On Jun 10, 2014 12:45, Steve French <smfrench@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >On Jun 10, 2014 3:19 AM, "Karin Hedlund" <karin.hedlund@xxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> On Mon, Jun 9, 2014 at 4:42 PM, Shirish Pargaonkar <shirishpargaonkar@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> vers=2.0 does not work? > >> Well, actually vers=2.0 does work fine! Thanks for the suggestion! :) I did try it earlier, but probably did not have all the other things in place by then, because I know it didn't work then, but it does now. >> I wonder why nothing above vers=2.0 works though, any ideas? > >The obvious reason would be samba 3.6 on the server instead of samba 4 or later Ah, ok, I see. I thought the client and server would sort of 'autonegotiate' and agree on the highest version they both support, but I guess that's not the case when using the 'vers' mount.cifs option then? In that case what I'm seeing is very much expected, so I'm very happy now. Thanks for all the support! Any news on the upgrade of the default SMB version of the in-kernel cifs module, by the way? I found the SDC2013 "SMB3.02 And Linux: A Status Update" presentation (http://www.snia.org/sites/default/files2/SDC2013/presentations/Revisions/StevenFrench_SMB3_Meets_Linux_ver3_revision.pdf), but since it's almost already old by now and I'm curious, I thought I'd ask. :) ��.n��������+%������w��{.n�����{�����ܨ}���Ơz�j:+v�����w����ޙ��&�)ߡ�a����z�ޗ���ݢj��w�f
