03-23-2022, 07:14 PM
(This post was last modified: 03-23-2022, 07:16 PM by TheOldPresbyope.
Edit Reason: fix wording
)
Just so others won't get misled by this discussion,
Putting aside the now deprecated SMBv1 (aka CIFS aka NT1), the default moOde settings will allow it to negotiate with a server for the highest SMB protocol level acceptable to both.
So, for example, in my test environment with a Samba server running in OpenWRT (to emulate common routers) with no maximum protocol level set and with the minimum protocol level set to NT1, moOde will mount the share with SMBv1 if I explicitly force vers=1.0 in the mount flags.
However, if I leave moOde set with only the default mount flags, then it will negotiate to and mount with SMB3.1.1. If I set the Samba server to a maximum protocol level of SMBv2.0, then that's where the negotiation will end, and so on (usw!).
In past tests, I have covered the entire matrix of SMB protocol versions on various Samba servers versus on the moOde client and found it all very consistent.
If Fritz!Box doesn't work this way they should be more forthcoming on configuring their software.
Regards,
Kent
Putting aside the now deprecated SMBv1 (aka CIFS aka NT1), the default moOde settings will allow it to negotiate with a server for the highest SMB protocol level acceptable to both.
So, for example, in my test environment with a Samba server running in OpenWRT (to emulate common routers) with no maximum protocol level set and with the minimum protocol level set to NT1, moOde will mount the share with SMBv1 if I explicitly force vers=1.0 in the mount flags.
However, if I leave moOde set with only the default mount flags, then it will negotiate to and mount with SMB3.1.1. If I set the Samba server to a maximum protocol level of SMBv2.0, then that's where the negotiation will end, and so on (usw!).
In past tests, I have covered the entire matrix of SMB protocol versions on various Samba servers versus on the moOde client and found it all very consistent.
If Fritz!Box doesn't work this way they should be more forthcoming on configuring their software.
Regards,
Kent