toasters

toasters@lists.teaparty.net

1 participants
13515 discussions

/etc/dgateways questions
by Daniel Quinlan 27 Sep '98

27 Sep '98

This comment in the dgateways.5 manual page doesn't mean that you can't specify multiple addresses for a single router box, right? I assume not since I'm not getting error messages. :-) Duplicate gateway names or addresses are not allowed - only the first one encountered in the file will be added by routed to the default gateway table, and the additional ones will produce error messages. We only have one router per building right now, but each of our NetApps share more than one local interface with their respective building router because the NetApps are multihomed. My expectation is that by specifying multiple local interfaces for the router in /etc/dgateways will lessen the impact of a link failure affecting the current default gateway. A comment: it would be nifty if the selection of a default gateway (among gateways with the same metric) was more intelligent. It seems that the current method would easy allow a router interface that was going up and down more often than every 90 seconds to remain the default gateway. Any plans to change this? (A scheme based on reliability, traffic, and response time would be cool.) - Dan

1 0

Y2K Testing & compliance
by Thomson, Michael 25 Sep '98

25 Sep '98

Hi there! I've been asked some questions by our Y2K project team, specifically related to NetApp, and I'm unsure how to respond. >From the web page (http://www.netapp.com/y2k_table.html) it seems that the only thing that is 'preliminarily evaluated' is DOT 4.1. Can anyone give the authorative answer to: 1) Are there any plans to use a hardware clock that stores 4-digit years? 2) What Y2K tests were performed on DOT 4.1 3) Have later releases (4.1.3, 5.0, etc.) had the same tests run on them before release? 4) Can customers get access to NetApp test plans and results, directly or via a non-disclosure agreement? More generally, are people inclined to believe that, once certified by NetApp, the appliances can be treated as 'any other' NFS server by client machines, or would you advocate specific interoperational testing with NetApp kit? Cheers, Mike Thomson -- \\|||// Minds are like parachutes; (@ @) They only work when open. *---oOO-(_)-OOo------------------------------------* * Michael Thomson Email: mt53590(a)ggr.co.uk * * Unix Specialist Internal: 782 4393 * * Glaxo Wellcome External: 01438 764 393 * * Fax: 01438 763 204 * * .oooO Oooo. Mobile: 0498 725 047 * *--( )---( )-----------------------------------* \ ( ) / (Quote: Sir James Dewar) \_) (_/

4 6

Access Times on ONTAP
by Raymond Brennan 25 Sep '98

25 Sep '98

Hello, Does anyone know of a way to find out access times for files and directories on a netapps box running 5.1D4 which works on both Unix and Windows. Yours in Eager Anticipation, :) "ALCOHOL KILLS SLOWLY" So what ? Who's in a hurry ? - Buster Keaton

1 0

Re: A netapp failover possibility...???
by mds＠ns.gbnet.net 25 Sep '98

25 Sep '98

Seeing as the specific data in question could be considered readonly to the majority of clients, why not have them use an automount map with both filers in. We do that for our centrally maintained and served binaries and db's and it works very well. > Hi, > > We have two netapp filers serving mainly static data (updated overnight) > to several hp-ux clients. > > If one server fails we can swap the clients onto the other server by > mounting and switching symbollic links. >

8 9

Re: Soft Links ON NT ( again)
by Mark Muhlestein 24 Sep '98

24 Sep '98

Happy to hear things are working for you! And no, there is no fixed limit to the number of entries in the symlink.translations file. Mark -----Original Message----- From: Raymond Brennan <ray_brennan(a)mentorg.com> To: Mark Muhlestein <mmm(a)netapp.com> Cc: toasters(a)mathworks.com <toasters(a)mathworks.com> Date: Thursday, September 24, 1998 2:04 AM Subject: RE: Soft Links ON NT ( again) >Mark, > >It works ! Thanks very much. Just one more thing-I would like this to work >on some other quota trees also;can I just add similar lines into my >/etc/symlink.translations files ? > >Currently, my /etc/symlink.translations file looks like this : > >dv40ss5# cat symlink.translations >Map /eeg/sandbox/* /sandbox/* >dv40ss5# > >Presumably , I can add as many lines as I need like this for trees called >"shared","dev" or whatever: > >Map /eeg/sandbox/* /sandbox/* >Map /eeg/shared/* /shared/* >Map /eeg/dev/* /dev/* > >then terminate and restart CIFS and I'm in business ? I'm just checking that >there isn't a limit of one line in the /etc/symlink.translations file or >something like that.

1 0

RE: Soft Links ON NT ( again)
by Raymond Brennan 24 Sep '98

24 Sep '98

Mark, It works ! Thanks very much. Just one more thing-I would like this to work on some other quota trees also;can I just add similar lines into my /etc/symlink.translations files ? Currently, my /etc/symlink.translations file looks like this : dv40ss5# cat symlink.translations Map /eeg/sandbox/* /sandbox/* dv40ss5# Presumably , I can add as many lines as I need like this for trees called "shared","dev" or whatever: Map /eeg/sandbox/* /sandbox/* Map /eeg/shared/* /shared/* Map /eeg/dev/* /dev/* then terminate and restart CIFS and I'm in business ? I'm just checking that there isn't a limit of one line in the /etc/symlink.translations file or something like that. Please let me know ASAP, as this problem has caused us a huge backlog of work and we would like to get cracking again. Thanks, Raymond >-----Original Message----- >From: Mark Muhlestein [mailto:mmm@netapp.com] >Sent: Wednesday, September 23, 1998 6:15 PM >To: Raymond Brennan >Subject: Re: Soft Links ON NT ( again) > > >The syntax "//sandbox/*" isn't right, I suspect. That means you have a >volume named "sandbox". I'm assuming you want a directory named "sandbox" >in the root volume. In that case try it without the double slashes: > >Map /eeg/sandbox/* /sandbox/* > >Let me know if this works for you. > >Mark > >-----Original Message----- >From: Raymond Brennan <ray_brennan(a)mentorg.com> >To: Simmons Mr M D <mds46523(a)ggr.co.uk> >Cc: toasters(a)mathworks.com <toasters(a)mathworks.com> >Date: Wednesday, September 23, 1998 7:59 AM >Subject: RE: Soft Links ON NT ( again) > > >>maybe, I'll wait to see what Mark has to say. I've been trying to get this >>to work for over two weeks now without success. My users are getting a bit >>annoyed about it to say the least. Hopefully, we'll hear from him today >>before 5PM GMT. >> >>:? >> >>>-----Original Message----- >>>From: Simmons Mr M D [mailto:mds46523@ggr.co.uk] >>>Sent: Wednesday, September 23, 1998 3:56 PM >>>To: Raymond Brennan >>>Subject: Re: Soft Links ON NT ( again) >>> >>> >>>Hmm, I'm afraid I'm out of good ideas already. >>> >>>I can't see why it's not working now - perhaps we should see what >>>wisdom Mark >>>from NetApp can glean. >>> >>>Did you have to replace the symlink.translations file? Can it not >>>take both the >>>line you mentioned previously and the line you've got there now, >>>at the same >>>time? >>> >>>Keep us posted - this is of general interest IMHO. >>> >>>On Sep 23, 15:36, Raymond Brennan wrote: >>>> Subject: RE: Soft Links ON NT ( again) >>>> Mark, >>>> >>>> Now, I can see the permissions via SecureShare, but still can't >>>read or edit >>>> the file. >>>> Here is what the /etc/symlink.translations file now looks like : >>>> >>>> cat symlink.translations >>>> Map /eeg/sandbox/* //sandbox/* >>>> >>>> Here is what a long listing looks like on Unix : >>>> >>>> {dv40ss5::raybr} [10] % l >>>> total 2 >>>> drwxrwsr-x 2 raybr eeg 4096 Sep 22 16:21 . >>>> drwxr-sr-x 6 raybr eeg 4096 Sep 22 14:01 .. >>>> lrwxrwxrwx 1 raybr eeg 25 Sep 22 15:19 >absolutesoftlink -> >>>> /eeg/sandbox/raybr/1/test >>>> -rw-rw-r-- 2 raybr eeg 6 Sep 22 14:03 hardlink >>>> lrwxrwxrwx 1 raybr eeg 9 Sep 22 15:18 >relativesoftlink -> >>>> ../1/test >>>> {dv40ss5::raybr} [11] % >>>> >>>> The file I want to be able to access is absolutesoftlink. if I >>>try to send >>>> it to a text editor, I get : >>>> >>>> Access is denied. >>>> >>>> I have stopped and restarted CIFS as you said. So, what do I do now ? >>>> >>>> :( >>>> >>>> >-----Original Message----- >>>> >From: Simmons Mr M D [mailto:mds46523@ggr.co.uk] >>>> >Sent: Wednesday, September 23, 1998 3:14 PM >>>> >To: Raymond Brennan; Mark Muhlestein >>>> >Cc: toasters(a)mathworks.com >>>> >Subject: Re: Soft Links ON NT ( again) >>>> > >>>> > >>>> >On Sep 23, 10:59, Raymond Brennan wrote: >>>> >> Subject: RE: Soft Links ON NT ( again) >>>> >> Mark, >>>> >> >>>> >> I've got a quota tree on my F520 called "sandbox". My F520 >>>system name is >>>> >> "tap", mainly because I got fed up of typing in "netapp" all the >time. >>>> >> Anyway, what I'm trying to do is to get soft links with absolute >>>> >path names >>>> >> to work on NT. They work fine on Unix(as you woud expect). >>>I've installed >>>> >> SecureShare on all my PCs and am using Unix-style security on >>>> >"sandbox" and >>>> >> indeed as the default security style on all other trees. >>>> >> >>>> >> I use NIS on my LAN. "sandbox" on "tap" is accessed on Unix as >>>> >> /eeg/sandbox-the NIS map is called auto.eeg and has this line in it >: >>>> >> >>>> >> sandbox -intr tap:/sandbox >>>> >> >>>> >> So, on Unix, all I have to do is >>>> >> >>>> >> # cd /eeg/sandbox >>>> >> >>>> >> and I'm there. Hard links (ln file linkname) work fine on NT, as >>>> >do relative >>>> >> soft links ( ln -s ../file linkname). The problem I'm having >>>is with soft >>>> >> links with absolute path names on NT. If, for example, I do >>>> >> # cd /eeg/sandbox/dir2 >>>> >> # ln -s /eeg/sandbox/dir1/file linkname >>>> >> >>>> >> NT can't seem to access linkname on /eeg/sandbox/dir2 at all, >>>apart from >>>> >> showing it in the Windows Explorer. I hope this is clear. >>>> >> >>>> >> My /etc/symlink.translations file looks like this : >>>> >> >>>> >> Map /sandbox/* //sandbox/* >>>> >> >>>> >> The double slash on the second field is to counteract Bud ID >>>> >9553, which I >>>> >> found on the NOW website. Also, I've tried terminating and >>>> >restarting CIFS, >>>> >> but without success. >>>> >> >>>> >> Thanks for any help you can give me. >>>> > >>>> >I think I know why the NT box is having problems, and I think I >>>> >can demonstrate >>>> >a similar situation on two Unix boxes. >>>> > >>>> >Simply put, absolute symlinks have too much information, they're >>>> >too precise >>>> >for either the NT box or the filer to map them correctly. >>>> > >>>> >To demonstrate my hypothetical scenario, I've use my home >>>> >directory on ukwfs2 >>>> >another F520 (running 4.3.1, for interest). >>>> > >>>> >On our (SunOS4.1.4) admin host: >>>> > >>>> >uk-dns-stv1-root /net/ukwfs2/users/d23/mds46523: ln -s \ >>>> > >>>> >/net/ukwfs2/users/d23/mds46523/dead.letter flibble >>>> > >>>> >uk-dns-stv1-root /net/ukwfs2/users/d23/mds46523: ln -s >>>> >./dead.letter flobble >>>> > >>>> >Creating two symlinks in my home directory to a simple text-file also >>>> >in the directory, one absolute, one relative. >>>> > >>>> >Now, on a client, in my home directory: >>>> > >>>> >0 ukwit12> head -2 flibble >>>> >UX:head: ERROR: Cannot read from flibble >>>> >1 ukwit12> head -2 flobble >>>> >>From mds46523 Thu Sep 17 18:07:40 1998 >>>> >From: mds46523(a)ukwsv1.ggr.co.uk (Simmons Mr M D) >>>> > >>>> >The absolute symlink simply overspecifies the location, which my >>>> >client has no >>>> >way to map to something it can understand and use. >>>> > >>>> >The NT box is in as bad a position as my Unix client - the >>>/eeg/... part of >>>> >any absolute symlink in your Unix domain doesn't match anything in >>>> >the NT box's >>>> >wordlview, and the filer has no rule to map it for the NT box. >>>> > >>>> >Extend the mapping rules in the filer, or revert all absolute >>>symlinks to >>>> >relative symlinks and I think you'll be able to work around the >problem. >>>> > >>>> >I'd try adding: >>>> > >>>> >Map /eeg/sandbox/* //sandbox/* >>>> > >>>> >to your /etc/symlink.translations file. >>>> > >>>> >> >>>> >> :) >>>> >> >>>> >> "What do people mean when they say the computer went down on them?" >>>> >> >>>> >> --Marilyn Pittman >>>> >> >>>> >> >-----Original Message----- >>>> >> >From: Mark Muhlestein [mailto:mmm@netapp.com] >>>> >> >Sent: Tuesday, September 22, 1998 6:40 PM >>>> >> >To: Raymond Brennan >>>> >> >Subject: Re: Soft Links ON NT ( again) >>>> >> > >>>> >> > >>>> >> >Send me a copy of your symlink.translations file, along with >>>a specific >>>> >> >description of what you are trying to do, and I'll try to >>>help get you >>>> >> >going. >>>> >> > >>>> >> >One thing that may not be documented clearly is that you >>>have to restart >>>> >> >cifs before the symlink.translations file is reloaded. Yes, >>>it's a bug. >>>> >> > >>>> >> >Mark Muhlestein -- mmm(a)netapp.com >>>> >> > >>>> >> <SNIP> >>>> >>-- End of excerpt from Raymond Brennan >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> >-- >>>> >-Mark, TSG Unix admin and support, int 782 2499, ext +44 1438 76 2499. >>>> > ... an Englishman in London ... >>>> > >>>>-- End of excerpt from Raymond Brennan >>> >>> >>> >>>-- >>>-Mark, TSG Unix admin and support, int 782 2499, ext +44 1438 76 2499. >>> ... an Englishman in London ... >>> >> >> >

1 0

RE: Soft Links ON NT ( again)
by Raymond Brennan 23 Sep '98

23 Sep '98

maybe, I'll wait to see what Mark has to say. I've been trying to get this to work for over two weeks now without success. My users are getting a bit annoyed about it to say the least. Hopefully, we'll hear from him today before 5PM GMT. :? >-----Original Message----- >From: Simmons Mr M D [mailto:mds46523@ggr.co.uk] >Sent: Wednesday, September 23, 1998 3:56 PM >To: Raymond Brennan >Subject: Re: Soft Links ON NT ( again) > > >Hmm, I'm afraid I'm out of good ideas already. > >I can't see why it's not working now - perhaps we should see what >wisdom Mark >from NetApp can glean. > >Did you have to replace the symlink.translations file? Can it not >take both the >line you mentioned previously and the line you've got there now, >at the same >time? > >Keep us posted - this is of general interest IMHO. > >On Sep 23, 15:36, Raymond Brennan wrote: >> Subject: RE: Soft Links ON NT ( again) >> Mark, >> >> Now, I can see the permissions via SecureShare, but still can't >read or edit >> the file. >> Here is what the /etc/symlink.translations file now looks like : >> >> cat symlink.translations >> Map /eeg/sandbox/* //sandbox/* >> >> Here is what a long listing looks like on Unix : >> >> {dv40ss5::raybr} [10] % l >> total 2 >> drwxrwsr-x 2 raybr eeg 4096 Sep 22 16:21 . >> drwxr-sr-x 6 raybr eeg 4096 Sep 22 14:01 .. >> lrwxrwxrwx 1 raybr eeg 25 Sep 22 15:19 absolutesoftlink -> >> /eeg/sandbox/raybr/1/test >> -rw-rw-r-- 2 raybr eeg 6 Sep 22 14:03 hardlink >> lrwxrwxrwx 1 raybr eeg 9 Sep 22 15:18 relativesoftlink -> >> ../1/test >> {dv40ss5::raybr} [11] % >> >> The file I want to be able to access is absolutesoftlink. if I >try to send >> it to a text editor, I get : >> >> Access is denied. >> >> I have stopped and restarted CIFS as you said. So, what do I do now ? >> >> :( >> >> >-----Original Message----- >> >From: Simmons Mr M D [mailto:mds46523@ggr.co.uk] >> >Sent: Wednesday, September 23, 1998 3:14 PM >> >To: Raymond Brennan; Mark Muhlestein >> >Cc: toasters(a)mathworks.com >> >Subject: Re: Soft Links ON NT ( again) >> > >> > >> >On Sep 23, 10:59, Raymond Brennan wrote: >> >> Subject: RE: Soft Links ON NT ( again) >> >> Mark, >> >> >> >> I've got a quota tree on my F520 called "sandbox". My F520 >system name is >> >> "tap", mainly because I got fed up of typing in "netapp" all the time. >> >> Anyway, what I'm trying to do is to get soft links with absolute >> >path names >> >> to work on NT. They work fine on Unix(as you woud expect). >I've installed >> >> SecureShare on all my PCs and am using Unix-style security on >> >"sandbox" and >> >> indeed as the default security style on all other trees. >> >> >> >> I use NIS on my LAN. "sandbox" on "tap" is accessed on Unix as >> >> /eeg/sandbox-the NIS map is called auto.eeg and has this line in it : >> >> >> >> sandbox -intr tap:/sandbox >> >> >> >> So, on Unix, all I have to do is >> >> >> >> # cd /eeg/sandbox >> >> >> >> and I'm there. Hard links (ln file linkname) work fine on NT, as >> >do relative >> >> soft links ( ln -s ../file linkname). The problem I'm having >is with soft >> >> links with absolute path names on NT. If, for example, I do >> >> # cd /eeg/sandbox/dir2 >> >> # ln -s /eeg/sandbox/dir1/file linkname >> >> >> >> NT can't seem to access linkname on /eeg/sandbox/dir2 at all, >apart from >> >> showing it in the Windows Explorer. I hope this is clear. >> >> >> >> My /etc/symlink.translations file looks like this : >> >> >> >> Map /sandbox/* //sandbox/* >> >> >> >> The double slash on the second field is to counteract Bud ID >> >9553, which I >> >> found on the NOW website. Also, I've tried terminating and >> >restarting CIFS, >> >> but without success. >> >> >> >> Thanks for any help you can give me. >> > >> >I think I know why the NT box is having problems, and I think I >> >can demonstrate >> >a similar situation on two Unix boxes. >> > >> >Simply put, absolute symlinks have too much information, they're >> >too precise >> >for either the NT box or the filer to map them correctly. >> > >> >To demonstrate my hypothetical scenario, I've use my home >> >directory on ukwfs2 >> >another F520 (running 4.3.1, for interest). >> > >> >On our (SunOS4.1.4) admin host: >> > >> >uk-dns-stv1-root /net/ukwfs2/users/d23/mds46523: ln -s \ >> > >> >/net/ukwfs2/users/d23/mds46523/dead.letter flibble >> > >> >uk-dns-stv1-root /net/ukwfs2/users/d23/mds46523: ln -s >> >./dead.letter flobble >> > >> >Creating two symlinks in my home directory to a simple text-file also >> >in the directory, one absolute, one relative. >> > >> >Now, on a client, in my home directory: >> > >> >0 ukwit12> head -2 flibble >> >UX:head: ERROR: Cannot read from flibble >> >1 ukwit12> head -2 flobble >> >>From mds46523 Thu Sep 17 18:07:40 1998 >> >From: mds46523(a)ukwsv1.ggr.co.uk (Simmons Mr M D) >> > >> >The absolute symlink simply overspecifies the location, which my >> >client has no >> >way to map to something it can understand and use. >> > >> >The NT box is in as bad a position as my Unix client - the >/eeg/... part of >> >any absolute symlink in your Unix domain doesn't match anything in >> >the NT box's >> >wordlview, and the filer has no rule to map it for the NT box. >> > >> >Extend the mapping rules in the filer, or revert all absolute >symlinks to >> >relative symlinks and I think you'll be able to work around the problem. >> > >> >I'd try adding: >> > >> >Map /eeg/sandbox/* //sandbox/* >> > >> >to your /etc/symlink.translations file. >> > >> >> >> >> :) >> >> >> >> "What do people mean when they say the computer went down on them?" >> >> >> >> --Marilyn Pittman >> >> >> >> >-----Original Message----- >> >> >From: Mark Muhlestein [mailto:mmm@netapp.com] >> >> >Sent: Tuesday, September 22, 1998 6:40 PM >> >> >To: Raymond Brennan >> >> >Subject: Re: Soft Links ON NT ( again) >> >> > >> >> > >> >> >Send me a copy of your symlink.translations file, along with >a specific >> >> >description of what you are trying to do, and I'll try to >help get you >> >> >going. >> >> > >> >> >One thing that may not be documented clearly is that you >have to restart >> >> >cifs before the symlink.translations file is reloaded. Yes, >it's a bug. >> >> > >> >> >Mark Muhlestein -- mmm(a)netapp.com >> >> > >> >> <SNIP> >> >>-- End of excerpt from Raymond Brennan >> > >> > >> > >> >-- >> >-Mark, TSG Unix admin and support, int 782 2499, ext +44 1438 76 2499. >> > ... an Englishman in London ... >> > >>-- End of excerpt from Raymond Brennan > > > >-- >-Mark, TSG Unix admin and support, int 782 2499, ext +44 1438 76 2499. > ... an Englishman in London ... >

1 0

Re: Soft Links ON NT ( again)
by mds46523＠ggr.co.uk 23 Sep '98

23 Sep '98

On Sep 23, 10:59, Raymond Brennan wrote: > Subject: RE: Soft Links ON NT ( again) > Mark, > > I've got a quota tree on my F520 called "sandbox". My F520 system name is > "tap", mainly because I got fed up of typing in "netapp" all the time. > Anyway, what I'm trying to do is to get soft links with absolute path names > to work on NT. They work fine on Unix(as you woud expect). I've installed > SecureShare on all my PCs and am using Unix-style security on "sandbox" and > indeed as the default security style on all other trees. > > I use NIS on my LAN. "sandbox" on "tap" is accessed on Unix as > /eeg/sandbox-the NIS map is called auto.eeg and has this line in it : > > sandbox -intr tap:/sandbox > > So, on Unix, all I have to do is > > # cd /eeg/sandbox > > and I'm there. Hard links (ln file linkname) work fine on NT, as do relative > soft links ( ln -s ../file linkname). The problem I'm having is with soft > links with absolute path names on NT. If, for example, I do > # cd /eeg/sandbox/dir2 > # ln -s /eeg/sandbox/dir1/file linkname > > NT can't seem to access linkname on /eeg/sandbox/dir2 at all, apart from > showing it in the Windows Explorer. I hope this is clear. > > My /etc/symlink.translations file looks like this : > > Map /sandbox/* //sandbox/* > > The double slash on the second field is to counteract Bud ID 9553, which I > found on the NOW website. Also, I've tried terminating and restarting CIFS, > but without success. > > Thanks for any help you can give me. I think I know why the NT box is having problems, and I think I can demonstrate a similar situation on two Unix boxes. Simply put, absolute symlinks have too much information, they're too precise for either the NT box or the filer to map them correctly. To demonstrate my hypothetical scenario, I've use my home directory on ukwfs2 another F520 (running 4.3.1, for interest). On our (SunOS4.1.4) admin host: uk-dns-stv1-root /net/ukwfs2/users/d23/mds46523: ln -s \ /net/ukwfs2/users/d23/mds46523/dead.letter flibble uk-dns-stv1-root /net/ukwfs2/users/d23/mds46523: ln -s ./dead.letter flobble Creating two symlinks in my home directory to a simple text-file also in the directory, one absolute, one relative. Now, on a client, in my home directory: 0 ukwit12> head -2 flibble UX:head: ERROR: Cannot read from flibble 1 ukwit12> head -2 flobble >From mds46523 Thu Sep 17 18:07:40 1998 From: mds46523(a)ukwsv1.ggr.co.uk (Simmons Mr M D) The absolute symlink simply overspecifies the location, which my client has no way to map to something it can understand and use. The NT box is in as bad a position as my Unix client - the /eeg/... part of any absolute symlink in your Unix domain doesn't match anything in the NT box's wordlview, and the filer has no rule to map it for the NT box. Extend the mapping rules in the filer, or revert all absolute symlinks to relative symlinks and I think you'll be able to work around the problem. I'd try adding: Map /eeg/sandbox/* //sandbox/* to your /etc/symlink.translations file. > > :) > > "What do people mean when they say the computer went down on them?" > > --Marilyn Pittman > > >-----Original Message----- > >From: Mark Muhlestein [mailto:mmm@netapp.com] > >Sent: Tuesday, September 22, 1998 6:40 PM > >To: Raymond Brennan > >Subject: Re: Soft Links ON NT ( again) > > > > > >Send me a copy of your symlink.translations file, along with a specific > >description of what you are trying to do, and I'll try to help get you > >going. > > > >One thing that may not be documented clearly is that you have to restart > >cifs before the symlink.translations file is reloaded. Yes, it's a bug. > > > >Mark Muhlestein -- mmm(a)netapp.com > > > <SNIP> >-- End of excerpt from Raymond Brennan -- -Mark, TSG Unix admin and support, int 782 2499, ext +44 1438 76 2499. ... an Englishman in London ...

2 1

RE: Soft Links ON NT ( again)
by Raymond Brennan 23 Sep '98

23 Sep '98

Mark, I've got a quota tree on my F520 called "sandbox". My F520 system name is "tap", mainly because I got fed up of typing in "netapp" all the time. Anyway, what I'm trying to do is to get soft links with absolute path names to work on NT. They work fine on Unix(as you woud expect). I've installed SecureShare on all my PCs and am using Unix-style security on "sandbox" and indeed as the default security style on all other trees. I use NIS on my LAN. "sandbox" on "tap" is accessed on Unix as /eeg/sandbox-the NIS map is called auto.eeg and has this line in it : sandbox -intr tap:/sandbox So, on Unix, all I have to do is # cd /eeg/sandbox and I'm there. Hard links (ln file linkname) work fine on NT, as do relative soft links ( ln -s ../file linkname). The problem I'm having is with soft links with absolute path names on NT. If, for example, I do # cd /eeg/sandbox/dir2 # ln -s /eeg/sandbox/dir1/file linkname NT can't seem to access linkname on /eeg/sandbox/dir2 at all, apart from showing it in the Windows Explorer. I hope this is clear. My /etc/symlink.translations file looks like this : Map /sandbox/* //sandbox/* The double slash on the second field is to counteract Bud ID 9553, which I found on the NOW website. Also, I've tried terminating and restarting CIFS, but without success. Thanks for any help you can give me. :) "What do people mean when they say the computer went down on them?" --Marilyn Pittman >-----Original Message----- >From: Mark Muhlestein [mailto:mmm@netapp.com] >Sent: Tuesday, September 22, 1998 6:40 PM >To: Raymond Brennan >Subject: Re: Soft Links ON NT ( again) > > >Send me a copy of your symlink.translations file, along with a specific >description of what you are trying to do, and I'll try to help get you >going. > >One thing that may not be documented clearly is that you have to restart >cifs before the symlink.translations file is reloaded. Yes, it's a bug. > >Mark Muhlestein -- mmm(a)netapp.com > <SNIP>

1 0

Re: Soft Links on NT
by Keith Brown 22 Sep '98

22 Sep '98

>This mentions Release 4.3. However, I'm on 5.1D4 and does this work ? >In a word : NO. Any "bugs" of which I am unaware not withstanding... no! The CIFS symlink following mechanism should work in a Data ONTAP 5.1 release just as it did in the 4.3 releases. So let's see what might be up... >I've got an F520 running release 5.1D4. I've got a problem with reading Unix >soft links on NT. Symbolic links. OK... >NetApps Inc. say that soft links only work on NT within >one quota tree. That is a difficult thing t live with, but I suppose I'll >have to. The limitation that exists with the symlink following mechanism is that the encountered link must point to a location in the filer's file system that resides under the same *share* that the client encountering the link originally connected to in order to be able to hit the link in the first place (if you see what I'm saying? :-)). The "problem" is a rather fundamental one. If a link points to a location on the filer that is outside of the scope of the share being accessed from a client, our software has no way of telling the client to disconnect itself from the existing share and reconnect to another that could *possibly* allow it to go to the destination (even if one existed). Simply taking the client to the destination without regard to share security would be a "well iffy" piece of behavior from the security perspective. As for the quota tree limitation you specifically mention, yes, I believe that might be a new thing in 5.1, but there is a good reason for it and it isn't actually that much of a "new restriction" in practice. The good reason for it is that now our qtrees can have different security styles associated with them. You only get to inform a client about the security of the file system it is connecting to (FAT or NTFS) at connect time, so taking a client from a FAT file system (which actually has UNIX security on it in our case), to an NTFS file system would definately constitute a problematic situation in the eyes of the protocol. There's just no mechanism to cleanly handle such a transition. Oh... and the reason that it isn't actually that much of a (new) restriction is that qtrees are always rooted in the root directory of a volume, so the only share that a client could possibly connect to that would allow inter-qtree jumps while still obeying the "in the same share" rule, would be the C$, D$, E$ etc, etc... administrative shares, which aren't normally used by ordinary users. >I can make soft links with relative pathnames work OK, but what about links >with absolute pathnames ? On the NOW NetApp site, I found a sysadmin man >page mentioning the /etc/symlink.translations file, which is apparently a >way to make this work. It's a way to make *something* work, but not inter-share jumps. From a UNIX client you may have created symlinks that a filer could not possibly follow, because they point to locations that are not actually on the filer. A UNIX client can follow these links elsewhere because it is an NFS client. A filer can't, because it is not. The symlink translation mechanism lets you make a copy of the target data somewhere that *is* on the filer (manually), and then automatically translate the existing symlinks to hook a Windows client over to it. Make sense? Keith

1 0

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