[Dnsmasq-discuss] dnsmasq + samba??
GrantC
grant_nospam@dodo.com.au
Thu, 24 Feb 2005 12:31:58 +1100
Greetings!
Just had this happen (backgrounder, deltree is firewall running
dnsmasq, peetoo (192.168.1.24) is fileserver, both run nfs + samba):
deltree:~$ mount /home/install/ <<== this is an NFS exsport from peetoo
mount: RPC: Remote system error - No route to host
deltree:~$ mount /home/install/
deltree:~$ df
Filesystem 1K-blocks Used Available Use% Mounted on
/dev/hda3 661220 430156 231064 66% /
/dev/hda5 156155 13047 135046 9% /var
/dev/hda6 62437 6992 52221 12% /usr/local
peetoo:/home/install 20562504 15955656 4606848 78% /home/install
Feb 24 11:39:24 deltree dnsmasq[204]: query peetoo.mire.mine.nu[A] from 127.0.0.1
Feb 24 11:39:24 deltree dnsmasq[204]: /usr/local/etc/hosts peetoo.mire.mine.nu is 192.168.2.24
Feb 24 11:39:24 deltree dnsmasq[204]: /usr/local/etc/hosts peetoo.mire.mine.nu is 192.168.1.24
Feb 24 11:39:57 deltree dnsmasq[204]: query peetoo.mire.mine.nu[A] from 127.0.0.1
Feb 24 11:39:57 deltree dnsmasq[204]: /usr/local/etc/hosts peetoo.mire.mine.nu is 192.168.1.24
Feb 24 11:39:57 deltree dnsmasq[204]: /usr/local/etc/hosts peetoo.mire.mine.nu is 192.168.2.24
Feb 24 11:39:57 deltree dnsmasq[204]: query 1.1.168.192.in-addr.arpa[PTR] from 192.168.1.24
Feb 24 11:39:57 deltree dnsmasq[204]: /etc/hosts 192.168.1.1 is deltree.mire.mine.nu
Feb 24 11:39:57 deltree dnsmasq[204]: query deltree.mire.mine.nu[A] from 192.168.1.24
Feb 24 11:39:57 deltree dnsmasq[204]: /etc/hosts deltree.mire.mine.nu is 192.168.1.1
Correct dnsmasq operation, but I'm having trouble with samba on
localnet /var/log/syslog full of messages like:
Feb 24 11:34:42 deltree smbd[839]: Denied connection from (0.0.0.0)
Feb 24 11:34:42 deltree smbd[839]: [2005/02/24 11:34:42, 0] lib/util_sock.c:get_peer_addr(1000)
Feb 24 11:34:42 deltree smbd[839]: getpeername failed. Error was Transport endpoint is not connected
Feb 24 11:34:42 deltree smbd[839]: Connection denied from 0.0.0.0
Feb 24 11:34:42 deltree smbd[839]: [2005/02/24 11:34:42, 0] lib/util_sock.c:write_socket_data(430)
Feb 24 11:34:42 deltree smbd[839]: write_socket_data: write failure. Error = Connection reset by peer
Feb 24 11:34:42 deltree smbd[839]: [2005/02/24 11:34:42, 0] lib/util_sock.c:write_socket(455)
Feb 24 11:34:42 deltree smbd[839]: write_socket: Error writing 5 bytes to socket 22: ERRNO = Connection reset by peer
Feb 24 11:34:42 deltree smbd[839]: [2005/02/24 11:34:42, 0] lib/util_sock.c:send_smb(647)
Feb 24 11:34:42 deltree smbd[839]: Error writing 5 bytes to client. -1. (Connection reset by peer)
I don't really know what the above log is telling me??
# network topology
# `````````````````
#
# ---------------- ------------ LAN
# ( ) Phone | | Machines
# ( Big Bad Internet )--------| ADSL Modem |
# ( ) Line | | 100-Base-T ------
# ---------------- ------------ Switch | |
# | ------| |
# Public IP | X_WORLD | | |
# .----------. | | |_| ------
# | | ------------- | /
# | Laptop | | ppp0/eth2 | ---/ ------
# |__________| 10-Base-2 | | | \ | | |
# \\ . . . . \---------------|eth1 eth0|------|/ /|----| |
# \\ . . . . \ | | | \ | | |
# \\__________\ | Firewall | ---\ ------
# `-===------' X_LAN_2 ------------- | \
# 192.168.2.0/24 | |_| ------
# | | |
# ------| |
# X_LAN_1 | |
# 192.168.1.0/24 ------
#
# Not shown in the above diagram is that the 10-Base-2 cable also connects
# one or two additional machines that may take on the role of system
# firewall. This redundancy requires that some machines switch from
# being a localnet 'host' to being the localnet 'master' providing
# firewall, routing, nameserver and dhcp services to the localnet.
Mix of win98, win2k, winxp and linux boxen on localnet, less than
ten machines, but some multi-boot and I give them different IP
depending on OS as that seems to confuse windows (and me) less.
The fileserver (peetoo) is connected to both local subnets.
I'm using slackware 10.1 with 2.4.29-hf2 kernel and samba 3.0.10.
(See: http://linux.exosec.net/kernel/2.4-hf/ for 'hotfix' 2.4 kernels)
Anyone recognise the smbd errors? And are they locking up interface,
interfering with dnsmasq?
Thanks,
Grant.