Programmatically mount W2K AFP share


L

Lorenzo Thurman

I have a program which mounts afp shares via IP. It works fine when
mounting volumes on Apple servers and Unix servers running Netatalk. I
can mount these silently w/o user interaction. The password is taken
from the Keychain and the target volume is mounted but I can't mount AFP
shares running on W2K. I found the MS UAM for 10.x, but I can't mount
the volume silently, the auth box comes up. Is this possible with or
without the UAM? I would prefer not using the UAM, but from what I've
come to understand in researching the problem is that W2K will not
support Apple encryption, thus the need for the UAM. This needs to work
with Panther (10.3). Can anyone help me out with this?
TIA
 
Ad

Advertisements

L

Lorenzo Thurman

Lorenzo Thurman said:
I have a program which mounts afp shares via IP. It works fine when
mounting volumes on Apple servers and Unix servers running Netatalk. I
can mount these silently w/o user interaction. The password is taken
from the Keychain and the target volume is mounted but I can't mount AFP
shares running on W2K. I found the MS UAM for 10.x, but I can't mount
the volume silently, the auth box comes up. Is this possible with or
without the UAM? I would prefer not using the UAM, but from what I've
come to understand in researching the problem is that W2K will not
support Apple encryption, thus the need for the UAM. This needs to work
with Panther (10.3). Can anyone help me out with this?
TIA

I think I may have answered at least one of my questions. My familiarity
with W2K is part of the problem. I see that one can select what type of
encryption, if any, to use from a Mac when connecting to W2K. Clear
Text will work and does not require the UAM if I set the Mac client to
allow clear text passwords, but neither "Apple Encrypted" nor "Apple
Encrypted or Microsoft" will work without the UAM, so I guess the only
question I have left is:
Can I use Apple Encryption w/o the MS UAM?
 
E

Eric Chamberlain, CISSP

If you are running Panther, why use AFP? The MS UAM is not very good, use
CIFS and the machines can connect without any special configuration on the
servers.
 
L

Lorenzo Thurman

Eric Chamberlain said:
If you are running Panther, why use AFP? The MS UAM is not very good, use
CIFS and the machines can connect without any special configuration on the
servers.

Lorenzo Thurman said:
I have a program which mounts afp shares via IP. It works fine when
mounting volumes on Apple servers and Unix servers running Netatalk. I
can mount these silently w/o user interaction. The password is taken
from the Keychain and the target volume is mounted but I can't mount AFP
shares running on W2K. I found the MS UAM for 10.x, but I can't mount
the volume silently, the auth box comes up. Is this possible with or
without the UAM? I would prefer not using the UAM, but from what I've
come to understand in researching the problem is that W2K will not
support Apple encryption, thus the need for the UAM. This needs to work
with Panther (10.3). Can anyone help me out with this?
TIA

I would like to use that, but I get bad username/password error
connecting to the server using it. I read in another post that there is
a LAN Manager setting that needs to be turned off for it to work, but I
can't find it. I've already used Directory Access to put my computer
into the correct domain, and I can connect to other Windows servers,
just not this one.

Do you have any ideas?
 
Ad

Advertisements

E

Eric Chamberlain, CISSP

Lorenzo Thurman said:
Eric Chamberlain said:
If you are running Panther, why use AFP? The MS UAM is not very good, use
CIFS and the machines can connect without any special configuration on the
servers.



I would like to use that, but I get bad username/password error
connecting to the server using it. I read in another post that there is
a LAN Manager setting that needs to be turned off for it to work, but I
can't find it. I've already used Directory Access to put my computer
into the correct domain, and I can connect to other Windows servers,
just not this one.

Do you have any ideas?

Mac's don't support SMB signing without ADmitMac, other than that, they work
with Kerberos or NTLMv2.
 

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.

Ask a Question

Top