ML
    • Register
    • Login
    • Search
    • Recent
    • Categories
    • Tags
    • Popular
    • Users
    • Groups

    SMBv1 is removed in the Windows 10 Insider Preview Build 16226

    IT Discussion
    windows 10 windows windows desktop smb smb 1 storage
    7
    12
    2106
    Loading More Posts
    • Oldest to Newest
    • Newest to Oldest
    • Most Votes
    Reply
    • Reply as topic
    Log in to reply
    This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
    • black3dynamite
      black3dynamite last edited by scottalanmiller

      Microsoft Removed SMBv1 in the Windows 10 Insider Preview Build 16226
      https://blogs.windows.com/windowsexperience/2017/06/21/announcing-windows-10-insider-preview-build-16226-pc/#gV5ZHfJ2xtEVLWW3.97
      SMBv1 is removed

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
      • scottalanmiller
        scottalanmiller last edited by

        Not surprising, actually probably a very good thing. Nothing should be using SMB 1 today. SMB 2 and CIFS replaced that a ridiculously long time ago.

        Dashrender Obsolesce 2 Replies Last reply Reply Quote 1
        • Dashrender
          Dashrender @scottalanmiller last edited by

          @scottalanmiller said in SMBv1 is removed in the Windows 10 Insider Preview Build 16226:

          Not surprising, actually probably a very good thing. Nothing should be using SMB 1 today. SMB 2 and CIFS replaced that a ridiculously long time ago.

          The same can be said for 2... 3.x has been out for 5+ years

          scottalanmiller 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • scottalanmiller
            scottalanmiller @Dashrender last edited by

            @Dashrender said in SMBv1 is removed in the Windows 10 Insider Preview Build 16226:

            @scottalanmiller said in SMBv1 is removed in the Windows 10 Insider Preview Build 16226:

            Not surprising, actually probably a very good thing. Nothing should be using SMB 1 today. SMB 2 and CIFS replaced that a ridiculously long time ago.

            The same can be said for 2... 3.x has been out for 5+ years

            Not the same thing. SMB 3 has different features. SMB 2 / CIFS might be venerable but it is still highly useful and reasonable to use.

            Not quite the same as NFS 3 and NFS 4, but we intentionally use NFS 3 much of the time today even though NFS 4 is old.

            Also SMB 3 might be "mature" at this point, but it doesn't have broad compatibility yet. So removing SMB 2 from Windows would cripple Windows making it unable to communicate with nearly all NAS and non-Windows native devices.

            dbeato dafyre 2 Replies Last reply Reply Quote 1
            • dbeato
              dbeato @scottalanmiller last edited by

              @scottalanmiller That's the sad truth...

              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • dafyre
                dafyre @scottalanmiller last edited by

                @scottalanmiller said in SMBv1 is removed in the Windows 10 Insider Preview Build 16226:

                Not quite the same as NFS 3 and NFS 4, but we intentionally use NFS 3 much of the time today even though NFS 4 is old.

                This may be good for a fork...but why hang on to NFSv3 instead of stepping up to NFSv4??

                scottalanmiller 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • Obsolesce
                  Obsolesce @scottalanmiller last edited by

                  @scottalanmiller said in SMBv1 is removed in the Windows 10 Insider Preview Build 16226:

                  Not surprising, actually probably a very good thing. Nothing should be using SMB 1 today. SMB 2 and CIFS replaced that a ridiculously long time ago.

                  Copiers do (scan to folder), unless you pay ridiculous money to upgrade... I'll spare the rant.

                  Obsolesce 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • Obsolesce
                    Obsolesce @Obsolesce last edited by

                    @Tim_G said in SMBv1 is removed in the Windows 10 Insider Preview Build 16226:

                    @scottalanmiller said in SMBv1 is removed in the Windows 10 Insider Preview Build 16226:

                    Not surprising, actually probably a very good thing. Nothing should be using SMB 1 today. SMB 2 and CIFS replaced that a ridiculously long time ago.

                    Copiers do (scan to folder), unless you pay ridiculous money to upgrade... I'll spare the rant.

                    But IMO, security trumps functionality. Kill SMB1.0.

                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • scottalanmiller
                      scottalanmiller @dafyre last edited by

                      @dafyre said in SMBv1 is removed in the Windows 10 Insider Preview Build 16226:

                      @scottalanmiller said in SMBv1 is removed in the Windows 10 Insider Preview Build 16226:

                      Not quite the same as NFS 3 and NFS 4, but we intentionally use NFS 3 much of the time today even though NFS 4 is old.

                      This may be good for a fork...but why hang on to NFSv3 instead of stepping up to NFSv4??

                      Because the work differently and having the overhead of NFSv4 often does not make sense.

                      Dashrender 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • Dashrender
                        Dashrender @scottalanmiller last edited by

                        @scottalanmiller said in SMBv1 is removed in the Windows 10 Insider Preview Build 16226:

                        @dafyre said in SMBv1 is removed in the Windows 10 Insider Preview Build 16226:

                        @scottalanmiller said in SMBv1 is removed in the Windows 10 Insider Preview Build 16226:

                        Not quite the same as NFS 3 and NFS 4, but we intentionally use NFS 3 much of the time today even though NFS 4 is old.

                        This may be good for a fork...but why hang on to NFSv3 instead of stepping up to NFSv4??

                        Because the work differently and having the overhead of NFSv4 often does not make sense.

                        Can you give more detail?

                        coliver scottalanmiller 2 Replies Last reply Reply Quote 0
                        • coliver
                          coliver @Dashrender last edited by

                          @Dashrender said in SMBv1 is removed in the Windows 10 Insider Preview Build 16226:

                          @scottalanmiller said in SMBv1 is removed in the Windows 10 Insider Preview Build 16226:

                          @dafyre said in SMBv1 is removed in the Windows 10 Insider Preview Build 16226:

                          @scottalanmiller said in SMBv1 is removed in the Windows 10 Insider Preview Build 16226:

                          Not quite the same as NFS 3 and NFS 4, but we intentionally use NFS 3 much of the time today even though NFS 4 is old.

                          This may be good for a fork...but why hang on to NFSv3 instead of stepping up to NFSv4??

                          Because the work differently and having the overhead of NFSv4 often does not make sense.

                          Can you give more detail?

                          IIRC NFSv4 is a statful protocol. It uses TCP instead of UDP so there is a not insignificant amount of network and processing overhead when moving from NFSv3 to NFSv4.

                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                          • scottalanmiller
                            scottalanmiller @Dashrender last edited by

                            @Dashrender said in SMBv1 is removed in the Windows 10 Insider Preview Build 16226:

                            @scottalanmiller said in SMBv1 is removed in the Windows 10 Insider Preview Build 16226:

                            @dafyre said in SMBv1 is removed in the Windows 10 Insider Preview Build 16226:

                            @scottalanmiller said in SMBv1 is removed in the Windows 10 Insider Preview Build 16226:

                            Not quite the same as NFS 3 and NFS 4, but we intentionally use NFS 3 much of the time today even though NFS 4 is old.

                            This may be good for a fork...but why hang on to NFSv3 instead of stepping up to NFSv4??

                            Because the work differently and having the overhead of NFSv4 often does not make sense.

                            Can you give more detail?

                            They are very different protocols with a lot of different features. NFSv3 is much lighter than NFSv4.

                            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                            • First post
                              Last post