Michael H. Warfield wrote: > > On Mon, 2007-10-22 at 23:16 -0700, Atrox wrote: > >> Michael Lueck wrote: > >> > Atrox wrote: >> >> Michael Lueck wrote: >> >>> So, how do you know Samba can not find itself? >> >> >> >> Well, server doesn't answer to nmblookup by broadcast: >> >> $ nmblookup -B 192.168.1.255 frontier >> >> querying frontier on 192.168.1.255 >> >> name_query failed to find name frontier >> >> >> >> If I query Samba via unicast, it answers OK: >> >> $ nmblookup -U frontier frontier >> >> querying frontier on 192.168.1.31 >> >> 192.168.1.31 frontier<00> >> >> >> >> For lo0 interface I get the error: Packet send failed to >> >> 127.255.255.255(137) ERRNO=Operation not permitted >> >> >> >> Should it be that way? >> > >> > What are you actually trying to do? I know nmblookup by name, but never >> > have to use it. >> > >> >> The error "Operation not permitted" occures when I nmblookup without any >> flag, ie. "nmblookup frontier". Nmblookup queries lo0 as I have specified >> it >> in "interfaces" parameter. > > So, what happens if you DON'T specify lo in your interfaces? It should > still work using your real interfaces. I don't really see what you are > gaining by allowing the lo interface to begin with. >
I set it just to try whether it helps or not. If it's not specified, I just don't get the "Operation not permitted" error :) Nmblookup doesn't work nevertheless: $ nmblookup frontier added interface ip=192.168.1.31 bcast=192.168.1.255 nmask=255.255.255.0 querying frontier on 192.168.1.255 name_query failed to find name frontier -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Samba-can%27t-find-its-hostname-via-broadcast-tf4633404.html#a13439574 Sent from the Samba - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
