On Wed, Dec 3, 2008 at 8:32 AM, Obaid Farooqi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi Ronnie, Neil: > > Please let me know if the following response does not answer your question. >
It answers my question. I understand now that your IDLs duplicate the same types in different IDL files and that they are out of sync with eachother. > > > Regards, > > Obaid Farooqi > > Sr. SEE | Microsoft > > > > From: Obaid Farooqi > Sent: Wednesday, November 26, 2008 10:34 AM > To: 'ronnie sahlberg'; 'Neil B Martin' > Cc: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'; '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' > Subject: MS-SAMR missing SID name use type ? > > > > Hi Ronnie, Neil: > > We have finished investigation on this case. MS-SAMR does not document > SidTypeComputer in enum SID_NAME_USE because the enum value SidTypeComputer > =9 is not part of the SAMR protocol. The SAM object model does not > distinguish between computer objects and user objects, that is, computers > are users. > > > > In case of [MS-LSAT], while enum SidTypeComputer is mentioned in the > document, it clearly states that: > > > > The SidTypeInvalid and SidTypeComputer enumeration values are not used in > this protocol. Usage information on the remaining enumeration values is > specified in section 3.1.1. > > > > Our investigation also concluded that enum SidTypeComputer does not appear > on wire for any Windows scenario. > > > > If you see this enum on wire, please feel free to bring it to our attention. > > > > Regards, > > > > Obaid Farooqi > > Sr. SEE | Microsoft > > _______________________________________________ cifs-protocol mailing list [email protected] https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/cifs-protocol
