similar to: dNSTombstoned

Am 18.03.20 um 22:26 schrieb Andrew Bartlett: >> Also "samba-tool domain tombstones expunge --tombstone-lifetime=0" >> does >> not delete the records with "dNSTombstoned: TRUE". Is this a >> different >> tombstone? > > That would be a different tombstone, yes. Can someone help me out with the ldap/ldb syntax to delte those by cron? >

On Wed, 2020-03-18 at 20:48 +0100, Christian Naumer via samba wrote: > Hello you all, > with the new samba version out that fixes some problems with dns > scavenging I have decided to try this feature. > I was specifically interested for our reverse zone (PTR records) > > We have one zone for VPN clients 8.0.10.in-addr.arpa. I activated the > feature in the smb.conf as well

So strange.. I copied your commando's only change the arpa and servername / domainnames All worked. So far nobody told how there ad-dc and DNS is setup.. Which i why i added : > > Debian 10, my own packages. > > Samba 4.11.6 + BIND9_DLZ is used . Now are you using samba DNS or BIND_DLZ dns ? That might help here. Greetz, Louis > -----Oorspronkelijk

Dear all, somehow, new PTR records are not visible. This is on 4.11.6 DC with BIND9 ... Here is what happens: root at dc1:~# cat /etc/samba/smb.conf # Global parameters [global] bind interfaces only = Yes interfaces = 127.0.0.1 XXX.YYY.103.1 netbios name = DC1 realm = SAMDOM.REST_OF_FQDN server role = active directory domain controller server

Hello all, we have an AD running Samba 4.12.5 on Centos8 using the packages from sernet. We enabled "Dynamic DNS record scavenging support" as introduced at version 4.9. This works as expected. However, some dynamic updates by the windows and Linux clients (not by the dhcpd server) are marked as static. This is totally random. I routinely delete these entries and sometimes they are

Am 16.04.20 um 14:18 schrieb Rowland penny via samba: > On 16/04/2020 12:45, Christian Naumer via samba wrote: >> Hello alAl, >> after update of our test server to 4.12.1 from 4.11 it crashes. If the >> vfs module is removed from the config everthing works as before. > > The only change was to upgrade to 4.12.1 ? > > If there were no other changes, then Samba

The DC is a Windows AD DC. Could you please clarify why i should change setting in the Windows DC instead of the Samba server, which is the one that does the insecure ldap bind? Regards Andrea Cucciarre' On 11/9/2020 3:13 PM, Rowland penny via samba wrote: > On 09/11/2020 13:28, Andrea Cucciarre' wrote: >> My customer complain that in the AD DC they see the following

I have a domain with two Samba DC's I don't want to use either of them as a fileserver, so I want to build a separate file server which is not a DC, which will deliver all the files to the lovely little windows users (including their roaming profiles). I've been looking online and there seems to be a thousand different ways to "join" my fileserver to the domain, but most of

Hello Lois, thanks for looking into this. Have you looked at what the original poster shared in the bug report? https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14268 I don't have a big problem with this, just trying to help. Maybe the original poster can say more with regards of the problem he has with this. here are more of my details. Regards #####samba-debug-info.txt##############

On 16/04/2020 13:15, Christian Naumer via samba wrote: > Forgot to mention that this is on Centos 8. So maybe something different > than this: > https://www.spinics.net/lists/samba/msg163085.html > Is python3 standard or available for Centos 8 ? Not sure if python is used here though. Rowland

Am 16.04.20 um 14:23 schrieb Christian Naumer via samba: > Am 16.04.20 um 14:18 schrieb Rowland penny via samba: >> On 16/04/2020 12:45, Christian Naumer via samba wrote: >>> Hello alAl, >>> after update of our test server to 4.12.1 from 4.11 it crashes. If the >>> vfs module is removed from the config everthing works as before. >> >> The only change

Hello All, now that the BUG 14343: (s3: vfs_full_audit: Add missing fcntl entry in vfs_op_names[] array.) was fixed I wanted to try 4.12 again. This is the relevant config which has been running for years: vfs objects = acl_xattr full_audit shadow_copy2 full_audit:failure = none full_audit:success = pwrite write rename unlink full_audit:prefix = IP=%I|USER=%u|MACHINE=%m|VOLUME=%S

Hai, Today i thought lets re-test this again. So this was done yesterday, samba-tool dns add dc1.internal.dom.tld 2.249.10.in-addr.arpa 157 PTR host.extrazone.dom.tld samba-tool dns add dc1.internal.dom.tld 0.249.10.in-addr.arpa 157 PTR host.extrazone.dom.tld samba-tool dns add dc1.internal.dom.tld 1.249.10.in-addr.arpa 157 PTR host.extrazone.dom.tld I did keep the entries in the dns

To answer my own question: Yes, it's seems like a feature. I ran basic ldbsearch query: ldbsearch -H /usr/local/samba/private/sam.ldb -b "DC=DomainDnsZones,DC=mydomain,DC=com" and saw in output entries with: dNSTombstoned: TRUE Overall there are a couple hundred entries with as such. So now my question is: How can I safely remove them, any tips/guideliness? I thought that

What version of Samba is this and do you have "server schannel = no" set in its smb.conf? Regards Christian Am 09.11.20 um 15:31 schrieb Andrea Cucciarre' via samba: > The DC is a Windows AD DC. > Could you please clarify why i should change setting in the Windows DC > instead of the Samba server, which is the one that does the insecure > ldap bind? > >

Am 17.11.20 um 13:20 schrieb mj via samba: >> ,--- >> CN=DC2,CN=Servers,CN=Default-First-Site-Name,CN=Sites,CN=Configuration,DC=samba,DC=company,DC=com >> >> >> |,-- >>

Hello everybody, last weeks I started upgrading our DC from Centos 7 to Centos 8. After having read this (https://wiki.samba.org/index.php/Upgrading_a_Samba_AD_DC#Updating_Multiple_Samba_Domain_Controllers) and especially this "Joining a DC to domain can be a troublesome process for some users, and it can be difficult to recover your DC if something goes wrong". I really looked forward

Am 26.02.20 um 15:40 schrieb L.P.H. van Belle via samba: > So strange.. > > I copied your commando's only change the arpa and servername / domainnames > All worked. Have you checked that you have this situation? If this entry "192.168.2.157" exists and if you try to add "192.168.0.157" another entry to point to "192.168.2.157" is added. >

Am 24.07.20 um 14:51 schrieb Rowland penny via samba: > > NFS shares != Samba shares and 'mounting' != hosting Samba shares ;-) > > Up until Samba 4.8.0, 'smbd' (the fileserver component on a Unix domain > member) could contact AD directly, but after 4.8.0 , smbd must now go > through winbind, sssd uses some of the winbind code, so it is > incompatible with

How about the one from the Samba Wiki. https://wiki.samba.org/index.php/Setting_up_Samba_as_a_Domain_Member It is not a walk through but it covers the important points. Regards > Am 06.09.2020 um 01:34 schrieb Peter Pollock via samba <samba at lists.samba.org>: > > ?I have a domain with two Samba DC's > > I don't want to use either of them as a fileserver, so