SOLVED SMB shares not showing in network browsing

[Redcoat]

I'm not understanding the issue here, as all that's occurring is cosmetic, i.e. there's no icon for a connected PC/Server,

I have absolutely no issues with the current situation, but don't you think that the issue may indeed be that it's "cosmetic" to us - but to the average user it's "non GUI"/(non-Windows) and thus a regression from everything that they have become to expect from a Windows (graphical) environment?

 

[Basil Hendroff]

I have absolutely no issues with the current situation, but don't you think that the issue may indeed be that it's "cosmetic" to us - but to the average user it's "non GUI"/(non-Windows) and thus a regression from everything that they have become to expect from a Windows (graphical) environment?

You've hit the nail on the head. I could not have said it better.

 

[sretalla]

Have you set "Local Master" on SMB settings? this should make some improvement to the situation assuming you sleep your client machines... if they are elected Master before sleeping and after that the netbios naming lists can get messed up (since the sleep event usually doesn't give the old master the time to transfer the browse list to the new one). The Master Browser election process is pretty messed up (look it up for a laugh)... newest OS, uptime, who knows what else decides and then you end up with a workstation doing the function of a server.

I assume you already have "browsable to network clients" set in the share settings.

 

[Basil Hendroff]

Have you set "Local Master" on SMB settings?

The FreeNAS server makes a reliable browse master in a workgroup environment. In addition to setting Local Master, add the following lines to Auxiliary parameters under SMB service; then restart the service.

# FreeNAS server wins in any election process to become master browser
os level = 255

# Force a browser election if FreeNAS is restarted
preferred master = yes

The Master Browser election process is pretty messed up (look it up for a laugh)...

It's a democracy! ;)

 

[sretalla]

It's a democracy! ;)

But you just showed how you can "stack the branches" to guide the democracy to the dictatorial result ;)

# FreeNAS server wins in any election process to become master browser
os level - 255

# Force a browser election if FreeNAS is restarted
preferred master = yes

 

[Basil Hendroff]

But you just showed how you can "stack the branches" to guide the democracy to the dictatorial result ;)

Scandalous isn't it? It's so Cambridge Analytica.

 

[zoomzoom]

I have absolutely no issues with the current situation, but don't you think that the issue may indeed be that it's "cosmetic" to us - but to the average user it's "non GUI"/(non-Windows) and thus a regression from everything that they have become to expect from a Windows (graphical) environment?

As of Windows 8 forward, the Network GUI functionality was depreciated and the Network GUI, with the exception of the DLNA listings (which majority of users have never used), is fairly pointless and unusable. Except for the aforementioned exception, all it does is allow the user to see the IP, MAC, and manufacturer details of a specific network device, of which should be garnished from the router, not Windows.

• On top of this, OS maintainers decide to remove features from OSes all the time, it's a natural evolution of an OS. Users must evolve as an OS evolves, else they might be better served looking for a different OS to utilize.

Non-GUI?

• [ WinKey + [ R], followed by \\hostname or \\IP opens up the server in Explorer.
• Typing in the Explorer address bar \\hostname or \\IP opens up the server in Explorer.
• Typing the share path into a web browser ( \\hostname\ShareName or \\IP\ShareName) opens up the share within the web browser

All of the above will almost always be faster than opening Network in Explorer since Network must re-populate network devices every single time Network is opened.

• Considering everyone knows how to browse the internet, typing a hostname or IP is clearly something everyone knows how to do. You're making a supposition that unknown users will have an issue with this, which doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me.

 

[PeterWeyland]

I have just installed a new Win 10 PC on our network.
Unable to see our FreeNAS 9.10.2-U6 box.
But all the Win 7 PCs can see it as usual. FreeNAS has master browser disabled and only SMB 2 and above are enabled.
If I enable the Win 10 option (CPanel/Programs/Features) that says SMB1.0 [SMB 1.0 / CIFS and computer browser] then the Win 10 PC can see the FreeNAS box.
Maybe not only Netbios but also MS logic seems to be broken.

You need the old CIFS aka SMB1 to have prayer of a chance of being able to browse available network shares. Even then, different Samba releases work better/worse than others. Let's not forget SMB is Micro$oft's deliberate imposition of a protocol proprietary to only them to hobble competitors. SMB consists of many dialects. Its a marvel Samba works really.

 

[zoomzoom]

You need the old CIFS aka SMB1 to have prayer of a chance of being able to browse available network shares

This is factually inaccurate, as I have explained in a multitude of posts in this thread alone... Please use due diligence to at least skim prior posts before posting.

Additionally, anyone advocating the use of SMBv1 is either ignorant of the risks, or worse, knows the severe criticality of the risks and still recommends others utilize it.

• AGAIN, SMBv1 IS NOT SECURE, IS EXPLOITABLE, AND HAS BEEN EXPLOITED AGAINST THOUSANDS OF DEVICES.
  • SMBv1 should not be utilized by anyone... Period.
    • If one does not understand why, please use your search engine of choice to research the critical security reasons.
    • If a user chooses to disregard the advice of every single security researcher, then utilize SMBv1, but when the user is exploited, which is only a matter of when, not if, the user has no one to blame but themselves.

 

[PeterWeyland]

This is factually inaccurate, as I have explain in a multitude of posts in this thread alone... Please use due diligence to at least skim prior posts before posting.

Additionally, anyone advocating the use of SMBv1 is either ignorant of the risks, or worse, knows the severe criticality of the risks and still recommends others utilize it.

• AGAIN, SMBv1 IS NOT SECURE, IS EXPLOITABLE, AND HAS BEEN EXPLOITED AGAINST THOUSANDS OF DEVICES.
  • SMBv1 should not be utilized by anyone... Period.
    • If one does not understand why, please use your search engine of choice to research the critical security reasons.
    • If a user chooses to disregard the advice of every single security researcher, then utilize SMBv1, but when the user is exploited, which is only a matter of when, not if, the user has no one to blame but themselves.

Configuring SAMBA servers with server max protocol = NT1 most often helps folks enourmously. ref : https://wiki.samba.org/index.php/Required_Settings_for_Samba_NT4_Domains

 

[Basil Hendroff]

You need the old CIFS aka SMB1 to have prayer of a chance of being able to browse available network shares.

I know exactly what you're saying and the context it is in, but there are many posts within this thread that correctly point out there are other ways of browsing network shares. So that we're not conflating the meaning of network browsing, can I respectfully suggest a rephrasing of this sentence to...

You need the old CIFS aka SMB1 to have prayer of a chance of being able to use the Windows computer browser service to locate shared SMB resources on neighbouring computers.

It's a bit more of a mouthful, but if it keeps the family happy, I'm all for it.

 

[PeterWeyland]

I know exactly what you're saying and the context it is in, but there are many posts within this thread that correctly point out there are other ways of browsing network shares. So that we're not conflating the meaning of network browsing, can I respectfully suggest a rephrasing of this sentence to...

You need the old CIFS aka SMB1 to have prayer of a chance of being able to use the Windows computer browser service to locate shared SMB resources on neighbouring computers.

It's a bit more of a mouthful, but if it keeps the family happy, I'm all for it.

Agreed. Well put old chum. Thanks.

 

[zoomzoom]

SMBv1 is not secure in the slightest, due to the exploits currently existing, and any device that has SMBv1 enabled is asking to be exploited... but hey, don't take my word for it, take the few minutes to research it yourself via any search engine.

• This after all is the sole reason Microsoft removed SMBv1 in >v1709. So if you wanna utilize SMBv1, knock yourself out... but don't go around recommending for anyone else to participate in your bad judgement.

security is not the topic, regardless of importance

Right, because one should just overlook the serious consequences of enabling SMBv1 because even though it's apart of the topic, it's not the topic itself. Clearly our perspectives differ significantly...

 

[PeterWeyland]

The FreeNAS server makes a reliable browse master in a workgroup environment. In addition to setting Local Master, add the following lines to Auxiliary parameters under SMB service; then restart the service.

# FreeNAS server wins in any election process to become master browser
os level = 255

# Force a browser election if FreeNAS is restarted
preferred master = yes


It's a democracy! ;)

This is a great tip Seymour. Todays networks often have all kinds of weird & wonderful devices hanging off them with non standard configurations silently playing havoc.

 

[Ericloewe]

I think this thread needs a bit of a cool down period. Please remember to be civil and keep in mind that text can often seem more aggressive than it is meant to be - try to assume good faith.

 

[Ericloewe]

Mod note:

Some messages in this thread have been edited. Please be civil.

The thread is now open again.

 

[PeterWeyland]

SMBv1 is not secure in the slightest, due to the exploits currently existing, and any device that has SMBv1 enabled is asking to be exploited... but hey, don't take my word for it, take the few minutes to research it yourself via any search engine.

• This after all is the sole reason Microsoft removed SMBv1 in >v1709. So if you wanna utilize SMBv1, knock yourself out... but don't go around recommending for anyone else to participate in your bad judgement.

Right, because one should just overlook the serious consequences of enabling SMBv1 because even though it's apart of the topic, it's not the topic itself. Clearly our perspectives differ significantly...

1. The security flaw found in the NT1 dialect of SMB was found and patched long ago.
2. Home users & SME's are happy to solve the problem with this simple change. Fortune 500 users are another thing..
3. Here's an article which may help many folks : https://hendroff.wordpress.com/2018...th-windows-10-and-freenas/?share=twitter&nb=1

Cheers!

 

[Ericloewe]

A question that comes to my mind is why you'd want to browse the network. Sure, I did it all the time when I was a kid and had zero understanding of networking, to kill time while waiting for the Wi-Fi gods to favor me for a bit longer. However, there really is no workflow that comes to my mind that benefits from that. Pinning the server to the quick access side bar is a better solution, in my opinion.

 

[Basil Hendroff]

A question that comes to my mind is why you'd want to browse the network. Sure, I did it all the time when I was a kid and had zero understanding of networking, to kill time while waiting for the Wi-Fi gods to favor me for a bit longer. However, there really is no workflow that comes to my mind that benefits from that. Pinning the server to the quick access side bar is a better solution, in my opinion

Agree. We're empowered. However, I think Redcoat put it best, and the first part of your post subscribes to this notion, when he said...

I have absolutely no issues with the current situation, but don't you think that the issue may indeed be that it's "cosmetic" to us - but to the average user it's "non GUI"/(non-Windows) and thus a regression from everything that they have become to expect from a Windows (graphical) environment?

 

[PeterWeyland]

A question that comes to my mind is why you'd want to browse the network. Sure, I did it all the time when I was a kid and had zero understanding of networking, to kill time while waiting for the Wi-Fi gods to favor me for a bit longer. However, there really is no workflow that comes to my mind that benefits from that. Pinning the server to the quick access side bar is a better solution, in my opinion.

In their GUI filemanager programs & mobile apps users see 'Network Neighbourhood' click it wanting to see what servers/shares are on the LAN. This worked until a giant US corporation decided it should'nt work.