Error; Could not find an Active Directory domain controller

Support
, ,
1

NethServer Version: 7
Module:

Trying to join a second nethserver 7 to a nethserver 7 samba AD. The NS7 Samba AD has been running for a while, with nextcloud and clients accessing nextcloud.

The AD nic ip is .79 and it’s bridged to .80, the ns to join is .74, .74 can ping against .79.
Doesn’t matter what I set the gateway and dns to on the .74, the joiner can’t find the AD… I did set the gateway and dns on the joiner, .74, to .79 and ran software update, it ran, I did an nslookup for a domain that was never lookup up on the joiner before and it completed, but it always throws the can’t find AD error. The domain is the same on both ns. The only modules installed on the AD are nexcloud and statistics. The AD is running on virtualbox set as bridged and promisc allow all.

Isn’t the provider creation gui supposed to install the necessary modules?
There are no provider modules in the software center and it doesn’t seem like it’s trying to install anything when I try to join.

2

Hi @fasttech

It smells fishy: how can .79 (the DC) work as gateway? Nevertheless a bad gateway configuration shouldn’t prevent from joining the domain.

What domain? The FQDN domain part? The AD dns domain name? Both of them? Could you paste (from both .79 and .74)

  config show sssd
  account-provider-test dump

It depends on the type of provider: local providers install additional modules, remote ones not.

3

So, there’s no response to ping on the container ip, .80 of the AD ns, though the nic ip responds, .79.

I fired up my other, old, test environment and there’s ping response on both the nic and container ip of the AD node, .210 & .211. @davidep

4

Does the ping fail from .79 to .80 too?

5

@davidep No. .80 does respond to pings from .79.

6

In this case, either samba service failed to start or your virtualization software blocks Ethernet frames.

In NethServer

 systemctl -M nsdc status samba
 journalctl -M nsdc

And

yum install nmap
nmap ...80
7

It’s loaded and active (running)… .79 is on the latest virtualbox, v5… .74 is on hardware.
My test environment is all virtualbox but an older version, v4.

Your suspicion about vb is about the same as mine, maybe allow all doesn’t really mean, allow all… sigh. 2 days of this so far. smh.

8

You could try to manually attach the virtual interface to a host bridge and set it promiscuous.

…or update VB if possible :grinning:

9

You know what?.. this vm is on a temporary host… one of my i7 windows laptops, and, for convenience is bridged to the wireless adapter, which probably doesn’t support promisc mode… damn. We’ll see if my theory holds out in a few hours.

1 Like
10

That was it, the hardware doesn’t support promisc.

2 Likes