On Mon, Oct 13, 2008 at 01:39:30PM -0400, Ryan Novosielski wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > Jeremy Allison wrote: > > On Mon, Oct 13, 2008 at 11:57:45AM -0400, Gerald (Jerry) Carter wrote: > >> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > >> Hash: SHA1 > >> > >> Taylor, Marc wrote: > >>> Hello All, > >>> > >>> I was wondering if anyone knows why a print server needs to talk back on > >>> the submitting client's ports 139 or 445? > >> It's Microsoft's async print change notification protocol. Jeremy > >> had talked about adding a separate timetou for the back channel connect, > >> but I don't remember if this was ever done. > > > > Like the man said, it's Microsoft's doing :-). No, we don't have > > a separate timeout in spoolss_connect_to_client() > > (rpc_server/srv_spoolss_nt.c) but we could add one. > > How does this actually work in the case of Samba? Does the Samba server > attempt to contact the NT machine, and is there a benefit to allowing > this to happen?
We do *exactly* what the Windows server does. Yes, we attemt to contact the Windows client, as that's what Windows does. The benefit is it correctly implements the Windows printing change-notify protocol. Jeremy. -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
