- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Mark Topic as New
- Mark Topic as Read
- Float this Topic for Current User
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Printer Friendly Page
Re: RN104 SMB not supported from OSX - RN214 working OK from OSX -
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
RN104 SMB not supported from OSX - RN214 working OK from OSX -
Hello everyone
I have a RN104 and a newer RN214. The Firmware are BOTH at 6.10.1. Both NAS have only SMB on, AFP is off.
Using a Windows 10 PC, I am able to see the shares on both of them without issues. using Windows File Explorer.
Using a MacBook (High Sierra), I get strange results using FINDER.
a) when trying to access the RN214 it works fine.
b) when trying to access the RN104, I get a message URLs with the type “smb:” are not supported... I cannot get to enter a username/password.
This is really strange, the configuration for both NAS are almost the same except for the IP address. OSX seems to support access to SMB on one NAS but not another?
Any suggestions for how to isolate the problem?
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
Re: RN104 SMB not supported from OSX - RN214 working OK from OSX -
Did you try using cifs instead of smb in finder?
Also, are you trying the IP address or the hostname?
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
Re: RN104 SMB not supported from OSX - RN214 working OK from OSX -
Thanks Stephen,
Yes, I did try using CIFS://{name of NAS} and CIFS://192.168.0.XXX.
The machine simply appended SMB: in front of it and returned an error.
I did manage to enable AFP and access the NAS in finder successfully.
I am just surprised that the same OSX machine was able to see RN214, but not the RN104, both with SMB enabled.
PS: I had a typo on the subject line (it should by RN 214, and not RN204). Is there any way to correct that heading?
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
Re: RN104 SMB not supported from OSX - RN214 working OK from OSX -
@dyvong wrote:
PS: I had a typo on the subject line (it should by RN 214, and not RN204). Is there any way to correct that heading?
I think you've passed the editing window, but I fixed it for you.
@dyvong wrote:
I am just surprised that the same OSX machine was able to see RN214, but not the RN104, both with SMB enabled.
Yes. Did you check the SMB transport encryption settings on the two NAS, and see if they matched?
Perhaps create a test share on the RN104, and set it up with the same permissions and settings as the RN214 is using. Then see if you can access that.
Might be worth confirming that both NAS are showing the same time also.
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
Re: RN104 SMB not supported from OSX - RN214 working OK from OSX -
Thanks Stephen
I have checked both NAS have the identical SMB settings (services->SMB) are both showing: SMB3 Transport Encryption - configure globally : Disabled.
Enabled SMB is CHECKED.
Legacy Windows Discovery if NOT Checked.
Enhance MacOS is NOT Checked.
Were you thinking of settings found somewhere else in the Admin pages?
I also checked the Time and both are using the same and synchronized.
Now still using AFP, something I prefer not to enable if I can help it. It appears this is no longer popular.
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
Re: RN104 SMB not supported from OSX - RN214 working OK from OSX -
@dyvong wrote:
I have checked both NAS have the identical SMB settings (services->SMB) are both showing: SMB3 Transport Encryption - configure globally : Disabled.
Enabled SMB is CHECKED.
Legacy Windows Discovery if NOT Checked.
Enhance MacOS is NOT Checked.
Were you thinking of settings found somewhere else in the Admin pages?
No, this is the set.
Personally I'd enable SMB 3 transport encryption, but I don't believe that will solve your problem since both NAS are set the same way. Still, it might be worth a try.