After a bunch of noodling we're still showing about 15% of our cifs sessions to be using NTLMv2 and I suspect it has to to with our DNS and the Service Principal Names of the Computer Object for the SVM in our AD.
I've pretty much established that whether a connection gets
Kerberos or NTLMv2 depends on what hostname the mapping is made
to, and whether Kerberos is happy with the reverse lookup of that
hostname and whether AD says there's a Service Principal Name for
that hostname.
How's this for muddy waters. Our SVM sits in a different DNS
domain than the AD domain its CIFS server is in. Worse, users
might access it from yet another DNS domain via CNAME. And its IP
is in a private IP space so it can't get a PTR record in that
other DNS domain. And some number of our users are still mapping
Windows network drives to yet another CNAME leftover from the last
time we migrated to a new cluster and SVM. Good times. Oh, and we
don't manage the Windows clients that connect to these shares, so
we have limited access to what hostnames they're even mapping to.
We also don't manage the Active Directory the SVM sits in except
for the Computers OU where it actually sits.
I've gotten as far as 85% Kerberos by:
I do still see new NTLMv2 connections being made but I think we're on the right track:
I'll keep you posted.
"Randy" == Randy Rue <randyrue@gmail.com> writes:Hello All, We've upgraded our AFF-A220 to 9.13.1 as per https://kb.netapp.com/Support_Bulletins/Customer_Bulletins/SU530and should be all good to go for next Tuesday's closing of the door on NTLMv2 authentication.However,scrb::> vserver cifs session show -vserver sdata -fields auth-mechanism,address,windows-user node vserver session-id connection-id address auth-mechanism windows-user -------- ---------- -------------------- ------------- --------------- -------------- ------------ scrb-a sdata 12223613813613660030 4271015427 10.6.154.156 NTLMv2 FHC\rgrasduestill shows all of our CIFS connections using NTLMv2 to authenticate (one line is shown of hundreds of connections)Are we ready for next week's update? Will the auth-mechanism change after we patch our DCs? Or will all our CIFS connections break?I'm in the same boat, we have a 9.5P5 cluster which just shows NTLMv1 and NTLMv2 logins. Can't seem to get it to do kerberos. I suspect it's something on the DC side of things, but our admins there haven't found anything. My other system, running 9.3P17 (so definitely affected) is only showing kerberos logins, so we should be ok there no matter what. John