On Tue, 7 Dec 2010 11:11:08 -0600 Steve French <smfrench@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Tue, Dec 7, 2010 at 11:03 AM, Carter, Joel <JoelC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Hi Jeff. > > > > Yes I think you are right that it's race condition between the Kerberos > > ticket being stored and the automounter attempting to use that ticket. > > > > Thanks for the reminder of sec=krb5 maturity status, I wasn't aware of > > that. This is for a production system so I should probably stay away > > from it. That said, do you know if this is possible with RHEL5 using > > smbfs (sorry - off topic) or should I push this off until we move to > > RHEL6? It's not a must have, just trying to make our AD/RHEL integration > > as tight as possible. I found your bugzilla entry as well, I'll keep my > > eyes on it. > > smbfs doesn't support krb5. > Actually, I think it does. Socket creation and setup in smbfs was essentially offloaded to userspace so as long as libsmbclient supported it, it did too. I never really messed with it though so I can't vouch for its robustness. The point is moot though since RHEL5 didn't ship with smbfs enabled. > I did get the impression that Jeff did a good job of the Kerberos > backport for RHEL5 though. > Thanks, it basically works. There are some differences between how RHEL5 and RHEL6/mainline handle the uid= option however. -- Jeff Layton <jlayton@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
