similar to: preparing for a new site with an extra domain controller

From my experience, create the DC in the new office. Join domain. Using the mmc Sites and Sevices from a windows workstation, create new site and assign network. You can choose to rename the default site or create new site and assign network there. This is not necessary. I don?t recall doing anything else. On 10 Dec 2024 at 08:06 +0000, Stefan G. Weichinger via samba <samba at

Am 10.12.24 um 09:28 schrieb Luis Peromarta via samba: > From my experience, create the DC in the new office. Join domain. > > Using the mmc Sites and Sevices from a windows workstation, create new site and assign network. > > You can choose to rename the default site or create new site and assign network there. This is not necessary. > > I don?t recall doing anything

No issue, sync will continue next time network is up. On 10 Dec 2024 at 13:57 +0000, Stefan G. Weichinger <lists at xunil.at>, wrote: > > Anything to think of in terms of connectivity and syncing ... over the > VPN? The wireguard vpn should be rather stable, but is it any problem if > there are interruptions now and then? I think of power failures or > problems at the internet

Am 10.12.24 um 15:10 schrieb Luis Peromarta via samba: > No issue, sync will continue next time network is up. great As I prepare that I also hit the fact that I should switch from one-directional sysvol-sync to bi/multidirectional sync via unison or osync. That means I have to switch over the existing syncing also, right now we do the basic rsync-syncing. I will do that first, after

This is how I do it. http://samba.bigbird.es/doku.php?id=samba:sync-idmap.ldb On Dec 17, 2024 at 09:02 +0100, Stefan G. Weichinger via samba <samba at lists.samba.org>, wrote: > Am 16.12.24 um 12:23 schrieb Rowland Penny via samba: > > On Mon, 16 Dec 2024 10:33:59 +0100 > > "Stefan G. Weichinger via samba" <samba at lists.samba.org> wrote: > > > >

Hello everybody, I saw Guus already had contact with Jason over email. What do you guys tinc of wireguards, are there advantages? Jason seems to have a good grip of what he is talking about. https://fosdem.org/2017/schedule/event/wireguard/attachments/slides/1675/export/events/attachments/wireguard/slides/1675/wireguard_slides.pdf https://fosdem.org/2017/schedule/event/wireguard/ Kind

On Mon, 16 Dec 2024 10:33:59 +0100 "Stefan G. Weichinger via samba" <samba at lists.samba.org> wrote: > Am 12.12.24 um 10:48 schrieb Stefan G. Weichinger via samba: > > Am 10.12.24 um 15:10 schrieb Luis Peromarta via samba: > >> No issue, sync will continue next time network is up. > > > > great > > > > As I prepare that I also hit the

Am 12.12.24 um 10:48 schrieb Stefan G. Weichinger via samba: > Am 10.12.24 um 15:10 schrieb Luis Peromarta via samba: >> No issue, sync will continue next time network is up. > > great > > As I prepare that I also hit the fact that I should switch from one- > directional sysvol-sync to bi/multidirectional sync via unison or osync. > > That means I have to switch

Am 16.12.24 um 12:23 schrieb Rowland Penny via samba: > On Mon, 16 Dec 2024 10:33:59 +0100 > "Stefan G. Weichinger via samba" <samba at lists.samba.org> wrote: >> 1) sync it at first >> 2) do not sync it every time with sysvol >> 3) sync it periodically > > I am now not entirely convinced that '3' is required if you only use > the DC in

Hello, I published a new documentation about how to setup sites and subnets in Active Directory: https://wiki.samba.org/index.php/Active_Directory_Sites Regards, Marc

Hello, Reading about, specifically in the wiki <https://wiki.samba.org/index.php/Active_Directory_Sites> link, says the following about subnets. "Create a subnet entry for all subnets in your network and assign them to a site:" The subnet on which our DCs are configured is a public IP block, but the client machines are in a subnet with a private address block. Do I need to

Greetings, I'm not sure what else to add. If you need more info please let me know. Any input is greatly appreciated. Eric On Sat, Mar 4, 2023 at 2:58?PM Eric <rvwbug at gmail.com> wrote: > Greetings, > > This is my first attempt at multi-site with unique subnets (actually > first attempt at more than on DC). > > I had the existing "defaultFirstSite"

Thanks for the answer ligpanda101!! For DC's that are not present on a subnet, assign the subnet to the closet > site to a DC Visibly via RSAT, how would that look? On Wed, Jun 27, 2018 at 1:06 PM lingpanda101 <lingpanda101 at gmail.com> wrote: > On 6/27/2018 11:44 AM, Elias Pereira via samba wrote: > > Hello, > > > > Reading about, specifically in the wiki

Hi, Existing Samba setup has no sites, two servers (one AD and one DC) are all in Default-First-Site-Name site. Inter-Site Transport: IP Site Link: DEFAULTIPSITELINK Sites: Default-First-Site-Name (already existing): Domain Controller(s): AD, HKDC Subnets: 192.168.1.0/24 SZOffice (new created): Domain Controller:

Hi Jared, I've seen the same while testing on digital ocean, I think it's the context switching that happens when sending a packet. I've done some testing with wireguard and that has a lot better performance but it's still changing quite a lot and only does a subset of what tinc does so probably not a stable solution. Martin On Wed, 17 May 2017 at 18:05 Jared Ledvina <jared at

Hi folks, I have been using Samba4 as an Active Directory domain controller with many clients since about 2013, and it is the best. I have recently been asked to extend the AD domain in a clients office, to 6 other physical sites. Rather than reinvent the wheel, what is the best way to accomplish this given the current support in Samba4? Alex Ferrara Director Receptive IT Solutions

All, I configured two DCs (Samba version 4.5.5) replicating ad.corp.com in two sites ( https://wiki.samba.org/index.php/Active_Directory_Sites) Following 'DNS configuration on Domain Controllers' section from this wiki https://wiki.samba.org/index.php/Joining_a_Samba_DC_to_an_Existing_Active_Directory If I configure nameserver DC1 to be the first resolver for DC2, samba_dnsupdate

Hi list, I recently realized that using multiple DC has a major drawback when using Samba In my understanding, in a classical AD environment, sysvol share is supposed to be a DFS share. This means that proximity rules are applied when accessing to it. When using samba it seems that we face a classical round-robin DNS, which can lead to the situation where a machine on site A tries to fetch

Hello, I am trying to figure out, whether there are any best practices how to run a Samba AD DC in a container. First of all: why a container? Because obviously containers require less resources and are easier to update than multiple linux systems ? and I want to spend some of the savings into redundancy (multiple DCs, also distributed to serve different locations). Googling around I found

In Samba/NT i was used to share mapping done in netlogon script, so users move around between sites, get home and profile from remote location but still have share mapped from local servers. In Samba/AD, using GPO, share mapping is in ''user policy'', and so user roam between sites and get different policies? I'm googling around but i'm a bit confused... i can still use