Effective December 3, NetApp adopts Microsoft’s Business-to-Customer (B2C) identity management to simplify and provide secure access to NetApp resources.For accounts that did not pre-register (prior to Dec 3), access to your NetApp data may take up to 1 hour as your legacy NSS ID is synchronized to the new B2C identity.To learn more, read the FAQ and watch the video.Need assistance? Complete this form and select “Registration Issue” as the Feedback Category.
There is a problem with the info returned by NetApp Filers upon a NetServerGetInfo (Windows Networking API).
The server information returned by the API call should have the SV_TYPE_DOMAIN_MEMBER flag set in the sv101_type member of the returned structure, if the filer is joined to a domain, but it is never set.
All storage appliances that I'm aware of are returning an incorrect result for this API, but NetApp could be the first appliance that actually returns the expected result, that a Windows server would return.
It should be possible to reproduce the problem with the sample code above, you may have to add the NetApi32.Lib library to successfully compile the example. If you receive error 5 (Access Denied) you may have to authenticate first, for example by connecting a network drive.
Fixing this problem, would increase compatibility of Filers with 3rd party applications.
It would be great to receive some kind of feedback from NetApp for this issue (or at least some Kudos).
So what real-world applications do you have that do not work with the current implementation as-is?
Changing something like this would require extensive compatibility testing with operating systems and network stacks going back as far as LAN Manager 3.0 for DOS, so unless you have a very compelling use (and are a very big customer, I guess ) I doubt that anything will be changed there. ESPECIALLY if the actual use-case turns out to be "I just want the result of this API call to be what Windows version X returns" instead of, say, "my application which is a multi-million-dollar SAP or CATIA installation, doesn't work with the current implementation" 😉