Open sreenath-koannki opened 1 year ago
Hi Team, One more observation, sometimes DFS resolution is hanging and observed the below error Caused by: java.net.SocketTimeoutException: connect timed out at java.net.PlainSocketImpl.socketConnect(Native Method) ~[?:1.8.0_302] at java.net.AbstractPlainSocketImpl.doConnect(AbstractPlainSocketImpl.java:350) ~[?:1.8.0_302] at java.net.AbstractPlainSocketImpl.connectToAddress(AbstractPlainSocketImpl.java:206) ~[?:1.8.0_302] at java.net.AbstractPlainSocketImpl.connect(AbstractPlainSocketImpl.java:188) ~[?:1.8.0_302] at java.net.Socket.connect(Socket.java:607) ~[?:1.8.0_302] at com.hierynomus.protocol.commons.socket.ProxySocketFactory.createSocket(ProxySocketFactory.java:87) ~[smbj-0.11.5.jar:?] at com.hierynomus.protocol.commons.socket.ProxySocketFactory.createSocket(ProxySocketFactory.java:63) ~[smbj-0.11.5.jar:?] at com.hierynomus.smbj.transport.tcp.direct.DirectTcpTransport.connect(DirectTcpTransport.java:88) ~[smbj-0.11.5.jar:?] at com.hierynomus.smbj.connection.Connection.connect(Connection.java:139) ~[smbj-0.11.5.jar:?] at com.hierynomus.smbj.SMBClient.getEstablishedOrConnect(SMBClient.java:96) ~[smbj-0.11.5.jar:?] at com.hierynomus.smbj.SMBClient.connect(SMBClient.java:83) ~[smbj-0.11.5.jar:?]
Hi Team, Our customer is seeing an issue/exception inconsistently while doing the below operation by using SMBv2. It is observed that the above exception is seen only after upgrading from SMBJ-0.9.0 to SMBJ-0.11.5. (Suggested to Customer for the upgradation of jar, since have seen few issues in SMBJ-0.9.0)
"FileAllInformation fileAllInformation = DiskShare.getFileInformation(path)"
However, the path has all the access permission to the user.
Adding more info below,
I have tried to debug from the server end since it is inconsistent and observed only after upgrading the jar.
Hence, I have captured the traffic and observed that there is a difference in SMB header while using the SMBJ-0.11.5. (A file is transferred from the client to server)
SMBJ-0.11.5
SMBJ-0.9.0
What could be the potential issue here?