similar to: Raise Domain Level, Forest Level and Schema for Bitlocker integration

On 18/03/2024 15:44, Paul Littlefield via samba wrote: > > I would like to add BitLocker integration to the three DCs we have running 4.15.13 on Ubuntu 22.04 LTS. > > The DC has been around a while and is currently on Schema version 47 and Domain level 2008_R2. > > Can I confirm that the procedure to upgrade the three DCs is as follows:- > > 1) backup > 2) upgrade

Not sure what Bitlocker integration you are referring to. Saving bitlocker recovery keys does work for me with schema version 47. Regards, Joachim -----Urspr?ngliche Nachricht----- Von: samba <samba-bounces at lists.samba.org> Im Auftrag von Paul Littlefield via samba Gesendet: Mittwoch, 20. M?rz 2024 18:14 An: samba at lists.samba.org Betreff: Re: [Samba] Raise Domain Level, Forest Level

On 20-03-2024 18:14, Paul Littlefield via samba wrote: > On 18/03/2024 15:44, Paul Littlefield via samba wrote: >> >> I would like to add BitLocker integration to the three DCs we have >> running 4.15.13 on Ubuntu 22.04 LTS. >> >> The DC has been around a while and is currently on Schema version 47 >> and Domain level 2008_R2. >> >> Can I

On 22/03/2024 09:20, Joachim Lindenberg via samba wrote: > Not sure what Bitlocker integration you are referring to. Saving > bitlocker recovery keys does work for me with schema version 47. > Regards, Joachim We have tried a few times to use our existing schema version 47 and it's coming up with this error:- https://www.itdroplets.com/bitlocker-error-0x80005000/ A screenshot is

Hai Mason,   I had a look at the debug output.   on 1) why around 15-16 second, that i really dont know. im trying to figure that out. on 2) if DNS is inconsistance, that everything is unrelayable. This is really the first the that needs fixing. then we look again at the replication.   The debug output still shows several messages about zones in flat files. I still do believe also that this

Yes they are, see samba-tool drs replicate -h. Am 24.02.2016 um 16:24 schrieb Achim Gottinger: > Have you tried to replicate with the --sync-forced and --full-sync > options? > > Am 24.02.2016 um 14:31 schrieb Sébastien Le Ray: >> Hi list, >> >> We use samba 4.1.17 (debian's version) on several DCs. I just >> realized that one of them is desynced and

Hi list, We use samba 4.1.17 (debian's version) on several DCs. I just realized that one of them is desynced and cannot get it to resync. The long story: we got 5 DCs splitted over several sites. Recently we had to replace one of them (let's call him DC5). Since both had to run in parallel for data recovery/users work we decided to join a brand new DC (DC6) and latter demote the

Have you tried to replicate with the --sync-forced and --full-sync options? Am 24.02.2016 um 14:31 schrieb Sébastien Le Ray: > Hi list, > > We use samba 4.1.17 (debian's version) on several DCs. I just realized > that one of them is desynced and cannot get it to resync. > > The long story: we got 5 DCs splitted over several sites. Recently we > had to replace one of

I'd try to rejoin the faulty DC instead of copying sam.ldb files. I guess there are unique DC specific entries in the local database. Can be samba-tool replicate works if you try the push the settings from an other dc or pull em on the faulty dc. What command did you try andn on what dc? Am 25.02.2016 um 14:02 schrieb Sébastien Le Ray: > Still the same error… > > ERROR(<class

Hi again, The --local option did the trick. But I can see why samba-tool drs replicate desynced-dc.my.domain sane-dc.my-domain dc=ad,dc=my,dc=domain fails while samba-tool drs replicate desynced-dc.my.domain sane-dc.my-domain dc=ad,dc=my,dc=domain --local works like a charm (desynced-dc.ad.finsecur.lan resolves correctly) Anyway, sync seem to be up & running again, thank you very much Le

Le 19/11/2018 à 15:00, Julien TEHERY via samba a écrit : > Le 19/11/2018 à 12:33, Julien TEHERY via samba a écrit : >> Le 19/11/2018 à 11:14, Marco Gaiarin via samba a écrit : >>> Mandi! Julien TEHERY via samba >>>    In chel di` si favelave... >>> >>>> Is there a good pratice when adding new remote DCs in terms of >>>> replication

Cordialement, Doe Corp <https://www.openevents.fr/> <https://www.facebook.com/OPENevents-172305449504004/> <https://twitter.com/SocOPENevents> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/openevents/> Julien Téhéry Ingénieur Systèmes & Réseaux | OPENevents 15 avenue de l'Europe 86170 Neuville de Poitou phone : +33 5 49 62 26 03 <tel:+33549622603> mail :

On 07/08/2020 15:05, Paul Littlefield via samba wrote: > Hi, > > What do I need to get BitLocker integration with AD on Samba 4? > > Paul > Never tried it, but Tranquil IT has a webpage about this: https://dev.tranquil.it/samba/en/samba_advanced_methods/samba_bitlocker_ad.html Perhaps that will help ? Rowland

hi did anyone successfully implemented bitlocker key management in samba4 ad? searching web i can find one hit on this http://kidcartouche.blogspot.com/2013/03/bitlocker-drive-encryption-and-samba4.html i'm on 4.3.3. do i still need to import the bitlocker schema? any info on the subject is appreciated. thanks -- View this message in context:

On Fri, Oct 09, 2020 at 04:33:53PM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: >On Fri, Oct 09, 2020 at 05:02:57PM +0200, Martin Kletzander wrote: >> Basically what I did was create a small disk, create one partition >> over the whole disk, then cryptsetup luksFormat the partition, open >> it and format it with a filesystem (without any LVM). That is one >> of the things you were

On 23/12/15 02:26, yabko wrote: > hi > > did anyone successfully implemented bitlocker key management in samba4 ad? > searching web i can find one hit on this > > http://kidcartouche.blogspot.com/2013/03/bitlocker-drive-encryption-and-samba4.html > > i'm on 4.3.3. do i still need to import the bitlocker schema? Never attempted this, but on link you provided is this:

Hai Mason, > -----Oorspronkelijk bericht----- > Van: M B [mailto:mmx at exm0.net] > Verzonden: dinsdag 30 april 2019 20:42 > Aan: L.P.H. van Belle; samba at lists.samba.org > Onderwerp: Re: [Samba] Replication failures > > Hi Louis, > > In the past few days I’ve removed all bind flat file configs > from my environment, and I’ve checked carefully that all DCs

Thanks Rowland, I have removed from options, and amended the forwarders. [global] workgroup = <MYDOMAIN> realm = <MYDOMAIN>.CORP netbios name = <HOSTNAME> server role = active directory domain controller idmap_ldb:use rfc2307 = yes idmap config * : range = 3000-7999 ----------> If I remove the portion I get errors -> idmap

On Fri, Oct 09, 2020 at 05:02:57PM +0200, Martin Kletzander wrote: > Basically what I did was create a small disk, create one partition > over the whole disk, then cryptsetup luksFormat the partition, open > it and format it with a filesystem (without any LVM). That is one > of the things you were adding support for, but it is not limited to > Windows Bitlocker setup, it can just

On Thu, Sep 17, 2020 at 01:39:56PM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: >As discussed in the emails today, this is the third version addressing >most points from the v1/v2 review. > >You will need to pair this with the changes in libguestfs-common from >this series: > >https://www.redhat.com/archives/libguestfs/2020-September/msg00050.html > The series looks good, I went