similar to: Server multi channel support in Samba 4.7.5

> Yes. See the following bug for missing part: > > https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11897 Well, then maybe the man page should say: " This boolean parameter controls whether smbd(8) will support SMB3 multi-channel. This parameter has been added with version 4.4. Warning: Note that this feature is considered experimental. Use it at your own risk. Even though it may seem

On Sat, 2018-02-24 at 20:42 +0000, Miguel Medalha via samba wrote: > In Samba 4.7.5, the man page for smb.conf contains the following text: > > " > This boolean parameter controls whether smbd(8) will support SMB3 > multi-channel. > > This parameter has been added with version 4.4. > > Warning: Note that this feature is

Hi all, A - I thought badlock mitigation was about encrypting SMB traffic, at least most part of it. And this encryption of most part of data transfer could (or should) lower performances. It seems I was wrong: smallest part (something like commands) are encrypted but not SMB traffic (ie file transfer). This for SMB protocol prior to SMB3 (which comes with windows 8). B - According to what I

Hi, in this thread: https://lists.samba.org/archive/samba/2019-July/224365.html Joachim Lindenberg reminded me that he was using smbclient to sync Sysvol. He posted (in the link above) a link to his original post: https://lists.samba.org/archive/samba/2019-July/224346.html Here he posted a copy of his script. I personally would never have thought about using smbclient, but it just goes to

Hello, I am using Samba version 4.2.0rc4-GIT-4701d74. When using a connection in protocol smb2 or smb3, the unix client says symlinks are not supported, for example: # mount //ip.addr/Programs ./tmp -o vers=3.0 # cd tmp # ln -s bla blub ln: failed to create symbolic link ?blub?: Operation not supported # mount //ip.addr/Programs on /mnt/tmp type cifs

On Mon, Jul 13, 2020 at 2:03 AM Rowland penny via samba < samba at lists.samba.org> wrote: > On 13/07/2020 04:29, Michael Jones via samba wrote: > > I'm trying to diagnose why my windows 10 clients can't do network > browsing. > > The network neighborhood doesn't show any of my machines running samba. > > > > Any advice? > > > Sorry, but it

Hi, I've been doing some research and testing into implementing SAMBA 4 as a AD/DC role for offering "AD as a service" to various small companies, I've been testing SAMBA out in various different configurations and wondering if SAMBA in AD/DC role if it's possible to segment in such a way some requirements: - Windows 10 support, e.g SMB3 - AD tree segmentation so that one

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, windows 7 supports smb3. If centos's samba server suport smb3, how to make windows 10 support smb3 too? Thanks! Regards Andrew At 2019-09-13 15:47:34, "John Hodrien" <J.H.Hodrien at leeds.ac.uk> wrote: >On Thu, 12 Sep 2019, me at tdiehl.org wrote: > >> Why? This is NOT necessary for win 10 to work. I do not even know if it will >> work with

ACL management can be done for SMB2/SMB3 ACLs with two common tools depending on your preference. smbcacls (somewhat similar to using cacls.exe or icacls.exe in Windows but specifying the UNC name rather than a local path name). smbcacls sets up and tears down a network connection each time it is run and uses Samba user space code. or setcifsacl/getcifsacl (which calls cifs.ko to access the

Dear all, what is about the support for POSIX ACL in Samba protocol implementation of SMB2 and SMB3? >From what I extracted from SNIA and SambaXP developer conference talks and as well as the official Samba Wiki, support for POSIX ACL in SMB2 and SMB3 has been completely abandonned. Am I right? If so, is there any other possibility to allow Linux Clients to natively access access control lists

Using Wireshark I see the protocol used as SMB2. Using a Windows workstation I tested by navigating to files and folders on my member server or to my sysvol folder on a DC. On 3/6/2015 8:56 AM, Rowland Penny wrote: > On 06/03/15 13:36, James wrote: >> Hi Marc, >> >> I'm a little confused. The values I provided for client and server >> max protocol are default

Hi, I want to use the SMB3 POSIX extensions in the latest Samba (with SMB3.1.1, vers=3.1.1). By following the user manual, I have added the "posix" mount option when mounting, but it shows the following error messages. Error messages: [xxxxx] CIFS VFS: Server does not support mounting with posix SMB3.11 extensions. [xxxxx] CIFS VFS: cifs_mount failed w/return code = -95 Mount option:

I hope that someone here can give some advice on the following: I have a Samba based Active Directory. A CentOS 7.6 machine runs as a file server and hosts the Windows user profiles for all the Windows workstations. Now management has decided that they need a Windows server for a couple of administrative applications, which need MS SQL Server. That would be the only role of this Windows.

Hi all, Quick question - does Samba server still support Unix extensions when connecting over SMB3? My Linux client recently got upgraded to a CIFS module version that uses SMB3 by default, and since then I lost the ability to create symlinks on my CIFS shares. Running "mount" shows the share mounted with the "nounix" option. If I follow the advice in dmesg and add the

Dear folks. I am using smbclient 4.2.10 version (the one packaged for OEL 6, samba4-client-4.2.10-15.el6.x86_64), and observing a weird behaviour of the tool. I've got a Linux local directorio, say /tmp/eraseme, with a couple of subdirectories in it, say a and b, each one containing a dummy file, say a/AM.xls and b/AT.xls If I run: smbclient -d 30 -l /var/log/samba -m SMB3 -W

I have to add noise: Provisioning a DC with sernet 4.1.x called NT1 as max default with me. Am 6. M?rz 2015 18:28:55 MEZ, schrieb James <lingpanda101 at gmail.com>: >OK. Now I'm really confused. I was not aware of two 'testparm' >commands. >Running 'testparm -v' shows correct default values. So whats the >difference? > > >On 3/6/2015 12:20 PM,

On 06/03/15 17:05, Marc Muehlfeld wrote: > Am 06.03.2015 um 14:56 schrieb Rowland Penny: >>> From 'samba-tool testparm -v' : >>> >>> server max protocol = NT1 >>> >>> BUT 'man smb.conf' says this : >>> >>> Default: server max protocol = SMB3 >>> >>> OK, one of these is wrong, but which ??? > If

On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 01:08:31PM -0800, Jeremy Allison wrote: > On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 10:05:44PM +0100, Markus Doits wrote: > > > > On 23.01.15 19:57, Miguel Medalha wrote: > > > I am using Samba 4.1.16 with smb2/3 and symbolic links are working alright. > > > > > > Following the smb.conf man page, I use: > > > > > > unix extensions

Hi Marc, I'm a little confused. The values I provided for client and server max protocol are default values. At least according to the command 'samba-tool testparm -v'. I have not explicitly set them in my smb.conf file. I assume SMB3 became the default at some point with a release? I'm worried now that I must make explicit changes to my smb.conf file when default values are