Re: [Samba] DNS and DC replication clarification
- Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2017 07:05:25 +1300
- From: Andrew Bartlett via samba <samba@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: [Samba] DNS and DC replication clarification
On Mon, 2017-03-06 at 16:59 +0000, Rowland Penny via samba wrote:
> On Mon, 6 Mar 2017 16:30:48 +0000 (UTC)
> Mircea Husz via samba <samba@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > All,
> > I configured two DCs (Samba version 4.5.5) replicating ad.corp.com
> > in
> > two sites (
> > https://wiki.samba.org/index.php/Active_Directory_Sites)
> > Following 'DNS configuration on Domain Controllers' section from
> > this
> > wiki
> > https://wiki.samba.org/index.php/Joining_a_Samba_DC_to_an_Existing_
> > Active_Directory
> > If I configure nameserver DC1 to be the first resolver for DC2,
> > samba_dnsupdate --verbose --all-names fails with '
> > tkey query failed: GSSAPI error: Major = Unspecified GSS failure.
> > Minor code may provide more information, Minor = Server not found
> > in
> > Kerberos database.'
> > The failure makes sense because each DC has keys only for itself in
> > dns.keytab, as shown by 'klist
> > -k /usr/local/samba/private/dns.keytab'. It makes no sense
> > functionally for one DC to update another's DNS directly.
> > Seems to me the failure from 'samba_dnsupdate --verbose --all-
> > names'
> > can be ignored when another DC's nameserver is listed first. Unless
> > I'm missing something ?
> > -Mike
> This is all down to the mythical 'islanding' problem. I personally
> think that each DC should use its own ipaddress as the first
> in /etc/resolv.conf and another DC as the second.
This can have some other impacts, if a DNS run hasn't happened by the
time we first start up. I've got some patches to force the first DNS
entries to be created during the domain join. I hope that will help a
lot here, but this remains a problematic area.
There is also an issue with a patch that went in to 4.5 to help us with
resolv_wrapper that make the real-world use more fragile, because it
requires that the DC we point to first already have the NS records (and
our local IP won't have those yet).
Using it the other way around (remote first, then local) seems to avoid
some of that.
I'm really sorry we have got this far in to Samba as an AD DC without
this stuff 'just working', and I hope to have improved patches in
Andrew Bartlett http://samba.org/~abartlet/
Authentication Developer, Samba Team http://samba.org
Samba Developer, Catalyst IT http://catalyst.net.nz/services/samba
To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the