Samba-TNG Team Releases 0.3

emissary47 writes "The Samba-TNG (the next generation) team, releases the first beta of Samba-TNG (a Samba fork since 2000) including some very interesting features for everyone willing to replace NT4 domain controllers. With excellent LDAP-backend support, integration of Microsoft tools such as usermanager for domains and servermanager and a powerful command-line tool called rpcclient it is _the_ alternative solution for Windows domain controlling at the moment. They even include scripts for NT4-server migration in order to make a change easier."

Comments

What about Samba-DS9?

[Anonymous Coward]

How will they handle the wormhole effect?

What's new?

[$$$$$exyGal]

Taken directly from the announcement, but it's short enough to just put here.

Most important changes in 0.3:

• Updated LDAP schema in ldap/samba-tng.schema-v3
• Improved LDAP backend (subcontexts, performance speed up)
• NT trusting TNG works now out of the box
• Update to the registry tools in rpcclient
• libiconv usage

--sex

Re:What's new?

[Jeremy Allison - Sam]

Err - both Samba-TNG and Samba support this (byte-range
locks). Out of the box. We have done for years. I wrote the
code :-). That's why you can use Samba for these multi-user
apps :-).

Jeremy.

Samba-TNG+OpenLDAP howto

[Anonymous Coward]

Due to the complexity of LDAP, and samba w/PDC in general about 6 months ago I wroteup a pretty significant document on how to configure and deploy such a system, I've spent more then 40 hours on it to date, it's fairly complete:

http://howto.aphroland.de/HOWTO/LDAP

no way in hell could it withstand the slashdot effect, it runs ontop of Zope which is slow enough as it is! Apache seems to be in the order of 2000x to 2500x faster then zope+Zwiki, but the features of zope make it worth it.

(been on /. for 5 years and still don't have an account)

Re:late ???

[ed1park]

"Can Samba be a Backup Domain Controller?
With version 2.2, no. The native NT SAM replication protocols have not yet been fully implemented. The Samba Team is working on understanding and implementing the protocols, but this work has not been finished for version 2.2.

Can I get the benefits of a BDC with Samba? Yes. The main reason for implementing a BDC is availability. If the PDC is a Samba machine, a second Samba machine can be set up to service logon requests whenever the PDC is down."

You can find out more here...

http://us2.samba.org/samba/ftp/cvs_current/docs/ ht mldocs/samba-bdc.html

Re:Gui configuration tools?

[Jellybob]

From what I read in the summary, you can use the same tools you'd use to admin a native NT4 server, at least for the server list, and users.

Re:late ???

[buchanmilne]

can samba-TNG be a real PDC and comunicate to a NT BDC all the information such as the userlist AND when it falls over and comes back up (system maintenance) take back the PDC status and any changes from the BDC ?

AFAIK, this is what TNG was aiming for.

acting as a PDC and syncing with a NT BDC is what SAMBA really lacks IMHO

You mean samba-2.2.x. Samba-3.0alpha does support this, and has a better NT->Samba migration tool, 'net rpc vampire'.

Samba3 is due out in about 2 months (hopefully).

What I want to know is, have they got all the samba-2.2.x features?

We run samba-2.2.x with ldap support for samba-only PDC/BDC operation.

Re:NTLMv2?

[abartlet]

NTLMv2 authentication is fully supported in Samba 3.0 - we brought the code across from TNG 18 months ago.

Recent alphas have LMv2 authenticaion too :-).

The truth is, almost nobody uses NTLMv2 - certainly not MS...

Re:Article Extremely Misleading

[abartlet]

This comment is misleading. There are no plans for samba.org to release Samba TNG, they are there own project now, and we have our own development process that is producing a very nice PDC for 3.0.

Samba 2.2 contained basic domain control capabilty, and 3.0 really does a good job of completing it.

Also, Samba 3.0 does many things that TNG does not - in particular Active Directory client support, and even Active Directory DC developement (very early)

Re:Samba-TNG

[CleverNickName]

Code named 'Crusher'.

. . . and don't go asking me to reorganize your isolinear optical chips if you decide to play cowboy and run your server through the heart of an anomaly.

I don't do that shit anymore.

Re:Printing?

[psamuels]

Did I mis-read it?

No, you read it right. Here's the thing. samba.org has a much larger and (well, at least back in the boom days) better-funded team than we do, so we can only concentrate on so much at a time. Printing just isn't a priority. It might work in samba-tng, in some cases (it is after all derived from samba.org code, which includes printing) but we don't pay much attention to it.

If you need your PDC to also be a print server, you should either (a) run samba-tng and samba.org on the same machine, on two separate IP addresses and netbios names (yes, this is a common and supported configuration), or (b) just use samba.org for your PDC, which in the past wasn't such a great idea but nowadays it is reported to be quite usable.