Samba gets access to Microsoft's protocol specs | The Coffeehouse

Xaero_Vincent
Sexy me

Linuxworld wrote:
December 20th 2007. Today the Protocol Freedom Information Foundation (PFIF), a non-profit organization created by the Software Freedom Law Center, signed an agreement with Microsoft to receive the protocol documentation needed to fully interoperate with the Microsoft Windows workgroup server products and to make them available to Free Software projects such as Samba.

http://www.linuxworld.com/community/?q=node/1905

This is truely fantastic news across the board! Big Smile

TimP

Bring on SMBv2. Cool

W3bbo
The Master of Baiters

So will this mean Samba will be able to be a first-class Active Directory Domain Controller now?

Xaero_Vincent
Sexy me

W3bbo wrote:
So will this mean Samba will be able to be a first-class Active Directory Domain Controller now?

Most certainly. I believe this is something being worked on for Samba 4.

We can also look forward to full SMBv2 support.

The specs will speed up development.

Dharma Punk

Noice.

corona_coder
Only Proprietary software vendors deal in absolutes.

Victory is ours, we didnt even have to sign a patent agreement. Microsoft didnt do this out of the kindness of their heart, this is important to remember. Microsoft knew we wouldnt rest until we got the information. We have succeeded.

PaoloM
Hypermediocrity

corona_coder wrote:
Victory is ours, we didnt even have to sign a patent agreement. Microsoft didnt do this out of the kindness of their heart, this is important to remember. Microsoft knew we wouldnt rest until we got the information. We have succeeded.

So the 10,000 euros and the recognition of Microsoft's patents is... what?

Dharma Punk

PaoloM wrote:

corona_coder wrote:Victory is ours, we didnt even have to sign a patent agreement. Microsoft didnt do this out of the kindness of their heart, this is important to remember. Microsoft knew we wouldnt rest until we got the information. We have succeeded.

So the 10,000 euros and the recognition of Microsoft's patents is... what?

A Merry Christmas for someone.

stevo_
Human after all

corona_coder wrote:
Victory is ours, we didnt even have to sign a patent agreement. Microsoft didnt do this out of the kindness of their heart, this is important to remember. Microsoft knew we wouldnt rest until we got the information. We have succeeded.

I imagine it'll be a breath of fresh air seeing something thats actually well designed.. as apposed to.. well.. you know Wink

Maddus Mattus
Do, or do not. There is no try. - Yoda

corona_coder wrote:
Victory is ours, we didnt even have to sign a patent agreement. Microsoft didnt do this out of the kindness of their heart, this is important to remember. Microsoft knew we wouldnt rest until we got the information. We have succeeded.

ours? Ours? OURS?!?!?!

What the flying fleet do YOU have do with ANYTHING?!

staceyw
Before C# there was darkness...

But I thought they were better and only need themselfs. Why do they want MS's stuff? Guess when it serves there purpose they take stuff, otherwise they cry like kids wanting a new bike but don't want to do anything for it. Guess dad gets to mow the lawn again.

TimP

staceyw wrote:
But I thought they were better and only need themselfs. Why do they want MS's stuff? Guess when it serves there purpose they take stuff, otherwise they cry like kids wanting a new bike but don't want to do anything for it. Guess dad gets to mow the lawn again.

It's sort of like building a rocket ship given a warehouse of parts. With enough trial and error you could probably build it correctly eventually, but it would be a lot easier (and provably correct, unless MS omits details) with a manual. Most people on Linux don't use SMB/CIFS because it's god's gift to protocols, they use it because Windows machines support it out of the box and there are a lot of Windows machines.

DCMonkey
Monkey see, monkey do, monkey will destroy you!

corona_coder wrote:
Victory is ours, we didnt even have to sign a patent agreement. Microsoft didnt do this out of the kindness of their heart, this is important to remember. Microsoft knew we wouldnt rest until we got the information. We have succeeded.

I'm sure many Bothans died to bring you that information (wait, that's someone else's schtick).

ManipUni
Proving QQ for 5 years!

Everyone wins.

Users = Get better cross compatibility
Microsoft = Get less bug reports based on incorrectly developed Samba implementations (e.g. Saves money, time etc)
Samba = Get the "correct" protocol and thus are able to avoid bugs as a result of incorrect assumptions

The problem with all of this is that Microsoft, Linux, et al see it as some kind of lame "Holy War" and want to keep all of their little protocols locked in so nobody can implement them correctly - as if their software exists in isolation.

Xaero_Vincent
Sexy me

Speaking of interopability, I just posted something in Sandbox that you folks with spare machines might be interested in...

http://channel9.msdn.com/ShowPost.aspx?PostID=367865

I would have supported Ubuntu and 64-bit OSes but I only use Fedora and 32-bit OSes, since my machine is just a Pentium 4.

staceyw
Before C# there was darkness...

TimP wrote:

staceyw wrote: But I thought they were better and only need themselfs. Why do they want MS's stuff? Guess when it serves there purpose they take stuff, otherwise they cry like kids wanting a new bike but don't want to do anything for it. Guess dad gets to mow the lawn again.

It's sort of like building a rocket ship given a warehouse of parts. With enough trial and error you could probably build it correctly eventually, but it would be a lot easier (and provably correct, unless MS omits details) with a manual. Most people on Linux don't use SMB/CIFS because it's god's gift to protocols, they use it because Windows machines support it out of the box and there are a lot of Windows machines.

I agree and support it. It is a win-win because almost no company lives in a 1 os shop. It just bothers me they always want MS to carry the water and never give anything the other way except lip service and null gratitude.

elmer
I'm on my very last life.

corona_coder wrote:
Victory is ours... We have succeeded.

In being allowed to provide file/print/etc support for MS-Clients.

I didn't realise that is was how the "year-of-the-linux-desktop" thing worked Expressionless

DigitalDud

I guess now Samba can't blame crapiness on their lack of documentation.

sakisp
C/C++ and a cup of coffee...

I hope Samba gets some better performance after implementing the official MS protocols. Currently its transfer speed sucks when compared with Windows.

Xaero_Vincent
Sexy me

staceyw wrote:
I agree and support it. It is a win-win because almost no company lives in a 1 os shop. It just bothers me they always want MS to carry the water and never give anything the other way except lip service and null gratitude.

The documentation was purchased for 10,000 Euros.

Microsoft has not given away anything for free.

Anyway, it appears that PFIF can distribute the documentation to other FOSS projects, besides Samba. The main requirement is just to sign a no discloser agreements for the documents.

I can see the rdesktop team benefiting from the documentation. I'll bring it up to them.

Xaero_Vincent
Sexy me

DigitalDud wrote:
I guess now Samba can't blame crapiness on their lack of documentation.

How is it crappy?

Samba works incredibly well for all the pain-staking "blind" development behind it.

Show some respect.

TimP

DigitalDud wrote:
I guess now Samba can't blame crapiness on their lack of documentation.

I've had better luck with Samba "just working" than file sharing on Vista to date.