toasters

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

3 participants
13514 discussions

Re: Samba client and filers
by mday＠netapp.com 15 Apr '99

15 Apr '99

Garrett Burke <Garrett.Burke(a)msc.ie> wrote: > Anyone know of any issues with smbclient (version 1.9.18p8) and filers > running CIFS (OnTap 5.2.1)? Ack, sorry Garrett, I just noticed that you're running Samba 1.9.18p8 and I gave you a patch for Samba 2.0.3. I took a look at the Samba 1.9.18p10 source I had handy and it wasn't immediately clear to me what the correct patch is. Samba 1.9.18p10 uses a BUFFER_SIZE constant (defined as 0xFFFF) when calling Session Setup, but that constant is used in a *lot* more places than the CLI_BUFFER_SIZE constant in Samba 2.0.3, so I'm hesitant to fiddle with it. You're probably better off downloading 2.0.3 and applying that patch, since I'm sure that will get you a working smbclient. But if you want to stick with 1.9.18, you can give the following (untested!) patch a shot. (Let me know how it goes.) Matt *** samba-1.9.18p10/source/smb.h- Tue Jun 2 18:06:57 1998 --- samba-1.9.18p10/source/smb.h Thu Apr 15 13:02:02 1999 *************** *** 24,30 **** #ifndef _SMB_H #define _SMB_H ! #define BUFFER_SIZE (0xFFFF) #define SAFETY_MARGIN 1024 #define NMB_PORT 137 --- 24,30 ---- #ifndef _SMB_H #define _SMB_H ! #define BUFFER_SIZE (0x2000) #define SAFETY_MARGIN 1024 #define NMB_PORT 137

1 0

What is this qual_devices file?
by Jaye Mathisen 15 Apr '99

15 Apr '99

Looks like drive model numbers. Anybody slapped on 3rd party drives from that list and see if they work? I could always use a different source to update my filers.

1 0

Re: Samba client and filers
by mday＠netapp.com 15 Apr '99

15 Apr '99

Garrett Burke <Garrett.Burke(a)msc.ie> wrote: > Anyone know of any issues with smbclient (version 1.9.18p8) and filers > running CIFS (OnTap 5.2.1)? > > Session setup is failing. I can use smbclient to connect to my NT servers > but not the filer. I notice from the debug output of smbclient that it says > "Using encrypted passwords" Could this be the problem? Can't see anything > on the smbclient man page to force it to use unencrypted passwords. > > Here's some "-d 3" output from smbclient: > > [..] > > (Before you all say "use NFS", I'm writing some monitoring tools that will > run on a FreeBSD box and will actually fetch a file from the filer and calc > a CRC to ensure it's ok. This way I know the file service is available) Hi Garrett, Yes, there is a problem with the filer's handling of Session Setup requests in 5.2 that prevents smbclient from connecting. What's happening is smbclient is trying to connect with a client buffer size of 0x4400, but 5.2 rejects any client using a buffer size greater than 0x2000. So, you can recompile smbclient with the CLI_BUFFER_SIZE constant set to 0x2000 to get an smbclient that can connect to 5.2. (See below for the patch.) With that patch, smbclient should work well enough for you to at least connect and fetch a file. (There could be other bugs, though... we haven't spent any time testing smbclient yet, on any release.) In 5.3 this client buffer size limitation has been removed, so that patch isn't required. Unfortunately, though, a bug was introduced in 5.3 that causes smbclient to get filenames that are short by one character (do a "dir" and you'll see what I mean). That shouldn't prevent you from connecting and fetching a file, though. This bug will be fixed in 5.3.2. (It only affects smbclient, by the way.) Hope that helps, Matt *** samba-2.0.3/source/include/client.h- Fri Feb 5 18:17:46 1999 --- samba-2.0.3/source/include/client.h Thu Apr 15 12:18:47 1999 *************** *** 27,33 **** /* the client asks for a smaller buffer to save ram and also to get more overlap on the wire. This size gives us a nice read/write size, which will be a multiple of the page size on almost any system */ ! #define CLI_BUFFER_SIZE (0x4400) /* * These definitions depend on smb.h --- 27,33 ---- /* the client asks for a smaller buffer to save ram and also to get more overlap on the wire. This size gives us a nice read/write size, which will be a multiple of the page size on almost any system */ ! #define CLI_BUFFER_SIZE (0x2000) /* * These definitions depend on smb.h

1 0

RE: Dump command issues?
by Melvin, Grant 15 Apr '99

15 Apr '99

Hi Mike, Officially NetApp doesn't support the ATL L200 or L500, but we do have a bunch of L200s in-house and we see different issues with them which normally results in a firmware upgrade from ATL. The latest upgrade is version 28 you may want to try this. FYI, the only "stackers" we officially support are the Quantum 4700 and Breece Hill Q2.15. We have had issues with timing on other tape stackers and have made recent changes to Data ONTAP that should cope with these variations, but we have no roadmap to "certify" a bunch more stackers. I know that 3rd party vendors have also been having some difficulty getting the L200/L500 units to work via NDMP without software changes. So if you are using a 3rd party tool which is NDMP-compliant or NOT then you may want to ask about their support (think patches) for these units. If you still have an issue after getting your unit upgraded/ checked out then feel free to send me an e-mail with your dump output and we'll see if we can get to the bottom of it. Cheers, Grant -----Original Message----- From: Mike Ball [mailto:mball@rtp.opensystems.com] Sent: Tuesday, April 13, 1999 10:54 AM To: toasters@mathworks. com Subject: Dump command issues? Currently we have a F720 filer and a ATL Powerstor L500 tape library attached locally. We are running into a issue when we try to dump to multiple tapes. If we use the command below, it is supposed to dump our entire vol0 (90GB of data) to multiple tapes in our tape library. rsh -l dump 0uf urst0a,urst0a /vol/vol0 Unfortunately, the dump command above backs up to the first tape, then rewinds the tape when it is full but never unloads it. The first tape is then overwritten as the dump continues. The dump command above does not unload the tape and continue the dump onto the second tape in the library. Has anyone else experienced this before, or does anyone have any recommendations to correct the problem? Thank you, Mike Ball

2 1

RE: Migration problems
by Benn, Paul 15 Apr '99

15 Apr '99

Just for clarification.... The problem with Microsoft's Migration Tool for NetWare is that you can only migrate data to a domain controller (the problem exists for NT member servers as well as filers), right? I'm not sure how helpful this link is to you at this point (I just discovered it myself) but here it is anyway: http://support.microsoft.com/support/ntserver/migration/ Regards, Paul Oh, and to answer your question: Personally, I've never heard of any other tools to do this. I have, however, performed a NW=>NT migration. We chose to do everything manually because the end result was much cleaner. We did use the Microsoft tool, but only to migrate user accounts. The company was large so we performed the migration in steps (say 100 users per weekend and ~20 each week day). -----Original Message----- We tried to do this at the first time with a tool called Migration Tool for Netware. With this tool it is impossible to transfer the data from the Novell servers to the Netapp.

1 0

Migration problems
by JD Ambagtsheer 15 Apr '99

15 Apr '99

We are working on a migration project (Novell => NT) and want to transfer data from 3 Novell servers to a Netapp (F720) fileserver. Because of the different file systems, the right structure must also be transfered and translate. We tried to do this at the first time with a tool called Migration Tool for Netware. With this tool it is impossible to transfer the data from the Novell servers to the Netapp. Now we have the following question: - Does anyone already had a migration from Novell to a Netapp (or an other migration to a Netapp)? - Are there some tools to realise this? I hope someone has answer to those questions. Greetings, Jan-Dirk

1 0

Legato with NT
by Robert Palermo 15 Apr '99

15 Apr '99

Is anyone using Legato to back up a filer in an NT only environment ? Thanks for any input. Bob Palermo bob(a)opensystems.com Systems Engineer tel: 508-359-4248 Open System Solutions, Inc. fax: 508-359-5215 www.opensystems.com www.4privatei.com

2 1

Macs & NFS
by Clark Shishido 14 Apr '99

14 Apr '99

I just found that there is still one MacNFS client that is shipping. In an earlier post I had stated that there were no MacOS NFS clients available. Ascend bought Intercon which had published NFS/Share. It is now a part of IntragyAccess. I haven't seen it, but it might be an option for those of you who don't want to dedicate a UNIX server to reexport NFS shares via KA-Share, EtherShare, or netatalk. I looked around a little bit and PCZone/MacZone seems to have copies available. http://www.ascend.com/2405.html --clark http://macunix.com

2 2

Re: NDMP support, Arkeia and others
by Jason D. Kelleher 14 Apr '99

14 Apr '99

In message <19990413141027.A21139(a)sonic.net>, Dane Jasper writes: >I'm interested in seeing NetApp work closely with backup software vendors >such as Arkeia to further NDMP support. Arkeia now supports backup of the >Cobalt product line, including their (non exandable, small scale) RAID-1 NA >S >product. > >It would be great if NetApp would contact Arkeia and extend any assistance >they can in the extension of the Arkeia backup tool. This type of support >can only be beneficial for both companies, and end users too! > >Arkeia is at http://www.knox-software.com/. Arkeia is similar to Legato's >Networker product, but supports other server platforms and costs less. > >BRU is another backup product where I'd love to see NDMP support included. >BRU is at http://www.estinc.com/. > >NetApp customers, please voice your support to NetApp if you see value in >more support for NDMP. I thought NDMP was great until I saw it break in every other ONTAP release. I'm still using it. I'm waiting for fixes to internal bugs (in 5.3). I'm feeling jaded. And the NetApp voice mail call system just hung up on me twice while writing this email... Time to break out the secret stash of enginner numbers... Just so I don't sound like I'm beating NetApp up too bad... Hurray for SNTP!!!! Second level trunks are awesome!!! (But the 5.3 docs concerning them suck... Have a call open to find out if I'm doing it right. Generates errors during failover, but it works.) jason

1 0

RE: Not a server
by Benn, Paul 14 Apr '99

14 Apr '99

It's been some time since I've used this tool so curiosity got the best of me. I looked in one of the Microsoft NT4 training manuals and found the following tidbit: "The Windows NT Server Migration Tool for NetWare is used to migrate NetWare servers to computers running Windows NT Server. This tool transfers user and group accounts, login scripts, and files and directories form NetWare servers to Windows NT server domain controllers." It makes sense that the transfer of user accounts/groups and login scripts would fail but not the transfer of data only (even though it says otherwise). Were the attempted migrations of data only? If so, then you're initial assumption that the tool only works with domain controllers was correct. -----Original Message----- From: JD Ambagtsheer [mailto:J.D.Ambagtsheer@fel.tno.nl] Sent: Monday, April 12, 1999 1:04 AM To: Benn, Paul Cc: toasters(a)mathworks.com Subject: Re: Not a server It doesn't matter for those questions, but, I also checked those before, and were positive. I'm not for sure, but with this tool, I can see the NetApp, can select it, but when press the OK button, the NT PDC comes with the message I told before. I think it is a problem with this tool that it can only apply this migration on a NT PDC, and not an external filer (although it sounds stupid..).

2 2

Jump to page:

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

2001

2000

1999

1998

1997

toasters