[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       samba-technical
Subject:    Re: SAMLOGON UDP request
From:       "Dan \"Effugas\" Kaminsky" <effugas () best ! com>
Date:       1998-12-22 17:10:08
[Download RAW message or body]


-----Original Message-----
From: Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton <lkcl@switchboard.net>
To: Multiple recipients of list <samba-technical@samba.org>
Date: Tuesday, December 22, 1998 7:51 AM
Subject: Re: SAMLOGON UDP request


>On Tue, 22 Dec 1998, Dan Kaminsky wrote:
>
>> >i don't know of one specifically, but i bet there are some.
>> >
>> >> If there is, then why should be refuse to reply?
>> >
>> >netbios names have specific purposes.  it's a bit like receiving an http
>> >request on an SMTP port and answering with a valid http response as if
>> >nothing at all was wrong.
>>
>>
>> Can't a system only have one Netbios name, but many Netbios aliases?
>
>yes.  netbios aliases are irrelevant to this, and likely to cause
>administrative complications: thanks for reminding us.


Administrative complications?  What do you mean?

Hurm.  As long as Netbios Aliases don't go away, I'm happy.  They contribute
substantially to the usefulness of Samba.

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]