Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - caltec

Pages: [1]
"The short story might be because Zentyal uses RFC2307 then it is only 2008r2 and above compatible."

If this is the case then doesn't it defeat the whole purpose of Zentyal as such which is to be a replacement for SBS 2003. If you can not successfully join Zentyal to an SBS 2003 domain and then migrate email then it would not really be a replacement but more of an alternative to.

I would like to know this as well please. I am also struggling with an error relating to EBox::Samba::checkMailNotInUse. It was triggered when I tried to enable openchange. I hacked the peel code to bypass the check so I could test further but that was like hitting the problem with a large hammer and not acceptable for production. Did you have any issues with it? I have SBS 2003, what about you?

What is the samba openchange issue???


"Windows Server 2003. One of the most common misconceptions is that customers cannot run another member server or domain controller in a Windows SBS domain. This is not true! You can add additional member servers that are running Windows Server 2003 or Windows 2000 Server to a Windows SBS domain. You can even promote a member server that is running Windows Server 2003 to be a domain controller, in order to improve authentication services at remote offices"

Plus I already have another Server 2003 server running as a DC with sbs.

The zentyal machine has joined the domain fine. It is just this function that is causing me issues,

Installation and Upgrades / Re: Can't add Openchange Mail Services
« on: July 14, 2014, 01:02:18 am »
I have had the same issue and i think the error is in the EBox::Samba::checkMailNotInUse function. As far as I can see it checks to see if an email address is already in use but does not take into account the user / object it is working with and discount it from the check. So  if I ediy a user with an email address already set it fails because it has found the user I am editing has already got the email address in use. I think this is the same problem as demonstrated in setting up OpenChange.

I am going to try and hack the code and see if I can workout a fix. I have also created a post based on the problem and am trying to see how to submit a bug report.

If you have any further information / ideas please keep posting.

I have had a number of issues with Zentyal 3.5.
I have joined to my existing SBS 2003 domain as an additional DC so I can move the email over from exchange and in time ditch the SBS box and migrate to Zentyal 100%.
Upon trying to alter an existing user (in this example Administrator) from Zentyal the email (optional) field is populated automatically from the existing AD. Upon saving the changes I get the error "Address is already in use by the user Administrator".
I also get a similar error with more debug detail when I try and setup the mail & openchange modules and from this. I have traced the error to the EBox::Samba::checkMailNotInUse method.

As far as I can see looking at the source code (I am a php not a perl developer but it looks similar) the EBox::Samba::checkMailNotInUse method / function does not apply the logic to test if the response relates to the current object. Surely this should be done else editing an object runs the method in question and if the email field has been previously populated the edit on the object will always throw an exception.

One other way would be to exclude the current object when performing the ldap lookup somehow.

As I have said I am not a perl developer nd have no knowledge of the Zentyal architecture but I think I am on the right lines.
I will try and submit a bug report if I can but I am not currently sure how to go about it.

Many Thanks


Your domain could be running at a windows 2000 functional level (Mine was). Go into "Active Directory Domains and Trusts" right click on your domain and choose "Raise Domain Functional Level".

There are some losses that occur going from 2000 -> 2003 but they are explained in a warning dialog if I remember correctly.

Hope this helps

Pages: [1]