127

I have an issue with a mount point that was previously configured. It shows the folder, but the mount is missing and holds "?" values for size, permissions, etc.

So I tried to remount using cifs and the same command from before:

mount -t cifs //nas.domain.local/share /mnt/archive

But I get the error: 

Host is down.

If I ping the domain or IP I get a proper resolution and I also connected using smbclient without issue

 ping nas.domain.local
 ping ip
 smbclient //nas.domain.local/share

I looked around, but cant find a solid answer. Any thoughts?

Kevin
  • 1,403
  • 2
  • 11
  • 9
  • do a nslookup nas.domain.local does it equal the ip you pinged? – tony roth Aug 03 '12 at 17:19
  • Yes, the IP returned is accurate. I can access the web interface of the NAS using the IP and domain as well. I can access the data on my laptop using either the domain or IP so it seems there is some other issue at play here – Kevin Aug 03 '12 at 17:28
  • 8
    Add the `--verbose` switch to your mount command, post any errors/results that seem relevant. – Zoredache Aug 03 '12 at 17:55
  • 2
    @Zoredache Add `-vvv` for **even more verbose** information! – Serge Stroobandt Apr 23 '15 at 17:36
  • Is the service even running on the remote server. It is a Linux or Windows Server? If it is Linux... verify that the service is running. Make sure no changes have been done to the firewall... If it is windows... then you might consider a reboot... – Jay Aug 06 '12 at 22:06
  • Is anyone else struggling with this? In my case, changing the protocol version works only as a temporary workaround. Soon enough, the protocol veresion we are using hits the same error again, so it's pointless. And we keep getting the same error "host is down". I managed to nail the issue to [the same scenario as here](https://github.com/Azure/kubernetes-volume-drivers/issues/45). Right now, all we know is that a mount instance gets stuck and refuses to send credentials to the SMB server. Any help is appreciated. – JulioHM Nov 10 '20 at 11:34

15 Answers15

157

This could also be because of a protocol mismatch. In 2017 Microsoft patched Windows Servers and advised to disable the SMB1 protocol.

From now on, mount.cifs might have problems with the protocol negotiation.

The error displayed is "Host is down.", but when you do debug with:

smbclient -L <server_ip> -U <username> -d 256

you will get the error:

protocol negotiation failed: NT_STATUS_CONNECTION_RESET

To overcome this use mount or smbclient with a protocol specified.

for smbclient: add -m SMB2 (or SMB3 for the newer version of the protocol)

smbclient -L <server_ip> -U <username> -m SMB2

or for mount: add vers=2.0 (or vers=3.0 if you want to use version 3 of the protocol)

mount -t cifs //<server_ip>/<share> /mnt/<mountpoint> -o vers=2.0
Ankur Gupta
  • 103
  • 2
Marcin P
  • 1,678
  • 1
  • 8
  • 5
  • 3
    My NAS is on Linux when I try your solution `smbclient -L 192.168.1.47 -U admin -d 256` everything works perfectly but when I try `mount -t cifs -o username=aa,password=bb,uid=olivier //192.168.1.47/partagefichiers/ /mnt/PartageFichiers` it keeps saying `mount error(112): Host is down` – Olivier Pons Jan 12 '18 at 10:51
  • 8
    Have you tried to specify protocol as I explainde in this answer? Try adding vers=2.0 or vers=3.0 or vers=1.0 (depending on this NAS settings) by adding: mount -t cifs -o username=aa,password=bb,uid=olivier,vers=2.0 //192.168.1.47/partagefichiers/ /mnt/PartageFichiers – Marcin P Jan 13 '18 at 11:47
  • 16
    Strange. The man page says that `vers=1.0` is the default, but I couldn't get my network drive to mount before I explicitly passed `vers=1.0`. – Hubro Feb 06 '18 at 05:39
  • Is it possible to change that on windows side? I have a piece of software that forwards this options to cifs and it does not know the vers option so it is not forwarded. – Andrew Savinykh May 01 '18 at 22:28
  • 3
    In fstab file it will be like that ```/// /media/ cifs username=,password=,iocharset=utf8,sec=ntlm,vers=1.0 0 0``` – PRIHLOP Apr 18 '19 at 11:52
  • vers=1.0 worked for me on Ubuntu 18.10 – Sohel Pathan Mar 02 '21 at 08:43
  • For older network storages like mine the only working option is `vers=1.0` – Abel Paz Jan 09 '22 at 13:21
  • For _Windows 9x_ (95, 98, ME) servers, in addition to `vers=1.0`, you need to add the [`servern[etbiosname]`](https://linux.die.net/man/8/mount.cifs) switch when invoking `mount`, e. g.: `mount -t cifs -o vers=1.0,sec=none,user=alice,file_mode=0644,servern=SERVER //server/share /mount/point`. The value should be the NetBIOS name of the **remote** server. NetBIOS over TCP/IP is documented in [RFC 1001](https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc1001) and [1002](https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc1002). – Bass Jan 17 '22 at 19:51
  • BUT... it mounts and works for a while when Linux is in a Hyper-V VM, but then after some time it starts this "host is down" crap! – Michael Aug 12 '22 at 02:37
  • Not working for me unfortunately. I have Windows 10 22H2 share and Ubuntu 18.04 with Linux kernel 4.9. When I supply `vers=1.0` or no `vers`, I get "error(112): Host is down". When I supply `vers=2.0` or `2.1` or `3.0`, I get "error(22): Invalid argument" – tsul Jan 25 '23 at 07:43
50

On archlinux after a recent package update, I had to add vers=1.0 to my mount options. I'm connecting to an old centos 5 box and up until yesterday I could connect without explicitly stating a version number.

CIFS in linux kernel 4.13 now defaults to SMB 3.0 and in kernel 4.14 it tries 2.1 and higher. See this change log.

J Smith
  • 433
  • 3
  • 10
Sjoerd Timmer
  • 601
  • 5
  • 2
  • Thanks, I had the same issue however I don't know which upgrade makes this necessary. – Ben Oct 06 '17 at 18:54
  • This is a really weird problem. Same thing happened to me today. I tried downgrading smbclient and libwbclient, but the problem persisted. Maybe something on the server changed. I think it's CentOS too, I hope not CentOS 5! Thanks for the workaround :) – jplatte Oct 09 '17 at 11:27
  • 2
    I had to do this for my Fedora 26 system accessing a mount on my Synology NAS DS413j, my /etc/fstab now has ",vers=1.0" on the end of the options string and no more 'Host is down' error message. – Neek Nov 01 '17 at 06:41
  • 1
    I had an upgrade from Ubuntu 16.04 to 18.04 (LTS) which broke my mounts of a Lacie NAS. This did the trick for me. – YoungFrog Oct 31 '18 at 12:56
  • Solved my issue connecting to my oooold OpenMediaVault NAS. – silopolis Jun 09 '22 at 11:01
24

USB-stick at Fritz NAS showed "Host Down" for Ubuntu 17.10:

Defining the version (vers=1.0) worked - here's the full string:

sudo mount -t cifs -o vers=1.0,_netdev,username=<user>,password=<pwd>,uid=1000,gid=1000  //192.168.178.1/fritz.nas <local mountpoint>
Mike Fiedler
  • 2,162
  • 1
  • 17
  • 34
user449376
  • 241
  • 2
  • 2
  • 5
    Everything was working from within `/etc/fstab` cifs mount; after `apt upgrade` on my Ubuntu 16.04 this happened. Specifying the `-o vers=1.0` did the trick. Thank you – equivalent8 Jan 12 '18 at 13:02
7

Similar problem after upgrade to ubuntu 17.10, with an old Buffalo Diskstation. Solved by adding in /etc/fstab the "vers=1.0" option:

//myWDhostname/partage /media/Partage cifs guest,vers=1.0 0 0

Patrice
  • 71
  • 1
  • 2
  • Anybody using Ubuntu 18.04, adding the `,vers=1.0` option solves the problem when using the tutorial provided by *Ji m* at http://ubuntuhandbook.org/index.php/2014/08/map-network-drive-onto-ubuntu-14-04/ – Geppettvs D'Constanzo May 26 '18 at 22:04
  • I have the same problem and can solve it by using version 1 in the protocoll. But I have a very low rate of transmission of data. I suspect it might be due to version 1, so using another version would be better. – bomben Jul 09 '18 at 18:01
6

Sorry if this is a late response (I realise it's an old thread), however I have just discovered there is another possible reason why mount.cifs would say the host is down.

I have an antivirus with a firewall and even though I set it explicitly to allow "windows file and print sharing" -- a predefined rule, it was still blocking connections. I had that proven by disabling the firewall temporarily. Hope this helps someone, host is down might not mean it's not responding to pings, but could mean it's not responding to authentication attempts.

lolinux
  • 61
  • 1
  • 3
  • Remember to check the firewall in both sides: client and server (as well as any firewall that might there be in the way between them). In my case, it was the client's firewall that was blocking connections to the server. I had to add `iptables` rules to allow them: `iptables -A INPUT -s 1.2.3.4/32 -j ACCEPT` and `iptables -A OUTPUT -d 1.2.3.4/32 -j ACCEPT`, where `1.2.3.4` was the server's IP address. – Antônio Medeiros Sep 12 '16 at 13:44
  • My NAS is on Linux so I still have this problem, but thanks for sharing – Olivier Pons Jan 12 '18 at 10:48
5

I received the same error without further ado from a new Samba client, when trying to mount a CIFS SMB network share:

mount error(112): Host is down

Eventually, it turned out I had previously restricted SMB server access to only a limited number of IP addresses by configuring /etc/samba/smb.conf:

# Allow these IP Addresses to connect: 
hosts allow = 127.0.0.1 127.0.1.13 127.0.1.63

# Anything else not allowed is, by default, rejected
hosts deny = ALL

Adding the fixed IP address of the new SMB client solved the issue in this specific case.

Of course, there is a myriad of other reasons why one may receive above-mentioned error.

Serge Stroobandt
  • 385
  • 1
  • 5
  • 13
4

Same trouble connecting to Synology DiskStation (DSM 4.3).

Using vers=1.0 in the mount options works fine.

Additionally I had to use the option "noperm" because all files wrongly showed as not readable and writable by the owner.

Bernhard
  • 41
  • 1
3

The SMB1 version of the protocol has been deprecated, however this is the default version used in older versions of mount.cifs, e.g. I have this problem with version 6.2.

You can check with: sudo mount.cifs --version

If you try to connect to an SMB3 server using SMB1 protocol, you get the Host is down error.

The workaround, as described by many other answers here, is to specify a different version of the protocol. The following command works for me: sudo mount -t cifs //server.name.or.ip/shares/Public /target/directory -o username=someuser,domain=somedomain,vers=3.0

However, if the server that you are connecting to uses DFS, then you will get the following error instead: mount error(38): Function not implemented. This is because DFS support on SMB3 was only added to the kernel in version 4.11.

You can check your kernel version with uname -a. In my case, it was 3.10 on CentOS7. I followed these instructions to upgrade and now it works.

Dr John A Stevenson
  • 131
  • 4
2

Same trouble with Fritzbox 7490: mount error(112): Host is down

I didn't used -o vers=XX. As fast as a shark i am, i first tried -o vers=2.0 and failed.
As soon as i used the option -o vers=1.0, everything works fine !

This works for me.. 

 sudo mount -t cifs -o rw,username=myname_on_the_box,pass\word=mypasswd_on_the_box,vers=1.0 //192.168.1.1/Fritz-nas /media/something/something

My env:
Client: Ubuntu 17.10 Linux 4.13.0-17-generic #20-Ubuntu SMP x86_64 GNU/Linux
Server: Fritzbox 7490 firmware 6.83.

d.dieckert
  • 21
  • 1
  • AVM uses an outdated version of Samba that they maintain themselves. That probably explains why one has to use `vers=1.0` instead of the more appropriate newer protocol versions. – 0xC0000022L Jul 30 '18 at 21:09
1

For me, the mounted cifs share was on a Windows server whose IP address had changed recently, so I could ping the server and resolve its new address, but the mount had not updated itself. By running a lazy unmount and then re-mounting my issue was solved:

umount -l /mnt/share
mount -a
Jon.Mozley
  • 173
  • 1
  • 7
  • This worked for me for the Hetzner storage box that wouldn't mount anymore when using the DNS name of share. The IP did work, but I wanted to continue using the DNS name. Running these commands helped. – antisa Jun 26 '23 at 12:04
1

If you're having this problem with a Synology NAS, then check that the vers= option specified to mount and the min/max SMB versions on the NAS are compatible.

Specifically, I'm using vers=2.0, but my Synology Diskstation was triggering the Host is down error. I found a page, Windows 10 access to NAS share. SMB 1.0 and 3.0, on the Synology website that explained how to set the Diskstation to allow SMB v2.0 or newer...

On Synology NAS

  • Go to Control Panel-->File Services
  • On the SMB/AFP/NFS tab, select Advanced Settings
  • Change Maximum SMB protocol to SMB3
  • Change Minumum SMB protocol to SMB2 (the page says to use SMB2 with large MTU, but that didn't work for me)
Roger Lipscombe
  • 2,177
  • 6
  • 24
  • 37
0

I typically use this type of command to mount a cifs/smb share.

mount -t cifs -o rw,netbiosname=nasserver1,credentials=/etc/user_credentials.txt //192.168.1.11/someshare /mnt

the credentials file looks like so:

username=mydomain\user1
password=somepass

This can also be adapted to an automount setup so the mounting/unmounting can be handled by the system automatically via autofs.

slm
  • 7,615
  • 16
  • 56
  • 76
0

In our case I checked the users login name (of user2) in the AD. There I noticed that the name was starting with an upper case letter and changed it to lower case as it is written in the mount script. Even if we did not touch neither user2 nor the mount script before, suddenly the mount command was successful. 

mount --verbose -t cifs //pc/share /my-share -no user=user1,password=pw1 -o uid=user2,gid=group1,dir_mode=0775,file_mode=0664
Ludwig
  • 421
  • 4
  • 10
0

I also just ran into the problem mentioned after an upgrad to Xubuntu 17.10. I use a Synology DiskStation. What I saw there: In the DiskStation, you can choose which protocols to support. By adding he relevant protocols (up to SBM3) in the advanced options for file services in control panel, you can also solve the problem.

Matthias Mielke
  • 1
-4

Had a similar problem. The solution for me was on the Windows share server side. Even passing the value vers=2.0 to my Linux server, the mount wasn't working. So I had to enable on my Windows server smbv1 support. This article helped me: https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/help/2696547/how-to-detect-enable-and-disable-smbv1-smbv2-and-smbv3-in-windows-and

Vinicius Freitas
  • 1