On Thursday 01 December 2005 16:40, Andrew Bartlett wrote: > On Thu, 2005-12-01 at 13:07 +0100, Simo Sorce wrote: > > On Thu, 2005-12-01 at 09:38 +1100, Andrew Bartlett wrote: > > > On Wed, 2005-11-30 at 09:08 -0500, Mike Weske wrote: > > > > Hello all, > > > > > > > > There is still a use for netbeui (non-routed protocol) in the > > > > network. If you are using a VPN client that does not allow split > > > > tunneling, you can still access printers on another local system with > > > > netbeui. I would like to remove the windows system and have my print > > > > shares on my Linux system with Samba. > > > > Is all consideration of netbeui within the Linux/Samba environment > > > > gone? Can someone suggest another way to get printers and file > > > > shares between a windows system and Linux system without TCP/IP? > > > > > > The closest Samba ever got to netbeui was an experimental patch that > > > (from memory) accompanied the Linux kernel patch. It was never > > > accepted, because it never added a real transport independence, just > > > hacks to get around Samba's attachment to TCP. > > > > I have tested that patches last year or so, and they were too unstable > > (at the kernel level) to be usable in a production environment imho. > > > > But we may have hope to support netbeui in samba4 if we happen to have > > kernel support as samba4 code should be layer independent enough to > > allow we to support it easily. > > IPX might also be an interesting thing to look into some day... > > (For those who enjoy playing with dead network protocols ;-)
Nah! IPX is not a dead protocol - it is a cult that refuses to die! - John T. -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
