Bug 47 - handling of 'domain master' incompatible with legacy 2.2 configs
handling of 'domain master' incompatible with legacy 2.2 configs
Product: Samba 3.0
Classification: Unclassified
Component: nmbd
All All
: P2 normal
: none
Assigned To: Gerald (Jerry) Carter
Depends on:
  Show dependency treegraph
Reported: 2003-04-29 08:47 UTC by Steve Langasek
Modified: 2005-08-24 10:19 UTC (History)
0 users

See Also:


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Steve Langasek 2003-04-29 08:47:43 UTC
In Samba 3.0, the setting 'domain master = yes' is ignored unless accompanied by
'domain logon = yes'.  The justification for this change is that a machine which
registers #1b but does not register #1c will be confusing to Windows clients
that are looking for a PDC.  However, on a network that already has a PDC, a
Samba server can still cause trouble if 'domain logons' is set; and on a network
where Samba is only needed for DMB functionality (not logon functionality), it
does no harm to have 'domain master' turned on without 'domain logons'.  Now, it
also does no harm to turn 'domain logons' on whenever 'domain master' is set,
but this isn't what 3.0 is currently giving users.

Possible resolutions:

* change config handling so that either of 'domain master = yes' or 'domain
logons = yes' will promote the other to 'yes' by default.

* update the documentation so that 'domain master = yes' is deprecated,
presenting it only in the 'no' form for creating a BDC; restore 2.2-compatible
handling for legacy installs.

* update the documentation as above, and attempt to handle upgrading existing
config files at install time (ok, maybe this only works for Debian :).

* update the documentation, and have testparm throw an error when 'domain master
= yes' is set.

I'm happy to work up a patch for any of these, it's just a question of knowing
which way the Samba Team wants to go with it.
Comment 1 Gerald (Jerry) Carter 2003-04-29 09:48:22 UTC
i think I would classify this as an nmbd bug
Comment 2 Gerald (Jerry) Carter 2003-05-08 14:19:10 UTC
revert to 2.2 behavior.  register WORKGROUP<1B> name
if domain master = yes
Comment 3 Gerald (Jerry) Carter 2003-05-20 07:12:46 UTC
Comment 4 Steve Langasek 2003-06-05 16:35:11 UTC
Sorry, I just reviewed the patch in response to a user inquiry on irc -- the
patch that was committed does not fix the problem in question, as it's the 1c
name rather than the 1b name that's missing.  Actually, the patch looks like it
might be a no-op...
Comment 5 Steve Langasek 2003-06-05 17:10:50 UTC
No, sorry again, I seem to be on drugs -- the fix here is the correct one, and
I'm getting confused.  Ignore me...
Comment 6 Gerald (Jerry) Carter 2003-06-06 13:44:58 UTC
marked it fixed again
Comment 7 Gerald (Jerry) Carter 2005-02-07 07:54:33 UTC
originally reported against 3.0alpha23.  Bugzilla spring cleaning.
Comment 8 Gerald (Jerry) Carter 2005-08-24 10:19:13 UTC
sorry for the same, cleaning up the database to prevent unecessary reopens of bugs.