Samba, Named or .... ?

Problem: when click on 'My Network Places' -> 'Entire Network' in WinMe nothing showed, in XP message that workgroup cannot be browsed. If I do 'Search for Computers' (in both systems) - computer was instantly found and all the shares worked properly (including printer). In fact if I switch to see folders everything is showed including workgroup, but click on workgroup name have the same result as before (clicking on computer names or shares works properly).

Master browser is Samba on FC2 linux.

Why cannot Win browse network like it suppose to be?

Additional info:
Linux FC2 (ss1) and two win workstations (sale2, sale1)
On Linux:
eth0 -> 212.30.79.254 (public IP)
eth1 -> 192.168.14.1 (local IP)

smbd Version 3.0.7-2.FC2
nmbd Version 3.0.7-2.FC2

smb.conf:
[global]
        workgroup = BASING
        server string = ss1 Fedora2
        hosts allow = 192.168.14. 127.
        unix charset = UTF8
        display charset = UTF8
        printing = cups
        load printers = yes
        printcap name = cups
        guest account = smb
        log file = /var/log/samba/%m.log
        log level = 2
        max log size = 50
        security = user
        encrypt passwords = yes
        smb passwd file = /etc/samba/smbpasswd
        socket options = TCP_NODELAY
        interfaces = 192.168.14.1/255.255.255.0 127.0.0.1/255.0.0.0
        bind interfaces only = yes
        remote browse sync = 192.168.14.1
        lm announce = auto
        lm interval = 60
        browse list = yes
        enhanced browsing = yes
        local master = Yes
        os level = 75
        preferred master = Yes
        large readwrite = yes
        name resolve order = lmhosts wins bcast
        wins support = Yes
        wins proxy = no
        dns proxy = No
        show add printer wizard = yes

In log files:
nmbd.log
-----------------
  *****

  Samba name server NS1 is now a local master browser for workgroup BASING on subnet 192.168.14.1

  *****
[2004/10/21 11:53:03, 0] nmbd/nmbd_browsesync.c:domain_master_node_status_fail(250)
  domain_master_node_status_fail:
  Doing a node status request to the domain master browser
  for workgroup BASING at IP 212.30.78.251 failed.
  Cannot sync browser lists.
-----------------
???? WHY is it browsing public IP if it is not in the smb.conf?

sale2.log
-----------------
[2004/10/19 06:32:15, 2] smbd/sesssetup.c:setup_new_vc_session(608)
  setup_new_vc_session: New VC == 0, if NT4.x compatible we would close all old resources.
[2004/10/19 06:32:15, 2] smbd/sesssetup.c:setup_new_vc_session(608)
  setup_new_vc_session: New VC == 0, if NT4.x compatible we would close all old resources.
[2004/10/19 06:32:15, 1] auth/auth_util.c:make_server_info_sam(822)
  User smb in passdb, but getpwnam() fails!
[2004/10/19 06:32:15, 2] auth/auth.c:check_ntlm_password(312)
  check_ntlm_password:  Authentication for user [] -> [] FAILED with error NT_STATUS_NO_SUCH_USER
[2004/10/19 06:32:15, 2] smbd/server.c:exit_server(571)
  Closing connections
-----------------
In smbpasswd user exists and is enabled and usr/pass is the same as in Winbox

Anyone has any idea please?
vsasaAsked:
Who is Participating?
I wear a lot of hats...

"The solutions and answers provided on Experts Exchange have been extremely helpful to me over the last few years. I wear a lot of hats - Developer, Database Administrator, Help Desk, etc., so I know a lot of things but not a lot about one thing. Experts Exchange gives me answers from people who do know a lot about one thing, in a easy to use platform." -Todd S.

paranoidcookieCommented:
Firstly change the interfaces line to eth1 rathr than an ip address.

What is providing DNS for your network?
0
paranoidcookieCommented:
Sorry tell a lie

try

bind interfaces only = True
interfaces = eth1 192.168.14.1

For a single ip address you dont use a subnet mask.
0
Gabriel OrozcoSolution ArchitectCommented:
well, no...

it had happen to me and what I do is to increase the oslevel, while also try to force an election to become the group master.

like this:

os level = 255
remote announce = 192.168.14.255
interfaces = eth1 lo
local master = Yes
preferred master = Yes

test it
0

Experts Exchange Solution brought to you by

Your issues matter to us.

Facing a tech roadblock? Get the help and guidance you need from experienced professionals who care. Ask your question anytime, anywhere, with no hassle.

Start your 7-day free trial
Cloud Class® Course: Microsoft Windows 7 Basic

This introductory course to Windows 7 environment will teach you about working with the Windows operating system. You will learn about basic functions including start menu; the desktop; managing files, folders, and libraries.

vsasaAuthor Commented:
Hi

First thanx to paranoidcookie and Redimido for suggestios

I did try all suggested combinatios in smb.conf but with no effect.
What is more interesting it seems that if I put
interfaces = eth1 lo
or
interfaces = eth1
or IP with/wihout mask,
I always got the same effect.

More interesting is that if I connect using 'search for Computers' and map shared dir as network drive, after rebooting XP it is shown in the list and works perfectly.

I am no expert for linux/samba but there is no sence for me when I see in the nmbd.log
something like this:
---------
[2004/10/21 22:33:32, 0] nmbd/nmbd_browsesync.c:domain_master_node_status_fail(250)
  domain_master_node_status_fail:
  Doing a node status request to the domain master browser
  for workgroup BASING at IP 212.30.79.254 failed.
  Cannot sync browser lists.
---------
Why the ... it is looking for my workgroup on my public IP???

Nevertheless, I think that problem is somwhere in the user/group rights because every time I click
on the workgroup name (Basing) in XP windows return the message like:

'Basing is not accesible. You might not have permission to use this network resource. Contact the administrator of this server to find out if you have access permissions.
The network name cannot be found.'
(I contacted me but didn't find the answer)
and at the same time in samba log for my workstation there is a message:
-------
[2004/10/21 22:44:01, 1] auth/auth_util.c:make_server_info_sam(822)
  User smb in passdb, but getpwnam() fails!
[2004/10/21 22:44:01, 2] auth/auth.c:check_ntlm_password(312)
  check_ntlm_password:  Authentication for user [] -> [] FAILED with error NT_STATUS_NO_SUCH_USER
-------
It looks to me like XP tried to connect without user name!?

I can assume that something is wrong with my XP, but I also have ME on another station and the result is the same. Additionaly, if I put back my old linux (RH7.3+updates) everything on every winbox works properly.

Does anyone have any idea what is going on?
Thanx
0
paranoidcookieCommented:
For some reason samba is binding to your public ip address and it spooning everything up.

Seriously I think you need to look at the DNS resoluion on your network, if dns is wrong you start getting weird error servers looking in the wrong place for each other.
As a test add the machines into the hosts files
0
Gabriel OrozcoSolution ArchitectCommented:
mmhh... would you mind to post the output of

ifconfig

and

route -n ?
0
vsasaAuthor Commented:
SORRY, SORRY, SORRY!

I owe everyone a big apology.

In a hurry to set up my new linuxbox as soon as bossible, I overlooked an obvious detail (obvious to me now):
as I copied conf files from old to new linux I forgot to create user smb like it is very obvious written in smb.conf ( guest account = smb ) - stupid me.
The moment I did it everything started to work properly.

Once again, apology to everyone for taking your time for nothing (or maybe it wasn't for nothing).

Best regards to everyone
0
It's more than this solution.Get answers and train to solve all your tech problems - anytime, anywhere.Try it for free Edge Out The Competitionfor your dream job with proven skills and certifications.Get started today Stand Outas the employee with proven skills.Start learning today for free Move Your Career Forwardwith certification training in the latest technologies.Start your trial today
Linux Networking

From novice to tech pro — start learning today.

Question has a verified solution.

Are you are experiencing a similar issue? Get a personalized answer when you ask a related question.

Have a better answer? Share it in a comment.