On Thu, 2007-12-20 at 14:53 +1030, Tim wrote: > On Wed, 2007-12-19 at 14:15 -0700, Craig White wrote: > > Obviously Microsoft is the authoritative source for all information on > > both smb and cifs protocols > > Yet the story goes that they had to refer to writings by the Samba team > when it came to documenting some of their own SMB protocols... ;-) > > I don't know if that's really true, but it sounds amusing. ---- I am a member of the samba team...I don't know that story <http://wiki.samba.org/index.php/SambaWiki:About> ---- > > To the original poster, I would have thought http://www.samba.org/ to be > the place to start looking. If the included documentation wasn't > enough. ---- I'm not certain that the samba documentation has all that much info on smb protocol. It does cover things that are peripheral to the smb protocol such as authentication methods but not a dissection of the protocol itself. As I said, the smb protocol is for all purposes a dead protocol anyway because it has been replaced by cifs. Which is why I asked the OP to clarify what information it was that he was seeking and that the definitive answers will always come from Microsoft. Craig -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
