On Mon, 2010-12-06 at 10:28 -0600, Steve French wrote: > On Sun, Dec 5, 2010 at 10:34 PM, Volker Lendecke > <Volker.Lendecke@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Hi! > > > > On Sun, Dec 05, 2010 at 08:16:46PM -0600, Steve French wrote: > >> I am more worried about firewall rule changes and similar events > >> than about broken servers - but the idea of waiting forever on stat > >> to a server that is never going to respond seems odd. > > > > That would be a strange fw rule that allows SMBEcho but not > > other SMB requests. I think if someone puts up such a silly > > rule, some pain is deserved :-) > > Aaah - remember the proxies that cut out "chatty" smb traffic by > responding on behalf of remote servers in the interest of optimizing > traffic over slow links :) They better send their own smb echos to remote servers then ... Simo. -- Simo Sorce Samba Team GPL Compliance Officer <simo@xxxxxxxxx> Principal Software Engineer at Red Hat, Inc. <simo@xxxxxxxxxx> -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-cifs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
