|
windows
newsgroups
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Network Path not FoundI have 2 machines (all XP) connected to a switch and an uplink to a modem
router No probs with pinging bothways, net, etc But one machine can see and transfer files, the other (Boris) cannot. On "Boris" in Network Places/Entire NW/ MS Win./Home (group)/ there are the two icons for the two machines, local view is OK, but to view the other machine "Mark" - error Msg: \\Mark is not accessible. You might not have permission...Network Path Not Found These machines have worked flawlessly in the past. The wiring is spot on. But one mac works oneway, the other does not. What little hair I have is almost lost over this one. I would appreciate any suggestions Dave
Show quote
Hide quote
On Tue, 10 Oct 2006 16:50:49 +1000, "David" <dcterr***@hotmail.com> wrote: Dave,>I have 2 machines (all XP) connected to a switch and an uplink to a modem >router > >No probs with pinging bothways, net, etc >But one machine can see and transfer files, the other (Boris) cannot. >On "Boris" in Network Places/Entire NW/ MS Win./Home (group)/ there are the >two icons for the two machines, local view is OK, but to view the other >machine "Mark" - error Msg: >\\Mark is not accessible. You might not have permission...Network Path Not >Found > >These machines have worked flawlessly in the past. The wiring is spot on. >But one mac works oneway, the other does not. >What little hair I have is almost lost over this one. >I would appreciate any suggestions >Dave One of the most common causes of this problem would be a misconfigured or overlooked personal firewall, or other security component. There are several other possibilities too, and any might be the cause of your problem. Read this article with an open mind. <http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/2005/10/irregularities-in-workgroup-visibility.html> http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/2005/10/irregularities-in-workgroup-visibility.html Check for a consistent NetBT setting. <http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/2006/04/netbios-over-tcpip.html> http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/2006/04/netbios-over-tcpip.html Then look at "browstat status" and "ipconfig /all",, from each computer, and the problem. Read this article, and linked articles, and follow instructions precisely (download browstat!): <http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/2005/05/troubleshooting-network-neighborhood.html#AskingForHelp> http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/2005/05/troubleshooting-network-neighborhood.html#AskingForHelp -- Cheers, Chuck, MS-MVP [Windows - Networking] http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/ Paranoia is not a problem, when it's a normal response from experience. My email is AT DOT actual address pchuck mvps org. Chuck,
This is sort of a follow up to the information you provided to Dave. Hopefully you may have some additional information to answer my problem. I've been through most of the steps you provided, found nothing out of line. I have my local network set up so that I can view all the computers on my subnet. I can access and manage all the HD's and shared folders for each machine, and access to each and every machine (5) from any of the machines is no problem. The access question comes up in the case of a couple of machines that have USB external drives attached. Some I can access without trouble, but some give me the "access denied" business. I've double (and triple) checked sharing on those drives and that's Ok. Any clues? Thanks, Gordon Show quoteHide quote "Chuck" wrote: > On Tue, 10 Oct 2006 16:50:49 +1000, "David" <dcterr***@hotmail.com> wrote: > > >I have 2 machines (all XP) connected to a switch and an uplink to a modem > >router > > > >No probs with pinging bothways, net, etc > >But one machine can see and transfer files, the other (Boris) cannot. > >On "Boris" in Network Places/Entire NW/ MS Win./Home (group)/ there are the > >two icons for the two machines, local view is OK, but to view the other > >machine "Mark" - error Msg: > >\\Mark is not accessible. You might not have permission...Network Path Not > >Found > > > >These machines have worked flawlessly in the past. The wiring is spot on. > >But one mac works oneway, the other does not. > >What little hair I have is almost lost over this one. > >I would appreciate any suggestions > >Dave > > Dave, > > One of the most common causes of this problem would be a misconfigured or > overlooked personal firewall, or other security component. There are several > other possibilities too, and any might be the cause of your problem. Read this > article with an open mind. > <http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/2005/10/irregularities-in-workgroup-visibility.html> > http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/2005/10/irregularities-in-workgroup-visibility.html > > Check for a consistent NetBT setting. > <http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/2006/04/netbios-over-tcpip.html> > http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/2006/04/netbios-over-tcpip.html > > Then look at "browstat status" and "ipconfig /all",, from each computer, and the > problem. Read this article, and linked articles, and follow instructions > precisely (download browstat!): > <http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/2005/05/troubleshooting-network-neighborhood.html#AskingForHelp> > http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/2005/05/troubleshooting-network-neighborhood.html#AskingForHelp > > -- > Cheers, > Chuck, MS-MVP [Windows - Networking] > http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/ > Paranoia is not a problem, when it's a normal response from experience. > My email is AT DOT > actual address pchuck mvps org. > On Wed, 11 Oct 2006 09:47:01 -0700, Gordon <Gor***@discussions.microsoft.com>
wrote: Show quoteHide quote >"Chuck" wrote: Gordon,> >> On Tue, 10 Oct 2006 16:50:49 +1000, "David" <dcterr***@hotmail.com> wrote: >> >> >I have 2 machines (all XP) connected to a switch and an uplink to a modem >> >router >> > >> >No probs with pinging bothways, net, etc >> >But one machine can see and transfer files, the other (Boris) cannot. >> >On "Boris" in Network Places/Entire NW/ MS Win./Home (group)/ there are the >> >two icons for the two machines, local view is OK, but to view the other >> >machine "Mark" - error Msg: >> >\\Mark is not accessible. You might not have permission...Network Path Not >> >Found >> > >> >These machines have worked flawlessly in the past. The wiring is spot on. >> >But one mac works oneway, the other does not. >> >What little hair I have is almost lost over this one. >> >I would appreciate any suggestions >> >Dave >> >> Dave, >> >> One of the most common causes of this problem would be a misconfigured or >> overlooked personal firewall, or other security component. There are several >> other possibilities too, and any might be the cause of your problem. Read this >> article with an open mind. >> <http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/2005/10/irregularities-in-workgroup-visibility.html> >> http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/2005/10/irregularities-in-workgroup-visibility.html >> >> Check for a consistent NetBT setting. >> <http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/2006/04/netbios-over-tcpip.html> >> http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/2006/04/netbios-over-tcpip.html >> >> Then look at "browstat status" and "ipconfig /all",, from each computer, and the >> problem. Read this article, and linked articles, and follow instructions >> precisely (download browstat!): >> <http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/2005/05/troubleshooting-network-neighborhood.html#AskingForHelp> >> http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/2005/05/troubleshooting-network-neighborhood.html#AskingForHelp >Chuck, >This is sort of a follow up to the information you provided to Dave. >Hopefully you may have some additional information to answer my problem. I've >been through most of the steps you provided, found nothing out of line. > >I have my local network set up so that I can view all the computers on my >subnet. I can access and manage all the HD's and shared folders for each >machine, and access to each and every machine (5) from any of the machines is >no problem. The access question comes up in the case of a couple of machines >that have USB external drives attached. Some I can access without trouble, >but some give me the "access denied" business. I've double (and triple) >checked sharing on those drives and that's Ok. > >Any clues? > >Thanks, Gordon The error "access denied" can have so many causes, I have a special article just about it. It's not the same as "name not found", though it's similar. <http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/2005/06/mysterious-error-5-aka-access-denied.html> http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/2005/06/mysterious-error-5-aka-access-denied.html And, as I offered to Dave, we could diagnose the problem online. Run "browstat status" and "ipconfig /all", on each computer. Read this article, and linked articles, and follow instructions precisely (download browstat!): <http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/2005/05/troubleshooting-network-neighborhood.html#AskingForHelp> http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/2005/05/troubleshooting-network-neighborhood.html#AskingForHelp -- Cheers, Chuck, MS-MVP [Windows - Networking] http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/ Paranoia is not a problem, when it's a normal response from experience. My email is AT DOT actual address pchuck mvps org. Chuck,
Here's what I've gotten so far with Browstat: C:\Browstat>browstat status Status for domain @HOME on transport \Device\NetBT_Tcpip_{02D42E84-AAFC-478D-AA18-D35E189B80BA} Browsing is active on domain. Master browser name is: ANTEC Master browser is running build 2600 1 backup servers retrieved from master ANTEC \\ANTEC There are 4 servers in domain @HOME on transport \Device\NetBT_Tcpip_{02D42E84-AAFC-478D-AA18-D35E189B80BA} There are 1 domains in domain @HOME on transport \Device\NetBT_Tcpip_{02D42E84-AAFC-478D-AA18-D35E189B80BA} Microsoft Windows XP [Version 5.1.2600] (C) Copyright 1985-2001 Microsoft Corp. C:\Browstat>browstat listwfw @home Calling NetServerEnum to enumerate WFW servers. 0 WFW servers returned. 0 total. There are WFW servers with an active Browser. I don't see anything strange here, but you're the expert. Gordon Show quoteHide quote "Chuck" wrote: > On Wed, 11 Oct 2006 09:47:01 -0700, Gordon <Gor***@discussions.microsoft.com> > wrote: > > > The error "access denied" can have so many causes, I have a special article just > about it. It's not the same as "name not found", though it's similar. > <http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/2005/06/mysterious-error-5-aka-access-denied.html> > http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/2005/06/mysterious-error-5-aka-access-denied.html > > And, as I offered to Dave, we could diagnose the problem online. Run "browstat > status" and "ipconfig /all", on each computer. Read this article, and linked > articles, and follow instructions precisely (download browstat!): > <http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/2005/05/troubleshooting-network-neighborhood.html#AskingForHelp> > http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/2005/05/troubleshooting-network-neighborhood.html#AskingForHelp > > -- > Cheers, > Chuck, MS-MVP [Windows - Networking] > http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/ > Paranoia is not a problem, when it's a normal response from experience. > My email is AT DOT > actual address pchuck mvps org. > On Wed, 11 Oct 2006 14:43:01 -0700, Gordon <Gor***@discussions.microsoft.com>
wrote: Show quoteHide quote >"Chuck" wrote: I see one problem.> >> On Wed, 11 Oct 2006 09:47:01 -0700, Gordon <Gor***@discussions.microsoft.com> >> wrote: >> >> >> The error "access denied" can have so many causes, I have a special article just >> about it. It's not the same as "name not found", though it's similar. >> <http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/2005/06/mysterious-error-5-aka-access-denied.html> >> http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/2005/06/mysterious-error-5-aka-access-denied.html >> >> And, as I offered to Dave, we could diagnose the problem online. Run "browstat >> status" and "ipconfig /all", on each computer. Read this article, and linked >> articles, and follow instructions precisely (download browstat!): >> <http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/2005/05/troubleshooting-network-neighborhood.html#AskingForHelp> >> http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/2005/05/troubleshooting-network-neighborhood.html#AskingForHelp >Chuck, >Here's what I've gotten so far with Browstat: > >C:\Browstat>browstat status > >Status for domain @HOME on transport >\Device\NetBT_Tcpip_{02D42E84-AAFC-478D-AA18-D35E189B80BA} > Browsing is active on domain. > Master browser name is: ANTEC > Master browser is running build 2600 > 1 backup servers retrieved from master ANTEC > \\ANTEC > There are 4 servers in domain @HOME on transport >\Device\NetBT_Tcpip_{02D42E84-AAFC-478D-AA18-D35E189B80BA} > There are 1 domains in domain @HOME on transport >\Device\NetBT_Tcpip_{02D42E84-AAFC-478D-AA18-D35E189B80BA} > >Microsoft Windows XP [Version 5.1.2600] >(C) Copyright 1985-2001 Microsoft Corp. > >C:\Browstat>browstat listwfw @home >Calling NetServerEnum to enumerate WFW servers. >0 WFW servers returned. 0 total. >There are WFW servers with an active Browser. > >I don't see anything strange here, but you're the expert. I asked for "browstat status" and "ipconfig /all", on each computer. I see "browstat status" from one computer. Not enough for a diagnosis. How many computers do you have, and what OS on each? Details please. <http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/2005/06/background-information-useful-in.html> http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/2005/06/background-information-useful-in.html -- Cheers, Chuck, MS-MVP [Windows - Networking] http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/ Paranoia is not a problem, when it's a normal response from experience. My email is AT DOT actual address pchuck mvps org. Chuck,
I have the information you requested now. Can I send that privately, addresses concern me, or is that a problem? Gordon Show quoteHide quote "Chuck" wrote: > I see one problem. > > I asked for "browstat status" and "ipconfig /all", on each computer. I see > "browstat status" from one computer. Not enough for a diagnosis. > > How many computers do you have, and what OS on each? Details please. > <http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/2005/06/background-information-useful-in.html> > http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/2005/06/background-information-useful-in.html > > -- > Cheers, > Chuck, MS-MVP [Windows - Networking] > http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/ > Paranoia is not a problem, when it's a normal response from experience. > My email is AT DOT > actual address pchuck mvps org. > On Thu, 12 Oct 2006 10:56:01 -0700, Gordon <Gor***@discussions.microsoft.com>
wrote: Show quoteHide quote >"Chuck" wrote: Gordon,> >> I see one problem. >> >> I asked for "browstat status" and "ipconfig /all", on each computer. I see >> "browstat status" from one computer. Not enough for a diagnosis. >> >> How many computers do you have, and what OS on each? Details please. >> <http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/2005/06/background-information-useful-in.html> >> http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/2005/06/background-information-useful-in.html >Chuck, >I have the information you requested now. Can I send that privately, >addresses concern me, or is that a problem? > >Gordon There's really nothing in either log that would give any attacker any advantage in wrongdoing. Trust me. If you really feel the need, though, my address is below. <http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/2005/06/privacy-statement.html> http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/2005/06/privacy-statement.html -- Cheers, Chuck, MS-MVP [Windows - Networking] http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/ Paranoia is not a problem, when it's a normal response from experience. My email is AT DOT actual address pchuck mvps org. Chuck,
I've pasted the info under the usual reply stuff, gets a little hard to read when it's scrunched. Let me know if there's anything else you need. Thanks, Gordon Show quoteHide quote "Chuck" wrote: Microsoft Windows XP [Version 5.1.2600]> On Thu, 12 Oct 2006 10:56:01 -0700, Gordon <Gor***@discussions.microsoft.com> > wrote: > > >"Chuck" wrote: > > > >> I see one problem. > >> > >> I asked for "browstat status" and "ipconfig /all", on each computer. I see > >> "browstat status" from one computer. Not enough for a diagnosis. > >> > >> How many computers do you have, and what OS on each? Details please. > >> <http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/2005/06/background-information-useful-in.html> > >> http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/2005/06/background-information-useful-in.html > > >Chuck, > >I have the information you requested now. Can I send that privately, > >addresses concern me, or is that a problem? > > > >Gordon > > Gordon, > > There's really nothing in either log that would give any attacker any advantage > in wrongdoing. Trust me. If you really feel the need, though, my address is > below. > <http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/2005/06/privacy-statement.html> > http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/2005/06/privacy-statement.html > > -- > Cheers, > Chuck, MS-MVP [Windows - Networking] > http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/ > Paranoia is not a problem, when it's a normal response from experience. > My email is AT DOT > actual address pchuck mvps org. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- (C) Copyright 1985-2001 Microsoft Corp. C:\Browstat>browstat status Status for domain @HOME on transport \Device\NetBT_Tcpip_{02D42E84-AAFC-478D-AA1 8-D35E189B80BA} Browsing is active on domain. Master browser name is: ANTEC Master browser is running build 2600 1 backup servers retrieved from master ANTEC \\ANTEC There are 4 servers in domain @HOME on transport \Device\NetBT_Tcpip_{02D42E 84-AAFC-478D-AA18-D35E189B80BA} There are 1 domains in domain @HOME on transport \Device\NetBT_Tcpip_{02D42E 84-AAFC-478D-AA18-D35E189B80BA} C:\Browstat>browstat listwfw @home Calling NetServerEnum to enumerate WFW servers. 0 WFW servers returned. 0 total. There are WFW servers with an active Browser. C:\ipconfig /all Windows IP Configuration Host Name . . . . . . . . . . . . : antec Primary Dns Suffix . . . . . . . : Node Type . . . . . . . . . . . . : Unknown IP Routing Enabled. . . . . . . . : No WINS Proxy Enabled. . . . . . . . : No DNS Suffix Search List. . . . . . : hsd1.co.comcast.net. Ethernet adapter Local Area Connection: Connection-specific DNS Suffix . : hsd1.co.comcast.net. Description . . . . . . . . . . . : Intel(R) PRO/1000 PL Network Connect ion Physical Address. . . . . . . . . : 00-16-76-A4-EF-3A Dhcp Enabled. . . . . . . . . . . : Yes Autoconfiguration Enabled . . . . : Yes IP Address. . . . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.1.100 Subnet Mask . . . . . . . . . . . : 255.255.255.0 Default Gateway . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.1.1 DHCP Server . . . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.1.1 DNS Servers . . . . . . . . . . . : 68.87.85.98 68.87.69.146 Lease Obtained. . . . . . . . . . : Thursday, October 12, 2006 4:59:46 A M Lease Expires . . . . . . . . . . : Friday, October 13, 2006 4:59:46 AM --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Microsoft Windows XP [Version 5.1.2600] (C) Copyright 1985-2001 Microsoft Corp. C:\>browstat status Status for domain @HOME on transport \Device\NetBT_Tcpip_{396CA7ED-1B7D-4A3D-9DB 7-C8A4E725CAC2} Browsing is active on domain. Master browser name is: ANTEC Could not open key in registry, error = 5 Unable to determine build of br owser master: 5 \\\\ANTEC . Version:05.01 Flags: 71203 NT POTENTIAL BACKUP MASTER 1 backup servers retrieved from master ANTEC \\ANTEC There are 4 servers in domain @HOME on transport \Device\NetBT_Tcpip_{396CA7 ED-1B7D-4A3D-9DB7-C8A4E725CAC2} There are 1 domains in domain @HOME on transport \Device\NetBT_Tcpip_{396CA7 ED-1B7D-4A3D-9DB7-C8A4E725CAC2} C:\>browstat listwfw @home Calling NetServerEnum to enumerate WFW servers. 0 WFW servers returned. 0 total. There are WFW servers with an active Browser. C:\>ipconfig /all Windows IP Configuration Host Name . . . . . . . . . . . . : upstairs Primary Dns Suffix . . . . . . . : Node Type . . . . . . . . . . . . : Unknown IP Routing Enabled. . . . . . . . : No WINS Proxy Enabled. . . . . . . . : No DNS Suffix Search List. . . . . . : hsd1.co.comcast.net. Ethernet adapter Local Area Connection: Connection-specific DNS Suffix . : hsd1.co.comcast.net. Description . . . . . . . . . . . : Linksys LNE100TX(v5) Fast Ethernet A dapter Physical Address. . . . . . . . . : 00-04-5A-84-04-AD Dhcp Enabled. . . . . . . . . . . : Yes Autoconfiguration Enabled . . . . : Yes IP Address. . . . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.1.101 Subnet Mask . . . . . . . . . . . : 255.255.255.0 Default Gateway . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.1.1 DHCP Server . . . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.1.1 DNS Servers . . . . . . . . . . . : 68.87.85.98 68.87.69.146 Lease Obtained. . . . . . . . . . : Thursday, October 12, 2006 6:41:06 A M Lease Expires . . . . . . . . . . : Friday, October 13, 2006 6:41:06 AM ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Microsoft Windows XP [Version 5.1.2600] (C) Copyright 1985-2001 Microsoft Corp. C:\>browstat status Status for domain @HOME on transport \Device\NetBT_Tcpip_{91B019C7-7149-4718-A52 1-2C2E422348A4} Browsing is active on domain. Master browser name is: ANTEC Could not open key in registry, error = 5 Unable to determine build of br owser master: 5 \\\\ANTEC . Version:05.01 Flags: 71203 NT POTENTIAL BACKUP MASTER 1 backup servers retrieved from master ANTEC \\ANTEC There are 4 servers in domain @HOME on transport \Device\NetBT_Tcpip_{91B019 C7-7149-4718-A521-2C2E422348A4} There are 1 domains in domain @HOME on transport \Device\NetBT_Tcpip_{91B019 C7-7149-4718-A521-2C2E422348A4} C:\>browstat listwfw @home Calling NetServerEnum to enumerate WFW servers. 0 WFW servers returned. 0 total. There are WFW servers with an active Browser. C:\>ipconfig /all Windows IP Configuration Host Name . . . . . . . . . . . . : master Primary Dns Suffix . . . . . . . : Node Type . . . . . . . . . . . . : Unknown IP Routing Enabled. . . . . . . . : No WINS Proxy Enabled. . . . . . . . : No DNS Suffix Search List. . . . . . : hsd1.co.comcast.net. Ethernet adapter Local Area Connection: Connection-specific DNS Suffix . : hsd1.co.comcast.net. Description . . . . . . . . . . . : Intel(R) PRO/100 VE Network Connecti on Physical Address. . . . . . . . . : 00-07-E9-83-4C-4F Dhcp Enabled. . . . . . . . . . . : Yes Autoconfiguration Enabled . . . . : Yes IP Address. . . . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.1.108 Subnet Mask . . . . . . . . . . . : 255.255.255.0 Default Gateway . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.1.1 DHCP Server . . . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.1.1 DNS Servers . . . . . . . . . . . : 68.87.85.98 68.87.69.146 Lease Obtained. . . . . . . . . . : Thursday, October 12, 2006 5:17:05 A M Lease Expires . . . . . . . . . . : Friday, October 13, 2006 5:17:05 AM ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Microsoft Windows XP [Version 5.1.2600] (C) Copyright 1985-2001 Microsoft Corp. C:\>browstat status Status for domain @HOME on transport \Device\NetBT_Tcpip_{9D21BC70-3819-416F-9DF 7-8A2509A9A545} Browsing is active on domain. Master browser name is: ANTEC Could not open key in registry, error = 5 Unable to determine build of br owser master: 5 \\\\ANTEC . Version:05.01 Flags: 71203 NT POTENTIAL BACKUP MASTER 1 backup servers retrieved from master ANTEC \\ANTEC There are 4 servers in domain @HOME on transport \Device\NetBT_Tcpip_{9D21BC 70-3819-416F-9DF7-8A2509A9A545} There are 1 domains in domain @HOME on transport \Device\NetBT_Tcpip_{9D21BC 70-3819-416F-9DF7-8A2509A9A545} C:\>browstat listwfw @home Calling NetServerEnum to enumerate WFW servers. 0 WFW servers returned. 0 total. There are WFW servers with an active Browser. C:\>ipconfig /all Windows IP Configuration Host Name . . . . . . . . . . . . : basement Primary Dns Suffix . . . . . . . : Node Type . . . . . . . . . . . . : Unknown IP Routing Enabled. . . . . . . . : No WINS Proxy Enabled. . . . . . . . : No DNS Suffix Search List. . . . . . : hsd1.co.comcast.net. Ethernet adapter Local Area Connection: Connection-specific DNS Suffix . : hsd1.co.comcast.net. Description . . . . . . . . . . . : Intel(R) PRO/100 VE Network Connecti on Physical Address. . . . . . . . . : 00-03-47-29-F6-44 Dhcp Enabled. . . . . . . . . . . : Yes Autoconfiguration Enabled . . . . : Yes IP Address. . . . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.1.103 Subnet Mask . . . . . . . . . . . : 255.255.255.0 Default Gateway . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.1.1 DHCP Server . . . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.1.1 DNS Servers . . . . . . . . . . . : 68.87.85.98 68.87.69.146 Lease Obtained. . . . . . . . . . : Thursday, October 12, 2006 5:24:39 A M Lease Expires . . . . . . . . . . : Friday, October 13, 2006 5:24:39 AM ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Microsoft Windows XP [Version 5.1.2600] (C) Copyright 1985-2001 Microsoft Corp. C:\>browstat status Status for domain @HOME on transport \Device\NetBT_Tcpip_{B2D320FF-34E8-4DF3-B5D 3-191E7D26232F} Browsing is active on domain. Master browser name is: BASEMENT Could not connect to registry, error = 53 Unable to determine build of br owser master: 53 \\\\BASEMENT . Version:05.01 Flags: 71003 NT POTENTIAL BACKUP MASTER 1 backup servers retrieved from master BASEMENT \\BASEMENT There are 5 servers in domain @HOME on transport \Device\NetBT_Tcpip_{B2D320 FF-34E8-4DF3-B5D3-191E7D26232F} There are 1 domains in domain @HOME on transport \Device\NetBT_Tcpip_{B2D320 FF-34E8-4DF3-B5D3-191E7D26232F} C:\>browstat listwfw @home Calling NetServerEnum to enumerate WFW servers. 0 WFW servers returned. 0 total. There are WFW servers with an active Browser. C:\>ipconfig /all Windows IP Configuration Host Name . . . . . . . . . . . . : Dell Primary Dns Suffix . . . . . . . : Node Type . . . . . . . . . . . . : Hybrid IP Routing Enabled. . . . . . . . : No WINS Proxy Enabled. . . . . . . . : No DNS Suffix Search List. . . . . . : hsd1.co.comcast.net. Ethernet adapter Local Area Connection: Media State . . . . . . . . . . . : Media disconnected Description . . . . . . . . . . . : Broadcom 440x 10/100 Integrated Cont roller Physical Address. . . . . . . . . : 00-14-22-AA-03-7B Ethernet adapter Wireless Network Connection: Connection-specific DNS Suffix . : hsd1.co.comcast.net. Description . . . . . . . . . . . : Intel(R) PRO/Wireless 2915ABG Networ k Connection Physical Address. . . . . . . . . : 00-16-6F-76-A6-FE Dhcp Enabled. . . . . . . . . . . : Yes Autoconfiguration Enabled . . . . : Yes IP Address. . . . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.1.105 Subnet Mask . . . . . . . . . . . : 255.255.255.0 Default Gateway . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.1.1 DHCP Server . . . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.1.1 DNS Servers . . . . . . . . . . . : 68.87.85.98 68.87.69.146 Lease Obtained. . . . . . . . . . : Thursday, October 12, 2006 7:48:04 A M Lease Expires . . . . . . . . . . : Friday, October 13, 2006 7:48:04 AM Show quoteHide quote > On Thu, 12 Oct 2006 13:35:02 -0700, Gordon <Gor***@discussions.microsoft.com>
wrote: Show quoteHide quote >"Chuck" wrote: Good job, Gordon.> >> On Thu, 12 Oct 2006 10:56:01 -0700, Gordon <Gor***@discussions.microsoft.com> >> wrote: >> >> >"Chuck" wrote: >> > >> >> I see one problem. >> >> >> >> I asked for "browstat status" and "ipconfig /all", on each computer. I see >> >> "browstat status" from one computer. Not enough for a diagnosis. >> >> >> >> How many computers do you have, and what OS on each? Details please. >> >> <http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/2005/06/background-information-useful-in.html> >> >> http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/2005/06/background-information-useful-in.html >> >> >Chuck, >> >I have the information you requested now. Can I send that privately, >> >addresses concern me, or is that a problem? >> > >> >Gordon >> >> Gordon, >> >> There's really nothing in either log that would give any attacker any advantage >> in wrongdoing. Trust me. If you really feel the need, though, my address is >> below. >> <http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/2005/06/privacy-statement.html> >> http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/2005/06/privacy-statement.html >Chuck, >I've pasted the info under the usual reply stuff, gets a little hard to read >when it's scrunched. Let me know if there's anything else you need. You have 5 computers. All are Node Type Hybrid or Unknown, no WINS servers defined. Unknown = Broadcast in this case. No problems there. <http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/2005/05/address-resolution-on-lan.html#Unknown> http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/2005/05/address-resolution-on-lan.html#Unknown Antec - the master browser. Upstairs - sees 4 servers, and acknowledges Antec as master browser. Master - sees 4 servers, and acknowledges Antec as master browser. Basement - sees 4 servers, and acknowledges Antec as master browser. Dell - sees 5 servers, and acknowledges Basement as master browser. Try restarting Dell first. You need Dell to acknowledge Antec as master browser. Once that starts happening, then enumerate the symptoms again. Which computers host the external drives, and which are problematic? And what operating system - XP Home? XP Pro? Other? on each computer? And once we solve this, then we have to work on your browser infrastructure. <http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/2005/04/nt-browser-or-why-cant-i-always-see.html> http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/2005/04/nt-browser-or-why-cant-i-always-see.html -- Cheers, Chuck, MS-MVP [Windows - Networking] http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/ Paranoia is not a problem, when it's a normal response from experience. My email is AT DOT actual address pchuck mvps org. Chuck,
Sorry for the slow response but I got interrupted by meals, sleep, walk the dog, and dealing with the failed MSMXL update. I checked all the machines this morning with browstat status and they are all talking to Antec, except for the Dell notebook that locks on to anything but Antec. It even prefers to declare itself it's own master, but will occasionally lock onto Antec. Don't think we'll worry about that just now. Basic problem is this, I can access all the machines (both ways) on my local net for everything, (including USB printers and thumb drives) with the exception of two external USB HD's on Antec and Master. All the machines (6) are using XP Home except Antec which has XP Media. All have the latest updates. Show quoteHide quote "Chuck" wrote: > On Thu, 12 Oct 2006 13:35:02 -0700, Gordon <Gor***@discussions.microsoft.com> > wrote: > > >"Chuck" wrote: > > > >> On Thu, 12 Oct 2006 10:56:01 -0700, Gordon <Gor***@discussions.microsoft.com> > >> wrote: > >> > >> >"Chuck" wrote: > >> > > >> >> I see one problem. > >> >> > >> >> I asked for "browstat status" and "ipconfig /all", on each computer. I see > >> >> "browstat status" from one computer. Not enough for a diagnosis. > >> >> > >> >> How many computers do you have, and what OS on each? Details please. > >> >> <http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/2005/06/background-information-useful-in.html> > >> >> http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/2005/06/background-information-useful-in.html > >> > >> >Chuck, > >> >I have the information you requested now. Can I send that privately, > >> >addresses concern me, or is that a problem? > >> > > >> >Gordon > >> > >> Gordon, > >> > >> There's really nothing in either log that would give any attacker any advantage > >> in wrongdoing. Trust me. If you really feel the need, though, my address is > >> below. > >> <http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/2005/06/privacy-statement.html> > >> http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/2005/06/privacy-statement.html > > >Chuck, > >I've pasted the info under the usual reply stuff, gets a little hard to read > >when it's scrunched. Let me know if there's anything else you need. > > Good job, Gordon. > > You have 5 computers. All are Node Type Hybrid or Unknown, no WINS servers > defined. Unknown = Broadcast in this case. No problems there. > <http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/2005/05/address-resolution-on-lan.html#Unknown> > http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/2005/05/address-resolution-on-lan.html#Unknown > > Antec - the master browser. > Upstairs - sees 4 servers, and acknowledges Antec as master browser. > Master - sees 4 servers, and acknowledges Antec as master browser. > Basement - sees 4 servers, and acknowledges Antec as master browser. > Dell - sees 5 servers, and acknowledges Basement as master browser. > > Try restarting Dell first. You need Dell to acknowledge Antec as master > browser. Once that starts happening, then enumerate the symptoms again. Which > computers host the external drives, and which are problematic? > > And what operating system - XP Home? XP Pro? Other? on each computer? > > And once we solve this, then we have to work on your browser infrastructure. > <http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/2005/04/nt-browser-or-why-cant-i-always-see.html> > http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/2005/04/nt-browser-or-why-cant-i-always-see.html > > -- > Cheers, > Chuck, MS-MVP [Windows - Networking] > http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/ > Paranoia is not a problem, when it's a normal response from experience. > My email is AT DOT > actual address pchuck mvps org. > On Fri, 13 Oct 2006 07:12:01 -0700, Gordon <Gor***@discussions.microsoft.com>
wrote: Show quoteHide quote >"Chuck" wrote: Gordon,> >> On Thu, 12 Oct 2006 13:35:02 -0700, Gordon <Gor***@discussions.microsoft.com> >> wrote: >> >> >"Chuck" wrote: >> > >> >> On Thu, 12 Oct 2006 10:56:01 -0700, Gordon <Gor***@discussions.microsoft.com> >> >> wrote: >> >> >> >> >"Chuck" wrote: >> >> > >> >> >> I see one problem. >> >> >> >> >> >> I asked for "browstat status" and "ipconfig /all", on each computer. I see >> >> >> "browstat status" from one computer. Not enough for a diagnosis. >> >> >> >> >> >> How many computers do you have, and what OS on each? Details please. >> >> >> <http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/2005/06/background-information-useful-in.html> >> >> >> http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/2005/06/background-information-useful-in.html >> >> >> >> >Chuck, >> >> >I have the information you requested now. Can I send that privately, >> >> >addresses concern me, or is that a problem? >> >> > >> >> >Gordon >> >> >> >> Gordon, >> >> >> >> There's really nothing in either log that would give any attacker any advantage >> >> in wrongdoing. Trust me. If you really feel the need, though, my address is >> >> below. >> >> <http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/2005/06/privacy-statement.html> >> >> http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/2005/06/privacy-statement.html >> >> >Chuck, >> >I've pasted the info under the usual reply stuff, gets a little hard to read >> >when it's scrunched. Let me know if there's anything else you need. >> >> Good job, Gordon. >> >> You have 5 computers. All are Node Type Hybrid or Unknown, no WINS servers >> defined. Unknown = Broadcast in this case. No problems there. >> <http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/2005/05/address-resolution-on-lan.html#Unknown> >> http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/2005/05/address-resolution-on-lan.html#Unknown >> >> Antec - the master browser. >> Upstairs - sees 4 servers, and acknowledges Antec as master browser. >> Master - sees 4 servers, and acknowledges Antec as master browser. >> Basement - sees 4 servers, and acknowledges Antec as master browser. >> Dell - sees 5 servers, and acknowledges Basement as master browser. >> >> Try restarting Dell first. You need Dell to acknowledge Antec as master >> browser. Once that starts happening, then enumerate the symptoms again. Which >> computers host the external drives, and which are problematic? >> >> And what operating system - XP Home? XP Pro? Other? on each computer? >> >> And once we solve this, then we have to work on your browser infrastructure. >> <http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/2005/04/nt-browser-or-why-cant-i-always-see.html> >> http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/2005/04/nt-browser-or-why-cant-i-always-see.html >Chuck, >Sorry for the slow response but I got interrupted by meals, sleep, walk the >dog, and dealing with the failed MSMXL update. > >I checked all the machines this morning with browstat status and they are >all talking to Antec, except for the Dell notebook that locks on to anything >but Antec. It even prefers to declare itself it's own master, but will >occasionally lock onto Antec. Don't think we'll worry about that just now. > >Basic problem is this, I can access all the machines (both ways) on my local >net for everything, (including USB printers and thumb drives) with the >exception of two external USB HD's on Antec and Master. > >All the machines (6) are using XP Home except Antec which has XP Media. All >have the latest updates. Do both Antec and Master have other shares, that are visible and accessible by all? By any? How many computers have these USB devices, such as thumb drives (you are sharing thumb drives?) and USB hard drives? What brand is each USB device that's being shared? Do you have up to date drivers for each (and did you get them from the vendor)? <http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/2005/05/dealing-with-physical-network-problems.html> http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/2005/05/dealing-with-physical-network-problems.html <http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/2005/06/background-information-useful-in.html> http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/2005/06/background-information-useful-in.html -- Cheers, Chuck, MS-MVP [Windows - Networking] http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/ Paranoia is not a problem, when it's a normal response from experience. My email is AT DOT actual address pchuck mvps org. "Chuck" wrote: Chuck,> Do both Antec and Master have other shares, that are visible and accessible by > all? By any? > > How many computers have these USB devices, such as thumb drives (you are sharing > thumb drives?) and USB hard drives? What brand is each USB device that's being > shared? Do you have up to date drivers for each (and did you get them from the > vendor)? Both Antec and Master can "see" and access all the other machines on my network. All the machines can "see" and access each other. Four of the six (I know, I added an old HP notebook) have external USB drives attached. Antec with a new Maxtor, Master with a WD, Upstairs with a an older WD, and Basement with a USB external I cobbled up with a spare notebook HD. In all cases with the external USB drives, it was an auto detect and install. (Found new hardware, etc.) I didn't find any drivers for WD and Maxtor on XP installs. The Thumb drives were just a coincidence, I used a thumb to install browstat.exe on each and store the info you requested. It just showed up on the network inventory and is viewable where it's plugged in. Then we have a collection of USB and LPT printers scattered around, all of which came with their own set of drivers. In the final analysis, the only external USB HD that can't be accessed by any other machine (except for the one it's connected to) is the WD on Master. FYI, I spent some time with WD troubleshooting that particular drive, and they assure me that there's nothing wrong with the drive and the problem is network or some other related issue. (It says that right here.<g>) Thanks for your patience, Gordon On Sat, 14 Oct 2006 05:46:01 -0700, Gordon <Gor***@discussions.microsoft.com>
wrote: Show quoteHide quote > Gordon,>"Chuck" wrote: > >> Do both Antec and Master have other shares, that are visible and accessible by >> all? By any? >> >> How many computers have these USB devices, such as thumb drives (you are sharing >> thumb drives?) and USB hard drives? What brand is each USB device that's being >> shared? Do you have up to date drivers for each (and did you get them from the >> vendor)? > >Chuck, >Both Antec and Master can "see" and access all the other machines on my >network. All the machines can "see" and access each other. > >Four of the six (I know, I added an old HP notebook) have external USB >drives attached. Antec with a new Maxtor, Master with a WD, Upstairs with a >an older WD, and Basement with a USB external I cobbled up with a spare >notebook HD. In all cases with the external USB drives, it was an auto detect >and install. (Found new hardware, etc.) I didn't find any drivers for WD and >Maxtor on XP installs. > >The Thumb drives were just a coincidence, I used a thumb to install >browstat.exe on each and store the info you requested. It just showed up on >the network inventory and is viewable where it's plugged in. > >Then we have a collection of USB and LPT printers scattered around, all of >which came with their own set of drivers. > >In the final analysis, the only external USB HD that can't be accessed by >any other machine (except for the one it's connected to) is the WD on Master. > > >FYI, I spent some time with WD troubleshooting that particular drive, and >they assure me that there's nothing wrong with the drive and the problem is >network or some other related issue. (It says that right here.<g>) > >Thanks for your patience, Gordon Devices that connect externally by USB require drivers from the vendor, and those drivers determine their network accessibility. Now if WD says that their drive supports network accessibility, then it probably does. But it's possible that it doesn't work universally. You say that all computers are providing shared data, from some share, to other computers. It's hard to think that any one computer has any network problem then. Not one that's common in this forum anyway. So the problem is with Antec (Maxtor) and Master (WD) external hard drives. And of all 6 computers on the network, all of which can access internal drive shares on other computers, none can access the shares on either Antec (Maxtor) or Master (WD). Is that an accurate description of the problem scope? Now what is the exact nature of the problem? Is it visibility, or accessibility? What exact error do you get? Is it the same for Antec (Maxtor) and Master (WD)? And is it the same for each client computer? And what drive structure do Antec (Maxtor) and Master (WD) use? FAT or NTFS? How about the other computer external drives, for comparison? -- Cheers, Chuck, MS-MVP [Windows - Networking] http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/ Paranoia is not a problem, when it's a normal response from experience. My email is AT DOT actual address pchuck mvps org. "Chuck" wrote: that it doesn't work universally.>Devices that connect externally by USB require drivers from the vendor, and >those drivers determine their network accessibility. Now if WD says that their >drive supports network accessibility, then it probably does. But it's possible >You say that all computers are providing shared data, from some share, to other Chuck,>computers. It's hard to think that any one computer has any network problem >then. Not one that's common in this forum anyway. >So the problem is with Antec (Maxtor) and Master (WD) external hard drives. >And of all 6 computers on the network, all of which can access internal drive >shares on other computers, none can access the shares on either Antec (Maxtor) >or Master (WD). Is that an accurate description of the problem scope? >Now what is the exact nature of the problem? Is it visibility, or >accessibility? What exact error do you get? Is it the same for Antec (Maxtor) >and Master (WD)? And is it the same for each client computer? >And what drive structure do Antec (Maxtor) and Master (WD) use? FAT or NTFS? >How about the other computer external drives, for comparison? I don't know enough about the fine points of USB drives and drivers to say for sure. All I know is that XP handled the installation on all my USB drives. No additional drivers were necessary, or even available. Could be that WD doesn't get along with network setups, but why one WD Ok and the newer WD not? The only drive with a problem is the WD on Master. The Maxtor on Antec is fine. I can view and access all drives on all (and from all) machines except the WD USB on Master. Visibility on the network is not the problem, It's visible to all. It's the access that's causing trouble. If I try to access it from anywhere, I get the "\\master\WD USB (G) is not accessible. You might not have permission, etc". Then lowerdown in the error box it says"Not enough server storage is available to process this command." Maybe there's a clue in that statement? Also, same message on all the other computers. All my drives are on NTFS. I've tried both FAT 32 and NTFS on the WD in question, with the same results. Gordon On Sat, 14 Oct 2006 09:45:01 -0700, Gordon <Gor***@discussions.microsoft.com>
wrote: Show quoteHide quote > Gordon,> >"Chuck" wrote: > >>Devices that connect externally by USB require drivers from the vendor, and >>those drivers determine their network accessibility. Now if WD says that their >>drive supports network accessibility, then it probably does. But it's possible >that it doesn't work universally. > >>You say that all computers are providing shared data, from some share, to other >>computers. It's hard to think that any one computer has any network problem >>then. Not one that's common in this forum anyway. > >>So the problem is with Antec (Maxtor) and Master (WD) external hard drives. >And of all 6 computers on the network, all of which can access internal drive >shares on other computers, none can access the shares on either Antec (Maxtor) >or Master (WD). Is that an accurate description of the problem scope? > >>Now what is the exact nature of the problem? Is it visibility, or >>accessibility? What exact error do you get? Is it the same for Antec (Maxtor) >>and Master (WD)? And is it the same for each client computer? > >>And what drive structure do Antec (Maxtor) and Master (WD) use? FAT or NTFS? >>How about the other computer external drives, for comparison? > > >Chuck, >I don't know enough about the fine points of USB drives and drivers to say >for sure. All I know is that XP handled the installation on all my USB >drives. No additional drivers were necessary, or even available. Could be >that WD doesn't get along with network setups, but why one WD Ok and the >newer WD not? > >The only drive with a problem is the WD on Master. The Maxtor on Antec is >fine. I >can view and access all drives on all (and from all) machines except the WD >USB on Master. Visibility on the network is not the problem, It's visible to >all. It's the >access that's causing trouble. If I try to access it from anywhere, I get the >"\\master\WD USB (G) is not accessible. You might not have permission, etc". >Then lowerdown in the error box it says"Not enough server storage is >available to >process this command." Maybe there's a clue in that statement? Also, same >message on all the other computers. > >All my drives are on NTFS. I've tried both FAT 32 and NTFS on the WD in >question, >with the same results. > >Gordon Is THAT the last problem? That one is known here quite well. > "Not enough server storage is available to process this command." <http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/2005/06/server-functionality-affected-by.html>http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/2005/06/server-functionality-affected-by.html -- Cheers, Chuck, MS-MVP [Windows - Networking] http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/ Paranoia is not a problem, when it's a normal response from experience. My email is AT DOT actual address pchuck mvps org.
Show quote
Hide quote
> Chuck,> Gordon, > > Is THAT the last problem? That one is known here quite well. > > "Not enough server storage is available to process this command." > <http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/2005/06/server-functionality-affected-by.html> > http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/2005/06/server-functionality-affected-by.html > > -- > Cheers, > Chuck, MS-MVP [Windows - Networking] > http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/ > Paranoia is not a problem, when it's a normal response from experience. > My email is AT DOT > actual address pchuck mvps org. So far as I can tell at this point that is the last ptoblem (with the exception of that error #5 I get from browstat status when I run it to see if we're still looking at Antec for the primary browser.) Don't keep me in suspense.<g> Gordon Show quoteHide quote > On Sat, 14 Oct 2006 13:40:02 -0700, Gordon <Gor***@discussions.microsoft.com>
wrote: Show quoteHide quote > Didn't you read the article? You may have to be persistent, but with that>> >> Gordon, >> >> Is THAT the last problem? That one is known here quite well. >> > "Not enough server storage is available to process this command." >> <http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/2005/06/server-functionality-affected-by.html> >> http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/2005/06/server-functionality-affected-by.html >> >> -- >> Cheers, >> Chuck, MS-MVP [Windows - Networking] >> http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/ >> Paranoia is not a problem, when it's a normal response from experience. >> My email is AT DOT >> actual address pchuck mvps org. > >Chuck, >So far as I can tell at this point that is the last ptoblem (with the >exception of that error #5 I get from browstat status when I run it to see >if we're still looking at Antec for the primary browser.) > >Don't keep me in suspense.<g> error, the article usually is the solution. -- Cheers, Chuck, MS-MVP [Windows - Networking] http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/ Paranoia is not a problem, when it's a normal response from experience. My email is AT DOT actual address pchuck mvps org.
Show quote
Hide quote
"Chuck" wrote: Chuck,> On Sat, 14 Oct 2006 13:40:02 -0700, Gordon <Gor***@discussions.microsoft.com> > wrote: > > > > >> > >> Gordon, > >> > >> Is THAT the last problem? That one is known here quite well. > >> > "Not enough server storage is available to process this command." > >> <http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/2005/06/server-functionality-affected-by.html> > >> http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/2005/06/server-functionality-affected-by.html > >> > >> -- > >> Cheers, > >> Chuck, MS-MVP [Windows - Networking] > >> http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/ > >> Paranoia is not a problem, when it's a normal response from experience. > >> My email is AT DOT > >> actual address pchuck mvps org. > > > >Chuck, > >So far as I can tell at this point that is the last ptoblem (with the > >exception of that error #5 I get from browstat status when I run it to see > >if we're still looking at Antec for the primary browser.) > > > >Don't keep me in suspense.<g> > > Didn't you read the article? You may have to be persistent, but with that > error, the article usually is the solution. > > -- > Cheers, > Chuck, MS-MVP [Windows - Networking] > http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/ > Paranoia is not a problem, when it's a normal response from experience. > My email is AT DOT > actual address pchuck mvps org. Sorry, didn't realize that was a reference. It sorta got lost in all that stuff. In any event I printed it out and went exploring in my registry, but found no entry relating to IRPStackSize. Don't know how much difference there is between NT 4 and XP, but it looks to be slightly different in how they manage that item. Symantec says for XP, remove the value and restart. I got no value to remove. I also don't have Norton, but I do have Win LOC. Any thoughts? Gordon Show quoteHide quote > On Sat, 14 Oct 2006 17:16:02 -0700, Gordon <Gor***@discussions.microsoft.com>
wrote: Show quoteHide quote > Well, sometimes I'm too subtle. Usually, I write> >"Chuck" wrote: > >> On Sat, 14 Oct 2006 13:40:02 -0700, Gordon <Gor***@discussions.microsoft.com> >> wrote: >> >> > >> >> >> >> Gordon, >> >> >> >> Is THAT the last problem? That one is known here quite well. >> >> > "Not enough server storage is available to process this command." >> >> <http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/2005/06/server-functionality-affected-by.html> >> >> http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/2005/06/server-functionality-affected-by.html >> >Chuck, >> >So far as I can tell at this point that is the last ptoblem (with the >> >exception of that error #5 I get from browstat status when I run it to see >> >if we're still looking at Antec for the primary browser.) >> > >> >Don't keep me in suspense.<g> >> >> Didn't you read the article? You may have to be persistent, but with that >> error, the article usually is the solution. >Chuck, >Sorry, didn't realize that was a reference. It sorta got lost in all that >stuff. > >In any event I printed it out and went exploring in my registry, but found >no entry relating to IRPStackSize. Don't know how much difference there is >between NT 4 and XP, but it looks to be slightly different in how they manage >that item. Symantec says for XP, remove the value and restart. I got no >value to remove. I also don't have Norton, but I do have Win LOC. Read the following article: Anyway, the Microsoft article, linked from my article, provides instructions on adding the registry value, when it doesn't exist. That is the proper solution, in this case. Please let me know if you have any problems following the Microsoft article. Add the value IRPStackSize, spelled precisely that way. Since the default value data (when the registry value doesn't exist) is 15, the recommended initial value data of 18. -- Cheers, Chuck, MS-MVP [Windows - Networking] http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/ Paranoia is not a problem, when it's a normal response from experience. My email is AT DOT actual address pchuck mvps org.
Show quote
Hide quote
"Chuck" wrote: Chuck,> On Sat, 14 Oct 2006 17:16:02 -0700, Gordon <Gor***@discussions.microsoft.com> > wrote: > > > > > > >"Chuck" wrote: > > > >> On Sat, 14 Oct 2006 13:40:02 -0700, Gordon <Gor***@discussions.microsoft.com> > >> wrote: > >> > >> > > >> >> > >> >> Gordon, > >> >> > >> >> Is THAT the last problem? That one is known here quite well. > >> >> > "Not enough server storage is available to process this command." > >> >> <http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/2005/06/server-functionality-affected-by.html> > >> >> http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/2005/06/server-functionality-affected-by.html > > >> >Chuck, > >> >So far as I can tell at this point that is the last ptoblem (with the > >> >exception of that error #5 I get from browstat status when I run it to see > >> >if we're still looking at Antec for the primary browser.) > >> > > >> >Don't keep me in suspense.<g> > >> > >> Didn't you read the article? You may have to be persistent, but with that > >> error, the article usually is the solution. > > >Chuck, > >Sorry, didn't realize that was a reference. It sorta got lost in all that > >stuff. > > > >In any event I printed it out and went exploring in my registry, but found > >no entry relating to IRPStackSize. Don't know how much difference there is > >between NT 4 and XP, but it looks to be slightly different in how they manage > >that item. Symantec says for XP, remove the value and restart. I got no > >value to remove. I also don't have Norton, but I do have Win LOC. > > Well, sometimes I'm too subtle. Usually, I write > Read the following article: > > Anyway, the Microsoft article, linked from my article, provides instructions on > adding the registry value, when it doesn't exist. That is the proper solution, > in this case. Please let me know if you have any problems following the > Microsoft article. > > Add the value IRPStackSize, spelled precisely that way. Since the default value > data (when the registry value doesn't exist) is 15, the recommended initial > value data of 18. > > -- > Cheers, > Chuck, MS-MVP [Windows - Networking] > http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/ > Paranoia is not a problem, when it's a normal response from experience. > My email is AT DOT > actual address pchuck mvps org. Sorry for the slow response, didn't get a notice on your last one and it took me a couple days to realize I'd better go look. So I made the changes to the registry irpstack to 18, with some success. I'm finally able to access the USB drive on Master from Antec. Unfortunately now I have problems accessing other locations that were accessible before. Go figure. Don't have time to play with it right now, off to Vegas to visit the kids for a few days, be back early next week. Also noticed the Antec (w/XP Media Edition) had 3 control sets in the registry instead of one. They all changed when I made the new entry. Are we having fun yet? Gordon Show quoteHide quote > On Tue, 17 Oct 2006 06:07:02 -0700, Gordon <Gor***@discussions.microsoft.com>
wrote: Show quoteHide quote > OK, we're getting one set of symptoms solved. Now we have to deal with another> >"Chuck" wrote: > >> On Sat, 14 Oct 2006 17:16:02 -0700, Gordon <Gor***@discussions.microsoft.com> >> wrote: >> >> > >> > >> >"Chuck" wrote: >> > >> >> On Sat, 14 Oct 2006 13:40:02 -0700, Gordon <Gor***@discussions.microsoft.com> >> >> wrote: >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> Gordon, >> >> >> >> >> >> Is THAT the last problem? That one is known here quite well. >> >> >> > "Not enough server storage is available to process this command." >> >> >> <http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/2005/06/server-functionality-affected-by.html> >> >> >> http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/2005/06/server-functionality-affected-by.html >> >> >> >Chuck, >> >> >So far as I can tell at this point that is the last ptoblem (with the >> >> >exception of that error #5 I get from browstat status when I run it to see >> >> >if we're still looking at Antec for the primary browser.) >> >> > >> >> >Don't keep me in suspense.<g> >> >> >> >> Didn't you read the article? You may have to be persistent, but with that >> >> error, the article usually is the solution. >> >> >Chuck, >> >Sorry, didn't realize that was a reference. It sorta got lost in all that >> >stuff. >> > >> >In any event I printed it out and went exploring in my registry, but found >> >no entry relating to IRPStackSize. Don't know how much difference there is >> >between NT 4 and XP, but it looks to be slightly different in how they manage >> >that item. Symantec says for XP, remove the value and restart. I got no >> >value to remove. I also don't have Norton, but I do have Win LOC. >> >> Well, sometimes I'm too subtle. Usually, I write >> Read the following article: >> >> Anyway, the Microsoft article, linked from my article, provides instructions on >> adding the registry value, when it doesn't exist. That is the proper solution, >> in this case. Please let me know if you have any problems following the >> Microsoft article. >> >> Add the value IRPStackSize, spelled precisely that way. Since the default value >> data (when the registry value doesn't exist) is 15, the recommended initial >> value data of 18. >> >> -- >> Cheers, >> Chuck, MS-MVP [Windows - Networking] >> http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/ >> Paranoia is not a problem, when it's a normal response from experience. >> My email is AT DOT >> actual address pchuck mvps org. > >Chuck, >Sorry for the slow response, didn't get a notice on your last one and it >took me a couple days to realize I'd better go look. > >So I made the changes to the registry irpstack to 18, with some success. I'm >finally able to access the USB drive on Master from Antec. Unfortunately now >I have problems accessing other locations that were accessible before. Go >figure. >Don't have time to play with it right now, off to Vegas to visit the kids >for a few days, be back early next week. > >Also noticed the Antec (w/XP Media Edition) had 3 control sets in the >registry instead of one. They all changed when I made the new entry. - probably the browser now. So thanks for the update. If you come back, and can't find this thread, you may end up making a new one. Try and reference this one the best that you can, and we'll continue. -- Cheers, Chuck, MS-MVP [Windows - Networking] http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/ Paranoia is not a problem, when it's a normal response from experience. My email is AT DOT actual address pchuck mvps org. 
Other interesting topics
A bit unsure...
Win xp pro sp2 is hiding computers. Maping network drive with Admin priveleges One Way network XP tcp ip problems pls help connecting laptop to desktop cable modem Possible DNS problem with user ID? reset the routing table? Network Connection Problems.. any ideas? Internet Gateway - how do I make it exist? |
|||||||||||||||||||||||
