RHEL Engineering is moving the tracking of its product development work on RHEL 6 through RHEL 9 to Red Hat Jira (issues.redhat.com). If you're a Red Hat customer, please continue to file support cases via the Red Hat customer portal. If you're not, please head to the "RHEL project" in Red Hat Jira and file new tickets here. Individual Bugzilla bugs in the statuses "NEW", "ASSIGNED", and "POST" are being migrated throughout September 2023. Bugs of Red Hat partners with an assigned Engineering Partner Manager (EPM) are migrated in late September as per pre-agreed dates. Bugs against components "kernel", "kernel-rt", and "kpatch" are only migrated if still in "NEW" or "ASSIGNED". If you cannot log in to RH Jira, please consult article #7032570. That failing, please send an e-mail to the RH Jira admins at rh-issues@redhat.com to troubleshoot your issue as a user management inquiry. The email creates a ServiceNow ticket with Red Hat. Individual Bugzilla bugs that are migrated will be moved to status "CLOSED", resolution "MIGRATED", and set with "MigratedToJIRA" in "Keywords". The link to the successor Jira issue will be found under "Links", have a little "two-footprint" icon next to it, and direct you to the "RHEL project" in Red Hat Jira (issue links are of type "https://issues.redhat.com/browse/RHEL-XXXX", where "X" is a digit). This same link will be available in a blue banner at the top of the page informing you that that bug has been migrated.

Description of problem:

A DFS share can host the same data on multiple machines across a whole AD forest. When such a DFS share is accessed by mount.cifs, it seems that AD sites are not taken into account and the share is provided by an AD server from a random site.

For instance:

\\foo.com\share -> \\site1.foo.com\share
                -> \\site2.foo.com\share

Reading through [1] the following should happen (at least this is what MS clients are supposed to do):

When a UNC is accessed, a list of servers hosting this share is returned. The calling client should then resolve those server names and send CLDAP pings to all those servers in weighted random order. The client will then send the mount request to the first server that responds to the ping request.

[1]  https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc717360.aspx

It seems that cifs.upcall (or some other component - not sure) is not sending those CLDAP pings to identity the server the client should talk to.


Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
cifs-utils-6.2-9.el7.x86_64.rpm

How reproducible:

Steps to Reproduce:
1.
2.
3.

Actual results:


Expected results:


Additional info:

Ronnie, this is probably a lower priority but do you agree this is a bug or do you need more info?

I am not sure how important this is or how much this comes up in support cases.

Kenneth or Jake, does this come up in other support cases, maybe in an indirect manner, but maybe not reflected here?  Or does it not come up to your knowledge?

Ronnie, what's the current upstream status on it?

(In reply to Dave Wysochanski from comment #9)
> I am not sure how important this is or how much this comes up in support
> cases.
> 
> Kenneth or Jake, does this come up in other support cases, maybe in an
> indirect manner, but maybe not reflected here?  Or does it not come up to
> your knowledge?

I have only seen this for the one customer, which is attached to this case.

Unless Ronnie says this is upstream and will backported, here's how I'd like to handle this:
1. Make a kbase explaining this feature does not exist
2. Close WONTFIX until we get hits on the kbase, or new customer cases demand it be prioritized

This RFE feels like one of those low priority "nice to have" RFEs that may never become a priority, and will just consume people's cycles each release without anything ever being done on it.