similar to: Samba-4.8.5 and SCCM-5.0 Problem Extending the Schema

G'day All, I'm running up Samba4.2.3 with 4 DCs on Centos7. There are no changes to the default smb.conf file that gets created at provision/DC join. "samba-tool drs showrepl" show all DC replicating in and out. "samba-tool dbcheck" shows no errors. See below for named.conf. I'm having two issues. 1) After bind first starts up

G'day All, I've been setting up a new set of DCs, using 4.2.3 and all was going well until I tried to get a 4th DC going. I'm using bind_DLZ, and I think this is where I went wrong. I provisioned the new DC before having set up bind properly (I forgot to "yum install bind bind-util bind-libs") before hand. The provision worked okay, except that it told me

On 27/10/15 03:57, David Minard wrote: > G'day All, > > I'm running up Samba4.2.3 with 4 DCs on Centos7. There are no > changes to the default smb.conf file that gets created at provision/DC > join. "samba-tool drs showrepl" show all DC replicating in and out. > "samba-tool dbcheck" shows no errors. > > See below for named.conf.

Hi , Thank you for your input. I have had tried all of the escape characters you have have tested with but I have had no luck with them. I am curious to know which versions of net have you been tested with? I do agree that the best practice for this is to remove "-" from the beginning of the object name, However, seeing that it can be created that way allowed, I would like to find a

Thanks Carlos, The thing is, that I did not upgrade the version of Samba - that is the next step, so the ports used would not have changed. I only updated the OS. > On 21/03/2018, at 10:04 PM, Carlos Alberto Panozzo Cunha <carlos.hollow at gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi, > I have same problem after update for samba. > I allow new ports in firewall. > >

G'day All, I have 4 DCs on Centos 7.1. Everything was working really well for years, including replication. Then I decided that the OS needed updating. Did the yum update on one of the DCs, rebooted. That server is now running Centos 7.4. Samba seemed to start okay. However, samba-tool drs showrepl gives this error on all 3 of the other DCs, and shows success on the updated DC.

On 24/03/18 01:35, lingpanda101 wrote: > On 3/22/2018 8:06 PM, David Minard wrote: >> G'day All, >> >>     Will replay to all messages so far in this one to keep it all >> together. >> >> On 21/03/18 22:52, lingpanda101 wrote: >>> On 3/21/2018 7:32 AM, David Minard via samba wrote: >>>> Thanks Carlos, >>>>

G'day Guys, Sorry for the delay. I've had the log level of samba at 5 for a while now. Nothing interesting seems to be coming from the samba log. Increasing the bind logs, to level 5, shows nothing different. I get the same two warnings: 09-Oct-2015 12:46:01.421 database: warning: samba_dlz: Ignoring duplicate zone 'samba4.scem.westernsydney.edu.au' from

G'day All, Will replay to all messages so far in this one to keep it all together. On 21/03/18 22:52, lingpanda101 wrote: > On 3/21/2018 7:32 AM, David Minard via samba wrote: >> Thanks Carlos, >> >> The thing is, that I did not upgrade the version of Samba - that is >> the next step, so the ports used would not have changed. I only >> updated the OS.

On 27/10/15 03:57, David Minard wrote: > G'day All, > > I'm running up Samba4.2.3 with 4 DCs on Centos7. There are no > changes to the default smb.conf file that gets created at provision/DC > join. "samba-tool drs showrepl" show all DC replicating in and out. > "samba-tool dbcheck" shows no errors. > > See below for named.conf.

On 3/25/2018 8:54 PM, David Minard wrote: > > > On 24/03/18 01:35, lingpanda101 wrote: >> On 3/22/2018 8:06 PM, David Minard wrote: >>> G'day All, >>> >>>     Will replay to all messages so far in this one to keep it all >>> together. >>> >>> On 21/03/18 22:52, lingpanda101 wrote: >>>> On 3/21/2018 7:32 AM, David

On 3/21/2018 7:32 AM, David Minard via samba wrote: > Thanks Carlos, > > The thing is, that I did not upgrade the version of Samba - that is the next step, so the ports used would not have changed. I only updated the OS. > > >> On 21/03/2018, at 10:04 PM, Carlos Alberto Panozzo Cunha <carlos.hollow at gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Hi, >> I have same problem

On 3/22/2018 8:06 PM, David Minard wrote: > G'day All, > >     Will replay to all messages so far in this one to keep it all > together. > > On 21/03/18 22:52, lingpanda101 wrote: >> On 3/21/2018 7:32 AM, David Minard via samba wrote: >>> Thanks Carlos, >>> >>> The thing is, that I did not upgrade the version of Samba - that is >>>

Hai, Very important things are missing here in this one.. smb.conf Samba from sources or os provided? In case of last, centos 7.1 to 7.4 is samba 4.1.12 to 4.6.2 https://wiki.centos.org/Manuals/ReleaseNotes/CentOS7 Various packages have been rebased. Some of those are openLDAP, samba, .... And yes, as Carlos suggested, do check your firewalling also. Maybe samba didnt change but

Hello Folks, We're using Samba as AD servers along with Windows AD Servers (2008R2 FL). We also use SCCM (Current Branch) that is dependent on AD for lab deployments (Windows 10). Currently, SCCM (current branch) supports 2008R2 FL, but for how long??? Samba does not support 2012R2, 2016, 2019 FL. We'd like to remove the Windows Servers from our AD infrastructure, but would also like

Hello, I would like to know if there are any resources (success stories, comparisons, blogs...) regarding the use of puppet as a substitute to SCCM in Windows platforms. Would also love to hear success stories from Windows administrators using puppet. I''m somewhat skilled with puppet but not with SCCM, so I don''t even know if the scope of the products is really similar.

Spike White, Sent: Saturday, December 27, 2014 4:32 AM > > Luke, I have considerable experience with this. We use WDS at work > for PXE (MS-centric shop). I use pxelinux at home. > > I've got WDS working in our test lab w/ UEFI. As you state, it strongly > wishes to do proxyDHCP (port 4011). More on this in a bit. > > It's quite common to segregate the DHCP

Thanks for your email. Yes it does provide some insight into why I could hack a Linux DHCP server into providing enough PXE boot information for PXE 3 clients but PXE 2.1 were happy (ROMs under many circumstances need to use proxy dhcp 4011 - as documented by IBM on the link I shared earlier). It appears only the most latest Dell business systems have EFI 64 support, and the best you can expect

> Date: Thu, 25 Dec 2014 07:07:52 +0000 > From: Luke Ledgerd <luke.ledgerd at niteco.se> > To: "syslinux at zytor.com" <syslinux at zytor.com> > Subject: [syslinux] Chain-loading from WDS to PXELinux on a different > tftp server > Message-ID: <17ba7ad419d54b6cab685c2cedc3de95 at NI-MAILEX.niteco.se> > Content-Type: text/plain;

G'day Guys, I've hit a snag. After using S4 from Alpha, beta, rc, 4.0.1..16 with success, I wanted to upgrade to the 4.1 series. However, after compiling, installing, and provisioning, with no errors, samba4 won't start correctly. I did a few tests by installing from scratch, on the same server each of the following versions (4.0.17, 4.0.18, 4.0.19, and 4.1.9), and got the same