IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO GET AN ACCOUNT, please write an
email to Administrator. User accounts are meant only to access repo
and report issues and/or generate pull requests.
This is a purpose-specific Git hosting for
BaseALT
projects. Thank you for your understanding!
Только зарегистрированные пользователи имеют доступ к сервису!
Для получения аккаунта, обратитесь к администратору.
Because we still want to commit any changes that successfully apply we
never want to do a global cancel, and because of how transaction nesting
works that means we never cancel any "transaction" at the single modify
operation level.
Let each operation start its own transaction so that the transaction is
properly canceled if any error is returned and half committed operations
(though plugins failing) are properly reverted on a per operation basis.
Add an option to propagate name releases directly.
This make the results for #1C name queries more consistent
among all servers.
It's off by default to match windows.
metze
(from samba4wins tree 166e9fdffb9f4e26513c3b4ec1f6f168ecbe18f8)
if we're the owner, the expire time becomes the highest
expire time of owned addresses
metze
(from samba4wins tree 024f439db45046c7c0bb4759c75877462405baec)
This fixes a bug where #1C addresses are registered with different
WINS-Servers and a merged #1C record.
metze
(from samba4wins tree 72e055394a0fd1f543be9c196b4179356a1033f6)
We may send requests packets (WACK challenges or similar things)
via a different udp socket than the socket we receive the
matching response. We need to setup an unexpected handler
on the nbt sockets and redirect responses to the correct
nbt_socket. (By redirect I mean we use the correct
nbt_socket structure, we're *not* resending the packet
with sendto() via the kernel...)
metze
(from samba4wins tree 7ce8e705e5a9aabb787d17fbec7a078d9d6780dc)
This fixes the following bug:
While we reply with a WACK response to a client.
Instead of waiting for the final reply some
windows client just resends the request using
the same name_trn_id in the nbt_name_packet.
We handled this as a new request and send a
WACK response (and the challenges) again.
Then the first request gets its final success
response, but the when we try to send the success
for the "second" request we notice that
the record was changed in between and we return
an error.
Windows 2003 (and I assume all other versions as well)
detect the packet is just a resent of a currently pending
request and ignores it.
So we now keep a list of all pending WINS name register
requests which result in a WACK response. On each incoming
name register request we search through the list to find
duplicate requests and ignore them. In theory we should
do that for all requests, but name register requests
are the only requests we response async and only
if we have to go via the WACK code path.
metze
(from samba4wins tree 382e7d384b70d03e9f81c7bb353afaed288d80f0)
