On Tue, 2012-10-23 at 11:17 -0400, [email protected] wrote: > > I have an existing install of Samba4 ( I think beta6 vintage ), which uses > > ntvfs and bind9. It's only providing AD and Group Policy. I have a > > seperate > > file server running 3.6.x. > > > > I want to add a server to the domain running the most recent RC. I know > > they are using internal by default and s3fs for the file shares on sysvol. > > Can > > s3fs coexist with ntvfs? Can the internal DNS coexist with Bind? > > > > Is there a specific reason to use the internal now? I'm happy with bind > > so if it's literally just a preference issue I'll probably stick with what > > I have. > > > > If there are good reasons to move to s3fs and internal? is there an easy > > way to migrate the older domains via the upgrade? > > > > Thanks in advance to everyone. > > > > Caleb O'Connell > > > > Until a couple of weeks ago the internal dns server had an issue with the > forwarder (kept connections open until it reached more than 1000, then it > didn't reply to requests out of the local domain) and it also didn't > update the reverse zone. I don't know whether it it's been fixed or not.
I don't think either server has special handling for reverse zones, but we now have a 2sec DNS timeout to reduce the number of open file descriptors. The issue is the default 1024 FD ulimit (and we use a lot - perhaps too many - internally for other things). Andrew Bartlett -- Andrew Bartlett http://samba.org/~abartlet/ Authentication Developer, Samba Team http://samba.org -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba
