From owner-freebsd-emulation Wed Aug 23 2:27:13 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org Received: from zorch.sf-bay.org (zorch.sf-bay.org [192.150.103.17]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4060837B43E; Wed, 23 Aug 2000 02:27:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from uucp@localhost) by zorch.sf-bay.org (8.9.3/8.8.2) with UUCP id CAA17249; Wed, 23 Aug 2000 02:27:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from scott@localhost) by zorba.sf-bay.org (8.9.3/8.8.8) id RAA50006 for nik@freebsd.org; Wed, 23 Aug 2000 17:26:01 +0800 (HKT) (envelope-from scott) Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 17:26:01 +0800 (HKT) From: Scott Hazen Mueller Message-Id: <200008230926.RAA50006@zorba.sf-bay.org> Subject: Re: VMWare and Samba To: nik@freebsd.org, freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org X-Envelope-To: nik@freebsd.org Sender: owner-freebsd-emulation@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org >> Have you tried accessing anything via \\host\share? >Yes, I should have made this clearer in my original message. Things like >"net use x: \\canyon\tmp" work fine. I just can't see the host in the >Network Neighbourhood. It's a minor niggle, I was just wondering if anybody >else had got things working 'completely'. Hm... Actually, I checked back later and Samba has shown up in Network Neighborhood>Entire Network>WORKGROUP. Must be some timing thing. I am using host-only networking - I'm an early enough adopter that I was all set up and configured before bridged networking was made to work. I am running 4.1-STABLE of 31 July. I would be curious to hear if anyone who is doing bridged networking has Samba working. I'm having some minor fits with host-only networking because I'm on a "real" Windows LAN, and the netbios-ns broadcasts (to a /25 broadcast address) give natd indigestion: Aug 23 11:01:28 zorba natd[14328]: failed to write packet back (Host is down) These messages are caused by Aug 23 15:07:45 zorba natd[39335]: denied [UDP] w.x.y.z:137 -> w.x.y.127:137 (if I use -deny_incoming and -log_deny) packets that get sent to natd and then natd tries to reinject them (somewhere). I don't know if it's a broadcast address interaction, for some strange reason my (DHCP-configured) ethernet interface has a proper netmask (0xffffffc0) but a .255 broadcast address. I do know that 'tcpdump ... ip broadcast' doesn't see these, but 'tcpdump ... ether broadcast' does. Anyhow, the point of this rant is that I'd probably be just as happy to use bridged networking if it will be "cleaner" than natd. Especially since the -deny_incoming option kills inbound connections (e.g. active-mode CVSup)... Gah. Computers. \scott To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-emulation" in the body of the message