Hi all,
I’m seeing some differences with the way the netware redirector from Novell
handles file handle sharing vs. MrxSmb on XP. Specifically, when I have a
file handle open with full share access and SYNCHRONIZE access, opening a
second handle with DELETE access (ACCESS_MASK: 0x110080) and full sharing
fails with FILE_SHARING_VIOLATION.
Does anybody know if Novell calls the the IoCheckShareAccess routine to
handle sharing, or has some proprietary way of handling sharing between
handles? I’m digging into it, and fully expect some large amount of
weirdness compared to MrxSmb, but wondered if anybody knew this…
TIA,
Matt
Matt,
It may be that any open on Netware conflicts with access for delete. It is
not necessarily just a question of what the Netware redirector does, but
also what the Netware file access protocol supports. You might try to do a
network sniff to see if you can tell whether both opens flow across the wire
and what they return. (I don’t know whether Netmon 3.1 or Wireshark have
parsers for the Netware protocol, though.)
Good luck,
-----Original Message-----
From: Matthew N. White
Sent: Tuesday, October 09, 2007 4:51 PM
To: Windows File Systems Devs Interest List
Subject: [ntfsd] Netware redirector SHARING_VIOLATION
Hi all,
I’m seeing some differences with the way the netware redirector from Novell
handles file handle sharing vs. MrxSmb on XP. Specifically, when I have a
file handle open with full share access and SYNCHRONIZE access, opening a
second handle with DELETE access (ACCESS_MASK: 0x110080) and full sharing
fails with FILE_SHARING_VIOLATION.
Does anybody know if Novell calls the the IoCheckShareAccess routine to
handle sharing, or has some proprietary way of handling sharing between
handles? I’m digging into it, and fully expect some large amount of
weirdness compared to MrxSmb, but wondered if anybody knew this…
TIA,
Matt
Danilo,
It certainly seems like what you say is true, messing around with FileTest
on the netware redirector with two filehandles. IMO, it is surprising that
such a major difference in semantics does not cause major problems with
explorer.exe or other applications.
Matt
-----Original Message-----
From: xxxxx@lists.osr.com
[mailto:xxxxx@lists.osr.com] On Behalf Of Danilo Almeida
Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2007 2:53 AM
To: Windows File Systems Devs Interest List
Subject: RE: [ntfsd] Netware redirector SHARING_VIOLATION
Matt,
It may be that any open on Netware conflicts with access for
delete. It is not necessarily just a question of what the
Netware redirector does, but also what the Netware file
access protocol supports. You might try to do a network
sniff to see if you can tell whether both opens flow across
the wire and what they return. (I don’t know whether Netmon
3.1 or Wireshark have parsers for the Netware protocol, though.)
Good luck,
-----Original Message-----
From: Matthew N. White
Sent: Tuesday, October 09, 2007 4:51 PM
To: Windows File Systems Devs Interest List
Subject: [ntfsd] Netware redirector SHARING_VIOLATION
Hi all,
I’m seeing some differences with the way the netware
redirector from Novell handles file handle sharing vs. MrxSmb
on XP. Specifically, when I have a file handle open with
full share access and SYNCHRONIZE access, opening a second
handle with DELETE access (ACCESS_MASK: 0x110080) and full
sharing fails with FILE_SHARING_VIOLATION.
Does anybody know if Novell calls the the IoCheckShareAccess
routine to handle sharing, or has some proprietary way of
handling sharing between handles? I’m digging into it, and
fully expect some large amount of weirdness compared to
MrxSmb, but wondered if anybody knew this…
TIA,
Matt
NTFSD is sponsored by OSR
For our schedule debugging and file system seminars
(including our new fs mini-filter seminar) visit:
http://www.osr.com/seminars
You are currently subscribed to ntfsd as: xxxxx@bitarmor.com
To unsubscribe send a blank email to xxxxx@lists.osr.com
I’m not sure if this is related, but is the reason why there are sometimes problems sometimes with, for example, Office applications and the way the use temporary files on NetWare volumes?
So how do you see these problems, just run office on the novell redirector?
-----Original Message-----
From: xxxxx@lists.osr.com
[mailto:xxxxx@lists.osr.com] On Behalf Of
xxxxx@evitechnology.com
Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2007 1:23 PM
To: Windows File Systems Devs Interest List
Subject: RE:[ntfsd] Netware redirector SHARING_VIOLATION
I’m not sure if this is related, but is the reason why there
are sometimes problems sometimes with, for example, Office
applications and the way the use temporary files on NetWare volumes?
NTFSD is sponsored by OSR
For our schedule debugging and file system seminars
(including our new fs mini-filter seminar) visit:
http://www.osr.com/seminars
You are currently subscribed to ntfsd as: xxxxx@bitarmor.com
To unsubscribe send a blank email to xxxxx@lists.osr.com
Explorer doesn’t need Delete except when it deletes a file.
This is not a typical scenario - i.e. an application opening a file and
then deleting it while still having it open. If another application has it
open, that’s a different thing, and the apps must be ready to handle such
cases.
“Matthew N. White” wrote:
Danilo,
It certainly seems like what you say is true, messing around with FileTest
on the netware redirector with two filehandles. IMO, it is surprising that
such a major difference in semantics does not cause major problems with
explorer.exe or other applications.
–
Kind regards, Dejan (MSN support: xxxxx@alfasp.com)
http://www.alfasp.com
File system audit, security and encryption kits.
Makes sense. Although if Novell did the same thing regarding read or
writing that is does with deleting, I would think almost nothing work really
“work”. I seems to just force exclusive opens for delete.
-----Original Message-----
From: xxxxx@lists.osr.com
[mailto:xxxxx@lists.osr.com] On Behalf Of Dejan
Maksimovic
Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2007 5:23 PM
To: Windows File Systems Devs Interest List
Subject: Re: [ntfsd] Netware redirector SHARING_VIOLATION
Explorer doesn’t need Delete except when it deletes a file.
This is not a typical scenario - i.e. an application
opening a file and then deleting it while still having it
open. If another application has it open, that’s a different
thing, and the apps must be ready to handle such cases.
“Matthew N. White” wrote:
> Danilo,
>
> It certainly seems like what you say is true, messing around with
> FileTest on the netware redirector with two filehandles.
IMO, it is
> surprising that such a major difference in semantics does not cause
> major problems with explorer.exe or other applications.
–
Kind regards, Dejan (MSN support: xxxxx@alfasp.com)
http://www.alfasp.com File system audit, security and encryption kits.
NTFSD is sponsored by OSR
For our schedule debugging and file system seminars
(including our new fs mini-filter seminar) visit:
http://www.osr.com/seminars
You are currently subscribed to ntfsd as: xxxxx@bitarmor.com
To unsubscribe send a blank email to xxxxx@lists.osr.com
Novell is not your ideal FS player. It’s not bad, but it does a few things
its own way.
“Matthew N. White” wrote:
Makes sense. Although if Novell did the same thing regarding read or
writing that is does with deleting, I would think almost nothing work really
“work”. I seems to just force exclusive opens for delete.
–
Kind regards, Dejan (MSN support: xxxxx@alfasp.com)
http://www.alfasp.com
File system audit, security and encryption kits.
No kidding. Just a few more notes on its wackiness…
For directories:
It does not seem to honor sharing for reading/writing, it just lets anybody
open a handle, even if there’s no share access specified. In the previous
example, where you get a SHARING_VIOLATION if you open a handle with
SYNCHRONIZE first, and then the DELETE handle, *order* matters. Opening
with DELETE first and then SYNCHRONIZE works fine.
For files:
It seems to honor sharing properly for reading/writing. But for DELETE,
there seems to be a bug. On XPSP2 with the Novell redirector, opening a
handle to a single file using FileTest, with DELETE and no sharing, works
fine the first time. After this, subsequent opens all fail with
STATUS_SHARING_VIOLATION. Even restarting explorer.exe doesn’t fix this, so
I suspect a problem with the redirector. But you *can* delete using
explorer, so I’m guessing it’s some combination of options in the
FileTest.exe setup. Bizarre.
-----Original Message-----
From: xxxxx@lists.osr.com
[mailto:xxxxx@lists.osr.com] On Behalf Of Dejan
Maksimovic
Sent: Friday, October 12, 2007 4:16 PM
To: Windows File Systems Devs Interest List
Subject: Re: [ntfsd] Netware redirector SHARING_VIOLATION
Novell is not your ideal FS player. It’s not bad, but it
does a few things its own way.
“Matthew N. White” wrote:
> Makes sense. Although if Novell did the same thing
regarding read or
> writing that is does with deleting, I would think almost
nothing work
> really “work”. I seems to just force exclusive opens for delete.
–
Kind regards, Dejan (MSN support: xxxxx@alfasp.com)
http://www.alfasp.com File system audit, security and encryption kits.
NTFSD is sponsored by OSR
For our schedule debugging and file system seminars
(including our new fs mini-filter seminar) visit:
http://www.osr.com/seminars
You are currently subscribed to ntfsd as: xxxxx@bitarmor.com
To unsubscribe send a blank email to xxxxx@lists.osr.com