Slashdot Mirror


Samba 3.0.0RC1 Released

dook43 writes "Samba 3.0.0 RC1 has been released as of 8/16. Probably the most important new feature is its Active Directory support, but the rest of the new features can be found at the website."

24 of 261 comments (clear)

  1. additional new feature by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Informative

    broken and horribly slow!

    i installed v3 .. moved back to v2 after about an
    hour of being pissed off at trying to speed it up
    to the v2 levels

    1. Re:additional new feature by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Just because you can't configure it right, don't call it 'broken'. Learn to read, and you'll figure it out.

    2. Re:additional new feature by AstroDrabb · · Score: 3, Informative

      AD is indeed VERY slow. I have to work with it at work and it blows. I wish they (the admins) would use a plain ole LDAP server. OpenLDAP is much better IMO.

      --
      If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land,
      it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy. -James Madison
    3. Re:additional new feature by Malcontent · · Score: 1, Informative

      " Vanilla LDAP != inherently better than AD. "

      Maybe not but it is more compatible with other operating systems and non MS software.

      I think those are strong enough reasons to avoid it right there.

      --

      War is necrophilia.

    4. Re:additional new feature by AstroDrabb · · Score: 2, Informative

      The problem is, is that AD is not a general purpose LDAP server. They diverged too much from regular ole LDAP which makes coding against it a pain. The company I am at have 110,000 employees in it plus other junk. It just get a little too slow for me with that much stuff in it. OpenLDAP and Novell can handle it with no problems. I also had more of a pain coding a java app and a php site to use it over a standard LDAP server.

      --
      If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land,
      it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy. -James Madison
  2. Re:Active Directory by isam_b · · Score: 2, Informative

    opps :)

    Bug= Big

  3. AD Controller Not Yet Suported by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative
    Just as an FYI,

    From the 3.0 FAQ

    The following functionalities are NOT provided by Samba-3:

    *

    SAM replication with Windows NT4 Domain Controllers (i.e. a Samba PDC and a Windows NT BDC or vice versa)
    *

    Acting as a Windows 2000 Domain Controller (i.e. Kerberos and Active Directory) - In point of fact, Samba-3 DOES have some Active Directory Domain Control ability that is at this time purely experimental AND that is certain to change as it becomes a fully supported feature some time during the Samba-3 (or later) life cycle.


    The samba team is doing a great job moving forward. What I would hope to also see in the near future is support for creating a (Linux) directory heirachy based network using samba that will allow both MS and non MS clients. It would be nice to be able to create an LDAP directory trust relationship to your friends/family/etc.. network to allow logins between them...
    1. Re:AD Controller Not Yet Suported by cleverhandle · · Score: 5, Informative

      "What I would hope to also see in the near future is support for creating a (Linux) directory heirachy based network using samba that will allow both MS and non MS clients."

      Once they have AD controller support, that part is easy - and also not exactly Samba's job. Just create appropriate schemas for your LDAP server and have a Samba AD controller authenticate client requests via LDAP. What's not there yet is the ability to handle MS Kerberos properly - creating the Kerberos tokens in the proper format and passing them off to the client is more of a barrier than any LDAP protocol issue.

    2. Re:AD Controller Not Yet Suported by lkaos · · Score: 3, Informative

      Ok, this is my real nick, before I was responding from my girlfriend's account.

      So here's the deal. AD domain controller support is really a nebulus phrase because it involves a lot of different things. Before the end of last week, an OpenLDAP server could not fool most AD clients into thinking it was a Windows LDAP server. This is no longer true though since we know have proper GSS-SPNEGO support.

      I got Windows client authenticating without modification to a Heimdal KDC quite a while ago (with fully signed PAC etc.).

      What's really missing at this point is actually a number of RPCs in Samba. Problem is these RPCs are coming directly over TCP (normally they're part of a named pipe over SMB) and they are encrypted. We should be able to figure these out soon enough though.

      What's most interesting though is that of all CIFS vendors, Samba is by far furtherest along in AD compatibility (well... sort of).

      --
      int func(int a);
      func((b += 3, b));
  4. Cool feature that is easy to miss by Gerdts · · Score: 5, Informative
    As I was reading the announcement, I missed item 42 (Added win2k3 shadow copy operations to VFS interface). Taking a look at the discussion on the samba-technical list, this seems like it is a very cool feature. It paves the way for being able to look at snapshot file systems (Veritas, UFS, LVM, etc.) and even creating a VFS interface that will allow you to browse the last 64 revisions of file a CVS repository. Very cool.

    Now, I would just love to see this in smbfs.

  5. Re:Samba wha?.... by 1010011010 · · Score: 4, Informative

    Isn't NFS good enough?

    No. How much security does NFS have built-in? Exactly none.

    --
    Napster-to-go says "Fill and refill your compatible MP3 player", which is a lie. It's not MP3. It's WMA with DRM.
  6. Re:q from a newbie by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    Samba runs on a Linux/unix server, and lets Windows clients think they're talking to a Windows server.

    So, you can share files and printers just like you would if you were running a Microsoft-based server, but without paying for an MS licence.

    This is possible because originally MS' file sharing standards were published as an (incomplete) open standard, and many patient developers have figured out how to make it work.

    A pure Linux network can also be configured with shared files and printers from a central server. There are a few standards that let you do that; most commonly the standard that's been around for a long time is called NFS.

  7. Re:Lucky Linux users by styrotech · · Score: 4, Informative

    why is the community chasing M$ in it's hide&seek strategy? Isn't the M$ auth GINA (what a lousy name...) whatever replaceable? Screw them! Let's interface windows auth methods to unix rather than run after their stuff. Wouldn't it be cool if the samba tree included some .dll to log a M$ box into an ldap ssha or cert , standards kerberos environment?

    There is an open source GINA implementation to auth against other services.


    http://pgina.xpasystems.com/

    I think it comes in two parts, one a general backend and there are a bunch of different auth systems.

  8. Re:Mac OS X integration? by davebo · · Score: 4, Informative
    I think it would be great if some version of Samba 3.0 could make its way into Mac OS X 10.3.


    Some version did.
  9. Re:Lucky Linux users by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    I believe the 5k limit has been raised in Windows Server 2003.

  10. Re:Samba wha?.... by Kunta+Kinte · · Score: 5, Informative
    No. How much security does NFS have built-in? Exactly none

    Care to back that up?

    NFS protocol has built in encryption/authentication using GSS-API since version 3. That was quite a few years ago. NFS version 4 is out.

    I maintained a lab running on an encrypted NFS FS about 3 years ago, on Solaris 7.

    Linux didn't have support for encrypted NFS because the kernel hackers couldn't get encryption into the kernel at the time. Now that 2.6 has kernel encryption services Linux will support the full NFSv4 spec. Or at least support the security features.

    But you can't blame the engineers that developed NFS, they've had encryption/authentication built into the protocol for years now.

    --
    Based on upvotes, Ageism is the only "-ism" Slashdotters care about and think isn't SJW
  11. Re:I'd like to be enthusiastic by Durandal64 · · Score: 2, Informative

    Samba 3.0 has been in development and beta for quite some time. Those builds have all had functioning AD support. So they're not "just adding" it. They had to reverse-engineer it because Microsoft don't companies to have a choice outside of their shitty products. So yeah, go out and buy Windows 2000 Server. The rest of us will just download Samba 3.0 for free.

    Idiot.

  12. Re:q from a newbie by afidel · · Score: 4, Informative

    In fact SAMBA makes a BETTER print server than windows, at least if you add a little glue. Cisco systems has only two print admins for thousands of printers at hundreds of sites around the world, including many in manufacturing facilities that are absolutly mission critical (no labels or packing slips means nothing goes out the door). The man behind Cisco printing added a database and distributed printing system to SAMBA and made CEPS or Cisco Enterprise Printing System. We lost our local linux print server one day but other than a little longer queue time for large docs no one noticed because a remote print server took over the queue and handled all the functions from the failed unit. For more info see the Ceps project at sourceforge.

    --
    There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
  13. Re:Mac OS X integration? by squiggleslash · · Score: 2, Informative
    Only Panther Server. Apple does routinely vary the versions of open source packages between the server/desktop versions of its OSes. For example, Jaguar ships with Apache 1.3, whereas the version shipped with OS X 1.2 Server is Apache 2.0.

    Apple may stick with an older version of SAMBA for the client if they judge it to be more stable: including it with the server is likely to be because it has compelling new features.

    --
    You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
  14. Re:Looking for some info. by ctr2sprt · · Score: 4, Informative
    Active Directory is basically an LDAP directory server with Kerberos 5 authentication. In case you don't know what those are either...

    LDAP servers are pretty much quasi-object-oriented databases (LDAP is the protocol used to talk to the server). On a Unix-like system, you could store all the user information (/etc/passwd, /etc/shadow, /etc/group, everything) in an LDAP directory. But you can really store anything in an LDAP directory, such as the complete DNS database for a server. This can be handy because LDAP has replication and such built right in, so you no longer need to worry about DNS replication. These are the two big things stored in the Active Directory in Windows (user information and DNS records).

    As for Kerberos, it's a secure authentication mechanism. The whole process is kind of complicated, but here are the basics. When you log in to a Kerberos domain (this is just a normal domain login for Windows) what you are doing is requesting a Ticket-Granting Ticket (TGT) from the Key Distribution Center (KDC). The TGT is returned, encrypted. If your password decrypts the TGT properly, you're logged in. Note that your password never goes over the network! Now you want to access a service on another machine in the same domain. You give your TGT to the KDC, asking it for a ticket to the specified machine. You get the ticket back, then provide it to the server. The server verifies the ticket similar to how the TGT is verified at login, and if it passes, then you've identified yourself securely. This means you don't need your password at all once you get your TGT, unless for some reason you need to get a new TGT. So Kerberos is both a secure authentication mechanism and a single sign-on mechanism.

    Believe me, all this is a huge leap forward for Microsoft. Even though they keep adding proprietary bits to both LDAP and Kerberos, they are at least getting on the open standards bandwagon. And technologically, this is all far superior to the way Windows NT did things.

  15. Run Samba-only network by whitmer · · Score: 2, Informative

    There was a quite good article on EnterpriseITPlanet about upcoming Samba 3 and they discuss the possibility to run Samba 3-only network. Which is very feasible IMHO because you don't have to manage headaches such as AD. Of course, this works with Linux/Unix fellas only, not you, my dear MCSEs. Samba is way too complex software package for you GUI people to comprehend. ;)

  16. Re:Lucky Linux users by Alioth · · Score: 2, Informative

    I wrote a replacement GINA for $BIG_PROJECT that I was on. What a nightmare.

    Unfortunately, GINA doesn't do everything, and it is (or at least was when I had the misfortune to write a replacement GINA) very badly documented. We had a $40K support contract with MS to provide us development support for this, but it was a complete waste of money - they couldn't answer our questions. We ended up essentially reverse engineering msgina.dll to find out exactly what needed to be set for everything to work correctly (we were writing a complete replacement, rather than a stub GINA).

  17. Re:Lucky Linux userssimple registry change by thegoldenear · · Score: 3, Informative

    batch file:

    echo Allow a maximum of 255 concurrent connections to this machine
    reg add "HKLM\System\CurrentControlSet\Services\LanmanServ er\Parameters" /v "Users" /t REG_DWORD /d "0x000000FF" /f

    see http://thegoldenear.org/tweak/ for more

  18. that's not true .. by Macka · · Score: 4, Informative

    The problem is none of the Unix filesystems do snapshots the right way for a client facing system. They all do a whole filesystem at a time snapshotting, not just change vectors

    AdvFS, currently on HP's Tru64 Unix and also (already) ported to the up and coming combined Tru64 + HP-UX offering, called Enterprise Unix, has a snapshot feature called 'cloning'. A cloned filesystem is mountable, and only contains pointers to the blocks of data on the original. Further write operations on the original first copy the data block to be changed to the clone before allowing the block to be replaced. It takes seconds to create a clone of a terrabyte filesytem and then you're back in business. This feature has been around for years!

    You shouldn't make statements like that without doing your homework.