The Samba-Bugzilla – Bug 11499
Windows 98 cannot access Samba Share or Samba Server
Last modified: 2018-02-24 21:24:54 UTC
With Samba 4.1.6 everything was working fine, now I tried to upgrade to Samba 4.2.3 on the weekend. We have several old machines around which are bound to the version of Windows they were delivered with.
After upgrading to 4.2.3 I found out that I could not access the samba Server from any of our 3 Windows 98 clients. Windows 95, DOS, Windows 2000, Windows XP and Mac OS X connect fine, it is just this three Windows 98 computers which do not see the Samba server using \\"IP-Address or Hostname". According to winver this is just plain 98 not the SE edition. Note as this is a production system I can just test out things in fixed intervals e.g. at the weekends when there is nobody working
Here is what is in my smb.conf
workgroup = HEYWINKEL.WIN
realm = kh.heywinkel.local
netbios name = HAUPTSERVER
server role = active directory domain controller
dns forwarder = 192.168.120.254
idmap_ldb:use rfc2307 = yes
logon script = logon.bat
logon drive = U:
# logon path = \\%N\%U\Profile
domain logons = Yes
preferred master = Yes
domain master = Yes
local master = Yes
# wins proxy = Yes
# dns proxy = No
time server = Yes
create mask = 0660
directory mask = 0770
hide unreadable = Yes
# Generic Options
unix charset = UTF-8
dos charset = 850
log file = /var/log/samba/%m.log
log level = 0
max log size = 1000
# Needed for MS DOS and Win 9.x Clients
lanman auth = yes
Please add a network trace and a debug level 10 smbd log of the failed attempt.
I think I can provide the requested information the next weekend.
Can you please tell me what network trace you want? Commandline would be helpful.
Created attachment 11452 [details]
Log Level 10 and tcpdump of affected computer
I used Samba 4.2.4
(In reply to Carsten Menke from comment #4)
Hmm. For some reason win98 just stops after our response. Do you still have the working Samba version around? If we get a working trace then we can compare bit by bit what goes wrong now.
Yes of course I have the working copy around which is 4.1.6 otherwise they would not be able to work :-)
I'll try to do a network trace and log level 10 tomorrow with the working copy of Samba.
Created attachment 11455 [details]
Log Level 10 and tcpdump of working Samba Version 4.1.6
One immediate difference I found is that 4.2.3 offers signing by default, 4.1.6 does not. Maybe it does not like the signature and disconnects.
Carsten, can you disable SMB signing to see if this helps?
server signing = disabled would be the setting to add
I will do that, however I have the next time slice not before next weekend.
By the way, meaning that this option is the reason, would it then not be helpfull to disable signing per client protocoll level at runtime (detect what version the client is running and then dynamically disable signingI)?
I couldn't resist trying this out, and yes indeed
server signing = disabled
is the key. When disabling this, ALL Windows 98 machines work as expected. So this is a workaround
As I read on technet, even Win 98 should be able to sign SMB packets and what even more wonders me is, that Windows 95 does work out of the box and Windows 98 doesn't. So even if Windows 98 would not support SMB signing (as I don't know if they implemented it in the SE Edition in an Update or the like), it should still work with the default values as Windows 95 does also.
There seems to be some trouble with Win98 and SMB Signing and there were some updates available from Microsoft, e.g. KB323466.
Can you try to install the dsclient updates on your WIN98 box to see if it helps?
Just saw today that you answered, the system is in full production as of now. If I recall correctly we just used 4.1.6. However I'm not sure but as far as I know the customer updated the machinery to windows 7 by the manufacturer finally. So I have to check if there are some windows 98 computers left.