Hi Folks,
I have three NASs: two Buffalo Link Stations, and one ASUStor. It never occurred to me to check for case insensitivity before, but I did and they aren't! This surprises me because case sensitivity is much easier to implement and it does not surprise me because the Windows world is case insensitive.
So, my first question is, "Can I require case sensitivity during the mount command?". I can't find anything about that, but I have seen comments claiming that CIFS mounts are case sensitive by default, but mine clearly aren't.
As an ancillary question, does anybody know if btrfs is case sensitive? I've spent some time looking, but I haven't found any comments I trust. For example, the [ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Btrfs | Wikipedia article ] fails to mention it.
Thanks for the help,
--
Chris.
V:916.799.9461
F:916.974.0428
A: Because we read from top to bottom, left to right.
Q: > Why should I start my reply below the quoted text?
Hi Folks,
O.M.G.! I have spent all afternoon trying to diagnose a DNS problem that presents like corruption but I can't find any trace, beyond the failure that I think is the result. This is a Windows Server problem...
I have a domain name for my NAS -- "\\NAS0.TCLC.org = 10.1.1.80", and all evaluations show me that translation. I can ping it; I can nslookup; I can run the DNS management application. My linux machines can "mount //NAS0.TCLC.ORG/d0 /net/nas0/d0 ..." All work exactly as you'd expect. Then I try to view the share with the Windows File Explorer -- "Windows can't find the DNS name"!! In that case I can use the IP address directly or the alternate domain name, so it is the domain name on the windows machines that is the problem, not the disk access protocol. I also created a second domain name "\\NASX.TCLC.org = 10.1.1.80" and that one work just fine everywhere!
Here I tried the command prompt:
C:\Windows\system32>net use n: \\10.1.1.80\d0
The command completed successfully.
C:\Windows\system32>net use n: /delete
n: was deleted successfully.
C:\Windows\system32>net use n: \\NASX.TCLC.org\d0
The command completed successfully.
C:\Windows\system32>net use n: /delete
n: was deleted successfully.
C:\Windows\system32>net use n: \\NAS0.TCLC.org\d0
System error 64 has occurred.
The specified network name is no longer available.
Of course I have flushed all caches I can find, scavenged resources records, rebooted every element -- Windows DNS server, Windows Server 2012r2, NAS, Client, ... the toaster and the microwave!
So, I have a domain name that shows zero problems in any investigation, until I try to use it for its intended purpose on the windows machines , and I have another one that is nearly identical that has no problems!
Any thoughts?
Thanks for the help,
--
Chris.
V:916.799.9461
F:916.974.0428
Hi Linus,
> Did you say it all worked fine by ip address?
Windows PowerShell:
$ nslookup nasx.tclc.org -- works. Reports 10.1.1.80
$ nslookup nas0.tclc.org -- works. Reports 10.1.1.80
# mount //10.1.1.80/d0 /net/nas0/d0 -- works
# mount //nasx.tclc.org/d0 /net/nas0/d0 -- works
# mount //nas0.tclc.org/d0 /net/nas0/d0 -- works
> dir \\10.1.1.80\d0 -- works
> dir \\nasx.tclc.org\d0 -- works
> dir \\nas0.tclc.org\d0 -- fails
If I change nas0.tclc.org to a different IP, say 10.1.1.81, then dir \\nas0.tclc.org\d0 still fails.
So, any inspection of nas0.tclc.org works everywhere, but any use of nas0.tclc.org fails only on Windows , regardless of the value. I no longer suspect a corruption, since I have purged and reinitialized all known sources and caches. This may be a collision, but that would require some rogue assignment that I haven't found. It may also be a permissions problem, but domain name level permissions is easily checked and I compared this name with nas1.tclc.org, which is not known to have problems. Ultimately, the culprit will have to be the NAS, since this all happened, coincidentally, after a system update. I have review all the settings for the NAS, and I have found nothing.
Thanks for the help,
--
Chris.
V:916.799.9461
F:916.974.0428
A: Because we read from top to bottom, left to right.
Q: > Why should I start my reply below the quoted text?
Hi Linus,
The full story is that I applied an update to this NAS just before this foolishness, so I have every reason to believe that is the culprit, but even knowing this, I am unable to diagnose the problem. Especially given that only one domain name has a problem -- "NAS0.TCLC.org". It is clearly the domain name, not the device; a different domain name (NASX.TCLC.org) works just fine. And the same domain name fails regardless of the IP.
'arp -a', look ok? Should clear at reboot but I've seen stranger things. Is there anything in hosts besides localhost entries? Does the output of the hostname command match the address record? nslookup the address of your machine and see if it's the only entry for it, is this the only interface live?
When I first started to investigate this, I found a bogus DNS entry defining NAS0.TCLC.org as 10.1.1.103 and DHCP told me that this was the address of ASUSTOR-3204T.TCLC.org, which, as you can guess, turned out to be the NAS. I deleted this and cleaned up DNS and DHCP and I have eradicated 10.1.1.103 from the system. I also have no reason why the NAS was asking for an IP. I'm going to chalk it up to some sort of update semantics, because the NAS is configured with a static IP and a DHCP reservation.
All of your proposed diagnostics return exactly what you would expect. arp, nbtstat, nslookup, ping, ... I have even disjoined and rejoined the domain. So far, nothing has had any effect.
From windows PowerShell on any windows machine in the domain:
* dir \\10.1.1.80\d0 -- works
* dir \\nasx.tclc.org\d0 -- works
* dir \\nas0.tclc.org\d0 -- fails
From any Fedora machine, "mount //NAS0.TCLC.org/d0 /net/nas0/d0 ..." works.
So, it is only Windows, and it is only "NAS0.TCLC.org". Any other combination works. This is truly bizarre. I hope it does not simply vanish as quickly as it appeared; I really want to know what is causing this.
Thanks for the help,
--
Chris.
V:916.799.9461
F:916.974.0428
A: Because we read from top to bottom, left to right.
Q: > Why should I start my reply below the quoted text?
I am migrating the server that runs the mailing list to a different
hypervisor. I hope this returns in a couple hours!
Brian
--
Brian Lavender
http://www.brie.com/brian/
"There are two ways of constructing a software design. One way is to
make it so simple that there are obviously no deficiencies. And the other
way is to make it so complicated that there are no obvious deficiencies."
Professor C. A. R. Hoare
The 1980 Turing award lecture
It looks like I had something happen to my disk that is attached through
USB to the hypervisor and the VM got mount to read lonely!
Brian
--
Brian Lavender
http://www.brie.com/brian/
"There are two ways of constructing a software design. One way is to
make it so simple that there are obviously no deficiencies. And the other
way is to make it so complicated that there are no obvious deficiencies."
Professor C. A. R. Hoare
The 1980 Turing award lecture
So been about 3 months since I handed a dell E6400T laptop loaded with
fedora 36 booting up to the welcome screen waiting to finish the install to
senior citizen neighbor who couldn't support windows 10, asked me two days
later if it was safe to do his banking on, "all I ever use", I answered
along with an expression of deep gratitude for the gift that was his only
question. "Just keep it up to date whenever it prompts for it", and I
haven't heard a peep since.
With apologies to Bing Crosby; "It's beginning to look a lot like the year
of linux desktop".
Hi Folks,
I want to deploy an FTP server on my Windows Server 2012r2, which is a component of Internet Information Server. Initially, I had the obvious and simple problem of the firewall blocking access to port 21, but I think I fixed that. It was a little tricky because the port was an artifact of the FTP service , not the IIE FTP component, so it took me longer than I would like to admit.
Now I have the problem of authenticating. Can't seem to authenticate. Has anybody done this?
Thanks for the help,
--
Chris.
V:916.799.9461
F:916.974.0428
A: Because we read from top to bottom, left to right.
Q: > Why should I start my reply below the quoted text?
Hi Folks,
This is noteworthy. I have a Windows Server 2012R2. I am using "DFS" and "Off-Line Files".
* "DFS" is "Distributed File System", which among other things "exports" the designated Windows file systems as SMB "Shares". Its goal is to "accumulate" disparate filesystems into a single filesystem, like Linux does, with the added feature of duplication/synchronization of client filesystems. In particular, Windows user "profiles" are shared as "\\TCLC.org\users\Profile\<username>.
* "Off-line Files" syncs a client copy with the "Share" to compensate for the "Share" periodically vanishing from transient conditions or you're traveling and not "connected".
I also have a bunch of Fedora boxes. I mount my Windows user profile on "/home/cjm", which gives me everything I would see on a Windows machine.
I also have a few NASes. Parenthetically, I have an ASUStore AS3204 v2, and I can heartily recommend it. Among other features, it supports hardlinks in the filesystem, which Buffalo NASes do not, and this means rSnapshot can run on ASUStore, which is pretty good news. I also have a couple of Buffalo LinkStations, which are also acceptable, but surprisingly primitive in comparison, and not without some inconvenient bugs surrounding "ownership and permissions", however they can be hacked to expose ssh and a command line.
I mount the NASs on two paths, depending on the access I choose to grant. For root access, I mount \\NAS0.TCLC.org\d0 on /net/nas0/d0, for example, and there is nothing remarkable about this. For user access, I mount the NAS in the user's filesystem: /home/<user>/net/nas0/d0, which mount point is on the Windows filesystem, and that mount point is visible from any of the Windows desktops at the same level as "Desktop", "Documents", and "Downloads".
Now, here's the point of this post: Windows Server can see that Fedora mount! It is not clear to me who is freelancing and extending their mandate -- "DFS", or "Off-line Files", but Windows server is aware that a Fedora box has mounted a filesystem on a Widows profile directory, and copies it, meaning files that should only be visible on the Fedora box are visible on the Windows desktop! This would simply be interesting and possibly beneficial, except this storage comes at a non-zero cost in space on the Windows Server 2012r2 disk, thanks to "Offline Files", or maybe "DFS" -- I don't know.
I discovered this because I am in the middle of a project to re-factor my storage, which has become unmanageable, and I was rsync'ing big file trees around, and they started to show up on my Server!
I'm not posting this as a problem for solving because I can easily work around it by simply doing my refactoring as root. No mounts within the "profile" filesystem; no volunteer files. I am posting this as an interesting observation that might be generally useful to know. Windows Server 2012r2 is spying on you! (-:
--
Chris.
V:916.799.9461
F:916.974.0428
A: Because we read from top to bottom, left to right.
Q: > Why should I start my reply below the quoted text?
Hi Folks,
The world seems to be headed toward universal multiple config files in the form <dir>.d. There are about fifty of them in /etc.
I mount some filesystems "universally", under "/net/...", and, when appropriate, in a user directory, "/home/<user>/net/...". This gives me better granularity of permissions. My fstab has become cumbersome and today I asked the question, "Maybe there is an /etc/fstab.d? Son-of-a-bitch! There is! Well, I mean, I find scattered, inaccurate references, but it is not clear to me that it works on Fedora 36, and initial experiments indicate otherwise. I can still use it, but I have a script that combines all my "components" and replaces the "real" /etc/fstab, and that's not too bad, but it is a hack, and I'd rather find out if it is supposed to work and find out why mine doesn't.
Anybody have any experience with /etc/fstab.d?
Thanks for the help,
--
Chris.
V:916.799.9461
F:916.974.0428
A: Because we read from top to bottom, left to right.
Q: > Why should I start my reply below the quoted text?
