them into production. Is there a way to join them to the existing NT4-based Samba-domain or not? I find various

Hi all, I try to receive an ipv6 address for my PPP link via autoconf (against Cisco machine), but there is a problem I'm unable to solve so far. I can see cisco's Router-Advertisement containing prefix etc., but no IP adress is assigned to tun0 interface. Anyone succesful in IPv6 over dial-up PPP connection? When I manually assign IPv6 address, connection works. My system is

On 05/15/17 08:06, Rowland Penny via samba wrote: > On Mon, 15 May 2017 13:25:03 +0200 > "Stefan G. Weichinger via samba" <samba at lists.samba.org> wrote: > >> As you may remember I went through a classic-upgrade a few months ago. >> >> I have a second domain to migrate and I am again/still scared to >> attack that ;-) >> >> As I

On Mon, 15 May 2017 13:25:03 +0200 "Stefan G. Weichinger via samba" <samba at lists.samba.org> wrote: > > As you may remember I went through a classic-upgrade a few months ago. > > I have a second domain to migrate and I am again/still scared to > attack that ;-) > > As I prepare my test VM and try to remember all those details the > customer has

Hello, shorewall6 seem to have problems duplicating the main routing table. shorewall6 tries to add the fe80::/64 route of every ipv6 configured interface to routing table 1. The first route applies but the other ones not. If i try to add the routes manually to routing table 1 i have to add the first fe80::/64 route and append not add the other ones. does not work: ip -6 route add table 1

I have centos 6 running kvm. IPv4 works perfectly works. But I am having some problem with ipv6, looks like its bridge routing problem but stuck. here are my bridge detail: bridge name bridge id STP enabled interfaces br0 8000.000af75613f2 no eth1 vnet1 br4 8000.000af75613f0 no eth0 ip -6 route shows : unreachable ::/96 dev lo metric 1024 error -101 mtu 65536 advmss 65476 hoplimit 4294967295

On 10/5/2014 1:56 AM, Bhasker C V wrote: > On 04/10/14 21:13, The Cop wrote: >> On 10/4/2014 8:46 PM, Bhasker C V wrote: >>> On 04/10/14 15:36, The Cop wrote: >>>> Hello, >>>> >>>> I am trying to assign an IPv6 address to one of my guests. I followed the >>>> following guide, unsuccessfully: >>>> >>