[2004/05/08 14:50:44, 0] lib/util_sock.c:open_socket_in(804) bind failed on port 137 socket_addr = _*192.168.1.1.*_ The trailing "_*.*_" may be your problem. I don't see any other "_*.*_" at the end of the other lines from your log.nmbd so it may be in the smb.conf file. BTW don't use 0 or 1 or 254 for the trailing octet in an IP address. Some TCP/IP stuff use 0 and/or 254 and 1 is just not used for PC's or Servers (sort of bad form) generally 1 is used for a gateway. Sam. Randy Clarksean wrote: >I have just pulled my hair out for several hours trying to figure out WHY >nmbd would NOT start on one of my Linux boxes. I guess I am looking for an >explanation/education as to the subtle issues associated with the smb.conf >file. > >I was configuring a Suse 9.0 box to use Samba. I had a RH7.2 box that I had >never configured samba on ... so I went ahead and did that ... it worked >fine. It showed up in network neighborhood, etc. without a problem. The >Suse9 box flaked on and off .. so it seemed .. until it finally would not >show up in network neighborhood. I could search for the IP address, and it >would show up that way ... so nmbd was not running and allowing it to show >up as it should. > >What I finally found was one difference between the smb.conf files on the >two systems. A portion of the smb.conf file is found below. > > > workgroup = WORKGROUP > server string = Suse_box > netbios name = Suse9 > os level = 2 > time server = Yes > unix extensions = Yes > encrypt passwords = yes > map to guest = Bad User > log file = /var/log/samba/%m > log level = 3 > printing = CUPS > printcap name = CUPS ># Please uncomment the following entry and replace the IP address and ># netmask with the values of your network interface configuration. >; interfaces = 127.0.0.1/8 192.168.1.1/24 ># By this limit also NMB name servie to the listed interfaces above. Before ># activating this, read carefully the 'bind interfaces only' section of the ># smb.conf man page. >; bind interfaces only = Yes > >The interfaces line is the one that I eventually had to comment out. I >stumbled upon this by comparing the testparm output for both smb.conf files >(working and non-visible system) > >I finally (yes finally) looked into the log.nmbd file to see if I could >discover anything. Excerpts are shown below. > >[2004/05/08 14:50:44, 0] nmbd/nmbd.c:main(795) > Netbios nameserver version 2.2.8a-SuSE started. > Copyright Andrew Tridgell and the Samba Team 1994-2002 >[2004/05/08 14:50:44, 1] lib/debug.c:debug_message(258) > INFO: Debug class all level = 3 (pid 1615 from pid 1615) >[2004/05/08 14:50:44, 3] nmbd/nmbd.c:reload_nmbd_services(292) > services not loaded >[2004/05/08 14:50:44, 2] nmbd/nmbd.c:main(833) > Becoming a daemon. >[2004/05/08 14:50:44, 3] nmbd/nmbd.c:main(862) > Opening sockets 137 >[2004/05/08 14:50:44, 3] lib/util_sock.c:open_socket_in(813) > bind succeeded on port 137 >[2004/05/08 14:50:44, 3] lib/util_sock.c:open_socket_in(813) > bind succeeded on port 138 >[2004/05/08 14:50:44, 3] nmbd/nmbd.c:open_sockets(550) > open_sockets: Broadcast sockets opened. >[2004/05/08 14:50:44, 2] lib/interface.c:add_interface(81) > added interface ip=127.0.0.1 bcast=127.255.255.255 nmask=255.0.0.0 >[2004/05/08 14:50:44, 2] lib/interface.c:add_interface(81) > added interface ip=192.168.1.1 bcast=192.168.1.255 nmask=255.255.255.0 >[2004/05/08 14:50:44, 0] lib/util_sock.c:open_socket_in(804) > bind failed on port 137 socket_addr = 192.168.1.1. > Error = Cannot assign requested address >[2004/05/08 14:50:44, 0] nmbd/nmbd_subnetdb.c:make_subnet(139) >nmbd_subnetdb:make_subnet() > Failed to open nmb socket on interface 192.168.1.1 for port 137. Error >was Cannot assign requested address >[2004/05/08 14:50:44, 0] nmbd/nmbd.c:main(873) > ERROR: Failed when creating subnet lists. Exiting. > >My server has two NICs ... one is 192.168.1.1 .... it SEEMS that as it hit >that machine it tried to open port 137 and died. I am guessing it did that >because I have a firewall on that system .... hopefully a fairly tight one. > >Should this (the firewall) have caused nmbd to not start? It could not be >started in any shape or form until I commented out the interfaces line. I >added that interface line because I thought it was the proper thing to do. > >I guess I am looking for some insight from someone much better at this sort >of thing than I. Thoughts and comments appreciated. Thanks in advance. > >Randy > > > > >_______________________________________________ >TCLUG Mailing List - Minneapolis/St. Paul, Minnesota >http://www.mn-linux.org tclug-list at mn-linux.org >https://mailman.real-time.com/mailman/listinfo/tclug-list > > > _______________________________________________ TCLUG Mailing List - Minneapolis/St. Paul, Minnesota http://www.mn-linux.org tclug-list at mn-linux.org https://mailman.real-time.com/mailman/listinfo/tclug-list