Steve, DFS should still work. The server address is resolved by the kernel cifs code and the share will be resolved correctly. -Bob > On Wed, 2014-06-18 at 18:10 -0500, Steve French wrote: >> On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 5:01 PM, Bob Balsover <cifs@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> > Why not just use DFS? I believe that this is what it was designed for. >> > >> > -Bob >> >> >> Yes. DFS should be used for this. Fairly easy to setup on server >> (Samba or Windows or NetApp, although very different setup on Samba >> than Windows) and the client supports it (whether Linux or Windows). > > Hi > Thanks. I know I can do that for windows clients but our Linux boxes (in > the same domain) use autofs e.g. > * -fstype=cifs,sec=krb5,multiuser ://server/share/& > Will the automounter still work from a DFS share and will it still do > the wild card like vanilla cifs? > > What we'd like to do is add a second samba file server and sync the data > between them. Is DFS the way to go for this? > Cheers, > Steve > >> >> >> >> >> Hi >> >> Is it possible to have cifs SRV rrs like ldap and kerberos where >> clients >> >> can look for the service themselves? We'd like to be able to offer >> >> shares on more than one server without the cluster stuff. >> >> >> >> ATM we have e.g. >> >> mount -t cifs //server/share -owhatever >> >> >> >> Our question is, would having cifs SRV be a way around having to >> >> specify a specific server? >> >> >> > > > -- > 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 > -- 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
