2015-10-26 09:28 AM - edited 2015-10-26 09:28 AM
TR 4100 covers this really well.. a really nice reference. See page 6. a LIF migrate and vol move are non-disruptive to SMB 2 and SMB 3. lif migrate is disruptive only if SMB 1.0. An aggregate relocate (from takeover/giveback or by command) is disruptive to SMB 2.0 though but not 3.0 with CA.
2015-10-26 09:44 AM
2015-10-26 10:28 AM
SMB signing can prevent smb1, but looks like a patch fixes that. http://mysupport.netapp.com/NOW/cgi-bin/bol?Type=Detail&Display=803058
2015-10-27 12:03 AM
TR 4100 covers this really well.. a really nice reference. See page 6.
Page 7 is more interesting as it details conditions when LIF migration is really non-disruptive. It seems that SMB 2 or 3 alone does not gurantee it; there are situations when session may be lost.
I wonder if Windows is using durable handles by default (and in which versions). I could not find any explanation, but then I am not really Windows guy.
2015-10-27 05:37 PM
Judging by the fact that NetApp created a solution to make sure SMB1 will still work, I guess NetApp left it to the Windows environment to decide if they will eliminate SMB1 or not. Security engineers may not like this. lol