On Mon, 2010-12-06 at 10:28 -0600, Steve French wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 5, 2010 at 10:34 PM, Volker Lendecke
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Hi!
> >
> > On Sun, Dec 05, 2010 at 08:16:46PM -0600, Steve French wrote:
> >> I am more worried about firewall rule changes and similar events
> >> than about broken servers - but the idea of waiting forever on stat
> >> to a server that is never going to respond seems odd.
> >
> > That would be a strange fw rule that allows SMBEcho but not
> > other SMB requests. I think if someone puts up such a silly
> > rule, some pain is deserved :-)
> 
> Aaah - remember the proxies that cut out "chatty" smb traffic by
> responding on behalf of remote servers in the interest of optimizing
> traffic over slow links :)

They better send their own smb echos to remote servers then ...

Simo.

-- 
Simo Sorce
Samba Team GPL Compliance Officer <[email protected]>
Principal Software Engineer at Red Hat, Inc. <[email protected]>

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-cifs" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to