ML
    • Recent
    • Categories
    • Tags
    • Popular
    • Users
    • Groups
    • Register
    • Login

    Linux Domain Controller

    IT Discussion
    linux debian
    11
    113
    39.4k
    Loading More Posts
    • Oldest to Newest
    • Newest to Oldest
    • Most Votes
    Reply
    • Reply as topic
    Log in to reply
    This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
    • ?
      A Former User @Danp
      last edited by

      @Danp said:

      With Centos 7, I believe you should be using "systemctrl" instead of "service".

      sudo systemctl enable firewalld
      sudo systemctl start firewalld
      sudo systemctl status firewalld
      

      Yep it will redirect the service commands but it's depreciated.

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • S
        Sparkum @coliver
        last edited by

        @coliver

        State is definitely not running.

        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • S
          Sparkum
          last edited by

          Well for some reason when I got home and started to re-try everything after confirming the service was indeed stopped, suddenly I could start it, and complete step 8 with success....

          Still not a DC but progress for sure

          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • S
            Sparkum
            last edited by

            So at this point I would have to assume that there is a mistake in on smb.conf file eh?

            Just going through the checklist

            Installed samba ....... Yep
            smb.conf file .........Prob?
            Made samba/anonymous.....yep
            Firewall steps........yep

            Can access it from windows comp.......No
            See it in my domain......No

            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • S
              Sparkum
              last edited by

              Here is some of my global and share; I'm assuming this is esentially the most important data

              Share.JPG General.JPG

              coliverC 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • coliverC
                coliver @Sparkum
                last edited by coliver

                @Sparkum said:

                Here is some of my global and share; I'm assuming this is esentially the most important data

                Share.JPG General.JPG

                I don't think you have an eth0 interface. At least not from the previous screenshot. I believe your interface is called ens33. Although I could be mistaken. Also your hosts allow option isn't going to let your workstation connect to it as it isn't in one of those subnets.

                S 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • S
                  Sparkum @coliver
                  last edited by

                  @coliver

                  Adjusted.IP.JPG

                  coliverC 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • coliverC
                    coliver @Sparkum
                    last edited by

                    @Sparkum said:

                    @coliver

                    Adjusted.IP.JPG

                    hosts allow is still going to block anything coming from the public internet. Unless you have a VPN setup between your Samba server and the workstation then you will need to change that to accept the public IP address of the workstation.

                    S 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • S
                      Sparkum @coliver
                      last edited by

                      @coliver

                      Oh thats a shame, my ISP doesnt allow dedicated IP's on home networks.

                      guess I'll have to stay on top of this one.

                      new ip.JPG

                      I wonder if I can use one of cloudflare's ip updaters in conjunction with this?

                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • scottalanmillerS
                        scottalanmiller
                        last edited by

                        That's where a VPN like Pertino is handy.

                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                        • DashrenderD
                          Dashrender
                          last edited by

                          Did I miss the part where you tried to actually join the SAMBA server to the domain to make it a DC?

                          As Scott mentioned you'll want to do this over a VPN like Pertino, you definitely don't want to open ports 135, etc to the world on both sides (at C@C and at home) to make this work, which you'd be required to do if you don't use VPN.

                          S 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                          • S
                            Sparkum @Dashrender
                            last edited by Sparkum

                            @Dashrender

                            Haha its funny I actually came on here to say "At what point am I prompted to join this to the domain" seemed like all I was doing was making a file share so far.

                            So to use Pertino for example I would need the VPN on every machine I assume?

                            I guess my initial plan here is mail server (or SMTP relay even) in the cloud, backup DC (this) in the cloud, dc at home then all my computers and servers, so I would need everything that I want to have access to the cloud DC to have the VPN correct?

                            Anyone know of any free options for 10-15 computers? (even under 10)

                            Thanks

                            scottalanmillerS 2 Replies Last reply Reply Quote 0
                            • scottalanmillerS
                              scottalanmiller @Sparkum
                              last edited by

                              @Sparkum said:

                              So to use Pertino for example I would need the VPN on every machine I assume?

                              Pertino is a full matrix VPN. So every machine that needs to talk to any other machine needs to be on it. This is a limitation, to be sure, compared to site to site VPNs, but it is also its power. It's also known as "software defined networking" and it turns your machines hosted here and there, your independent cloud nodes, your laptops, your desktops, no matter where they are into a single LAN that can all see each other, all the time.

                              NTG uses Pertino to turn our people around the world and our datacenters all over the world (US, Netherlands and Canada) into a single network. It's like we are all sitting in the same room, even when we are traveling.

                              S 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                              • scottalanmillerS
                                scottalanmiller @Sparkum
                                last edited by

                                @Sparkum said:

                                Anyone know of any free options for 10-15 computers? (even under 10)

                                You'd have to build your own using a tool like OpenVPN. We've done that before. Can work well but gets cumbersome.

                                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                • S
                                  Sparkum @scottalanmiller
                                  last edited by

                                  @scottalanmiller

                                  For sure I see the benefit don't get me wrong but I'm trying to cut fees with this not add them (again just a simple homelab wanting to expand knowledge and reach)

                                  And I was thinking OpenVPN last night so I'll keep looking down that route.
                                  Thanks.

                                  I'll try to get the VPN going this weekend and then hopefully start tackling the DC again Monday/Tuesday.

                                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                  • ?
                                    A Former User
                                    last edited by

                                    OpenVPN has more overhead, It's great for Roadwarior but I've never used it for site-site connections.

                                    scottalanmillerS 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                    • scottalanmillerS
                                      scottalanmiller @A Former User
                                      last edited by

                                      @thecreativeone91 said:

                                      OpenVPN has more overhead, It's great for Roadwarior but I've never used it for site-site connections.

                                      Same here. We used it for hub and spoke designs which are typically better for AD situations. He's looking at cloud servers which are not sites, but end points. So OpenVPN works really well.

                                      IPSec is definitely lower overhead when available.

                                      JaredBuschJ 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                      • ?
                                        A Former User
                                        last edited by

                                        Tinc is a pretty neat mesh VPN which has less overhead.
                                        You really want all static IPs for it though.

                                        http://www.tinc-vpn.org/

                                        scottalanmillerS 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                        • scottalanmillerS
                                          scottalanmiller @A Former User
                                          last edited by

                                          @thecreativeone91 said:

                                          Tinc is a pretty neat mesh VPN which has less overhead.
                                          You really want all static IPs for it though.

                                          http://www.tinc-vpn.org/

                                          You always need that somewhere. Pertino handles it by actually being an elaborate, hosted hub and spoke system that mimics a full mesh. You can do the same thing with OpenVPN or even IPSec, just takes a lot of work.

                                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                                          • JaredBuschJ
                                            JaredBusch @scottalanmiller
                                            last edited by

                                            @scottalanmiller said:

                                            IPSec is definitely lower overhead when available.

                                            IPSEC is lower overhead because it is has been offloaded in most cases.

                                            If you are not offloading the encryption in a router, the overhead between the two is not all that different.

                                            I use OpenVPN as the site-to-site method to connect the ERL at most clients. IPSEC always seems to have issues. For most SMB this is good enough as they will never saturate the OpenVPN link.

                                            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                            • 1
                                            • 2
                                            • 3
                                            • 4
                                            • 5
                                            • 6
                                            • 4 / 6
                                            • First post
                                              Last post