Keep in mind that CIFS on AIX was never on the support matrix for 7mode. It worked, but was never qualified or tested. Support for it and Samba was always on a "best effort" basis. Only Mac and Windows CIFS were qualified.
0... .... .... .... = Unicode Strings: Strings are ASCII
On the cluster, in sktrace, you'd see this:
[kern_sktlogd:info:3069] 11.16.02.021841+0461 [1.0] CIFS_Dbg:nbb2e1c=CheckUnicode: Non-Unicode request not supported. cmd/sub:0x73/0x0<<<<<<
[kern_sktlogd:info:3069] 11.16.02.021847+0663 [1.0] CIFS_Err:nb8a3cb=ConvertInternalErrorToClientError: Client conn cid=55d4f69d at ip 10.61.83.50 getting default error from Res <-- the AIX client
The reason you see so much variance in SMB implementation is that there is no RFC standard for SMB, as Microsoft owns SMB and does not publish RFCs for it. So clients like Samba, AIX, etc get to implement SMB however they like. The fix for your AIX issue would be a patch for AIX that sends Unicode requests for CIFS over SMB1. This variance is the reason NetApp only supports Mac and Windows CIFS clients - it would be virtually impossible to support every CIFS client with all the variance out there.
NFS support spans so many clients because NFS follows RFC standards, so we can predict how the protocol will behave with accuracy.
thanks.. we pretty much reached the same conclusions from out packet traces... but sktrace is new to me and clearly highlights non-unicode is not supported.
I can understand that linux/apple would cover 'most' non windows CIFS clients so non-unicode clients would be quite a small population.. such as embedded devices or things like printers.
Your right about variance in SMB implementation as the CIFS 1.0 RFC was only draft and expired.. for lack of better source.. wikipedia mentions "Microsoft's SMB1 code has to work with a large variety of SMB clients and servers. SMB1 features many versions of information for commands (selecting what structure to return for a particular request) because features such as Unicode support were retro-fitted at a later date. "
Due to this lack of an official standard I tend to agree with "Microsoft's implementations are the de facto CIFS standards" (http://www.ubiqx.org/cifs/Intro.html)... and their implementation DOES allow for non-unicode clients to connect.
So everyone is right.. but it just won't work they way it used to
I already asked IBM about unicode support in their cifs client and they have no plans to add it as they "follow the spec".. and it can connect to a windows file shares.... so it is a dead end for us and we have now headed down the NFS path and battling through username mapping fun
Re: Has anyone been able to mount a cdot CIFS share in AIX?