An excellent tutorial, sir. Thank you!
I had a bunch of trouble here and there in getting setup, but that's mostly due to me not being much of a Linux person.
An excellent tutorial, sir. Thank you!
I had a bunch of trouble here and there in getting setup, but that's mostly due to me not being much of a Linux person.
thank you for your appreciation, Sir.
One step further might be one step too far...
can't see the original message.
Guess that would help though if debug is needed...
One step further might be one step too far...
I am using now the Samba4.0.3 on Ubuntu 13.10 (default pakkage). In my provision was a BIND used as a DNS server. Working fine. No problems yet. Only the canonical forgot to define correct version of the BIND in Vim /var/lib/samba/private/named.conf
I reed somewhere that in production the BIND is more preferable choice than internal DNS. I do not have links sorry...Code:dlz "AD DNS Zone" { # For BIND 9.8.0 # database "dlopen /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/samba//bind9/dlz_bind9.so"; # For BIND 9.9.0 database "dlopen /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/samba//bind9/dlz_bind9_9.so"; };
you should go Samba 4.1 (it's been out for 1 week now) compile from source no problem .
4.0.3 is quite old and can't handle replication and such.
I ve been using samba_internal in production. it's quite effective and I don't know why Bind would be better. I know it's robust etc but Samba_internal is based on MS dns so if you re going to have mixed infrastructures MS/Linux both will work fine as long as you don't use isc-dhcp-server (samba_internal won't update records at least prior to 4.0.7, didn't test since).
that's been tested every day since the first install I did with samba 4.1
Last edited by Toxic64; October 21st, 2013 at 12:26 AM.
One step further might be one step too far...
probably your link about bind (quite old): https://lists.samba.org/archive/samb...er/170194.html
One step further might be one step too far...
Agreed, but the 4.0.3 is tested by canonical, and should work stable.
Moreover, for test propose it's a good start point. In addition, many of LDAP related software (SOGo, OpenChange, Squid, OpenERP etc...) are good tested only with Samba 4.0.3. However, the 4.1.0 is recommended by most of software vendors with no guidance.
There is just a question: what do you need from your samba appliance?
Yeah, exactly I think this was one of the links about "greatness" of the BIND
I have a complex mixed infrastructure with AD service working just great with Samba_internal.here is just a question: what do you need from your samba appliance?
AD Service integration with openfire for example has been as easy as it could be.
So my samba appliance as pretty much the same use a standard AD would have. (directory services, Kerberos authentication, DNS, directory replication)
all is just perfect
Mine is 4.1 from source on Ubuntu 12.04.3 LTS no problem there. Samba 4.1 is final stable. not beta anymoreAgreed, but the 4.0.3 is tested by canonical, and should work stable.
One step further might be one step too far...
It was a rhetorical question.
By this question I mean if I need only test things and I would like to understand how things working than I prefer a fast installation method. However, if I would like to have a production environment with FSMO, GC and etc., I will definitely go to the 4.1.0... It seems to me we have here a versions holy war
By the way, do you know something about this:
http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=2182061
Thank you
Bookmarks