Re: samba 3.0.2 + XP: No NetBIOS - SMB

This is a discussion on Re: samba 3.0.2 + XP: No NetBIOS - SMB ; On 31 Mar 2004 14:47:59 -0800, v8625@hotmail.com (v8625) wrote: >Linux (RedHat 9) machine is running samba-3.0.2a-1. Windows machines >are running XP Professional Windows 2003 server (standalone - no >domain and no Active Directory) >- I enabled access to Linux box ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: Re: samba 3.0.2 + XP: No NetBIOS

  1. Re: samba 3.0.2 + XP: No NetBIOS

    On 31 Mar 2004 14:47:59 -0800, v8625@hotmail.com (v8625) wrote:

    >Linux (RedHat 9) machine is running samba-3.0.2a-1. Windows machines
    >are running XP Professional Windows 2003 server (standalone - no
    >domain and no Active Directory)
    >- I enabled access to Linux box on port 445 in Linux Lokkit firewall -
    >both UDP and TCP, both ways
    >- I disabled NetBIOS over TCP/IP on Windows machines


    I may be mistaken but this way it may never work ...


  2. Re: samba 3.0.2 + XP: No NetBIOS

    Hi,

    >>- I enabled access to Linux box on port 445 in Linux Lokkit firewall -
    >>both UDP and TCP, both ways
    >>- I disabled NetBIOS over TCP/IP on Windows machines

    >
    >
    > I may be mistaken but this way it may never work ...



    well i read in several Samba-HowTos, that this will work.
    But when you disable NetBIOS, you HAVE TO HAVE a correct
    DNS-resolution for all the hosts involved.

    That means you probalbly need a local DNS server for your
    machines, which can be used by Win-Clients to resolve your
    "sambaservername" into it's IP.

    This is done by NetBIOS usually, when you disable it,
    you need DNS for your hosts.

    At least that's how i understood those How-To s

    HTH

    Ralf

  3. Re: samba 3.0.2 + XP: No NetBIOS

    Hi,

    sorry, should have read your post completely

    > That means you probalbly need a local DNS server for your
    > machines, which can be used by Win-Clients to resolve your
    > "sambaservername" into it's IP.
    >


    Ok, i saw you tried \\\sharename, too.
    Well the DNS-Thing still may be an issue!

    Another thing i saw in your smb.conf:

    Your server's NetBIOS name starts with a figure. (1979UU)
    This also might confuse things.
    Try a name starting with a letter.......

    Last ideas: are your Win-Clients in the same workgroup?
    Why setting OS-Level to 65 when you don't use NetBIOS?
    (your samba will win the NetBIOS master election on your net
    with os level = 65, but don't know, what happens when
    NetBIOS is not used on your clients......)

    Ciao

    Ralf

  4. Re: samba 3.0.2 + XP: No NetBIOS

    So what you are saying is that THE ONLY way to connect Windows and
    Linux machines is through ports 135-139? How come I keep reading all
    these references to port 445 being capable of carrying ALL samba
    traffic? Besides, I can connect from one Windows box to another with
    this set up - by running \\hostname\sharename in the Start>Run box.
    Isn't that a proof that it's possible?


    imbsysop wrote in message news:<7agn60pc44dicfupq20agan1ipd4pgkevd@4ax.com>...
    > On 31 Mar 2004 14:47:59 -0800, v8625@hotmail.com (v8625) wrote:
    >
    > >Linux (RedHat 9) machine is running samba-3.0.2a-1. Windows machines
    > >are running XP Professional Windows 2003 server (standalone - no
    > >domain and no Active Directory)
    > >- I enabled access to Linux box on port 445 in Linux Lokkit firewall -
    > >both UDP and TCP, both ways
    > >- I disabled NetBIOS over TCP/IP on Windows machines

    >
    > I may be mistaken but this way it may never work ...


  5. Re: samba 3.0.2 + XP: No NetBIOS

    On 1 Apr 2004 10:33:57 -0800, v8625@hotmail.com (v8625) wrote:

    >So what you are saying is that THE ONLY way to connect Windows and
    >Linux machines is through ports 135-139? How come I keep reading all
    >these references to port 445 being capable of carrying ALL samba
    >traffic? Besides, I can connect from one Windows box to another with
    >this set up - by running \\hostname\sharename in the Start>Run box.
    >Isn't that a proof that it's possible?
    >
    >
    >imbsysop wrote in message news:<7agn60pc44dicfupq20agan1ipd4pgkevd@4ax.com>...
    >> On 31 Mar 2004 14:47:59 -0800, v8625@hotmail.com (v8625) wrote:
    >>
    >> >Linux (RedHat 9) machine is running samba-3.0.2a-1. Windows machines
    >> >are running XP Professional Windows 2003 server (standalone - no
    >> >domain and no Active Directory)
    >> >- I enabled access to Linux box on port 445 in Linux Lokkit firewall -
    >> >both UDP and TCP, both ways
    >> >- I disabled NetBIOS over TCP/IP on Windows machines

    >>
    >> I may be mistaken but this way it may never work ...


    possibly ..
    The only thing I do know is that I run a students computer node
    (within a large academic computing network) with XP workstations and
    when I disable netbios over tcp the thing is not working properly nor
    reliably nor in any way "transparent" mode ... but despite the lengthy
    and well documented "howto"'s scattered all over the net anyone is
    free to re-invent the wheel of course .. :-)


+ Reply to Thread