"Dave Cox" wrote:

> Question:
>
> Hello,
> I have 5 computers which are set up in my network
> Somehow yesterday I could not access from one computer to another on all
> computers in the network. I have computers named Sys1, Sys2, Sys 3 , Sys4 and
> Sys5. My problems starting with Sys1
>
> 
>
> Sys 1 After clicking on my computer under Network drives  I only see
>
> drivec on Sys 3 and drivec on Sys 5
>
> drivec on Sys 2 and drive on Sys 4 do not show up any more so I can not
> access those computers from the network from Sys 1
>
> 
>
> Sys 2 is correct, After clicking on my computer under Network drives I see
> and can access Sys 1, Sys 3, Sys 4, and Sys 5, which are all the other
> computers in the network.
>
> 
>
> Sys 3 After clicking on my computer under Network drives  I see
>
> drivec on Sys 1 , drivec on Sys 2 drivec on Sys 4 and drivec on Sys 5
>
> I can acess all other computers on the network  except for drivec Sys 2
>
> drivec Sys 2 shows up but has a red X through it. When I click on it
>
> a window pops up saying, “An error occurred while reconnecting to drive Sys 2
>
> Microsoft windows network. The network path was not found.
>
> 
>
> Sys 4 all is correct, can access all other computers on network.
>
> 
>
> Sys 5 After clicking on my computer under Network drives I see
>
> drivec on Sys 1 , drivec on Sys 2 drivec on Sys 3 and drivec Sys 4, which is
> all other computers on network.
>
> However when I click on drive Sys 2,  a window pops up saying, “An error
> occurred while reconnecting to drive Sys 2
>
> Microsoft windows network. The network path was not found. Unlike Sys 3
> there was no red X through Sys 2
>
> 
>
> System OS as follows
> Sys1=Window 2000
> Sys2=XP Pro
> Sys3=Windows 2000
> Sys4=Windows 2000
> Sys5= XP PRo
>
> Thanks for your help
>
>

"Anteaus" wrote:

>
> -Not the answer you were hoping for, I suspect, but I would suggest you
> rethink your network configuration. It makes far more sense to allocate ONE
> computer as the place where shared data is put. You then only need to get
> four connections working, instead of twenty.
>
> With ten computers that becomes 90 connections, and a hopeless exercise in
> 'plate-spinning' to keep it all working.
>
> "Dave Cox" wrote:
>
> > Question:
> >
> > Hello,
> > I have 5 computers which are set up in my network
> > Somehow yesterday I could not access from one computer to another on all
> > computers in the network. I have computers named Sys1, Sys2, Sys 3 , Sys4 and
> > Sys5. My problems starting with Sys1
> >
> > 
> >
> > Sys 1 After clicking on my computer under Network drives  I only see
> >
> > drivec on Sys 3 and drivec on Sys 5
> >
> > drivec on Sys 2 and drive on Sys 4 do not show up any more so I can not
> > access those computers from the network from Sys 1
> >
> > 
> >
> > Sys 2 is correct, After clicking on my computer under Network drives I see
> > and can access Sys 1, Sys 3, Sys 4, and Sys 5, which are all the other
> > computers in the network.
> >
> > 
> >
> > Sys 3 After clicking on my computer under Network drives  I see
> >
> > drivec on Sys 1 , drivec on Sys 2 drivec on Sys 4 and drivec on Sys 5
> >
> > I can acess all other computers on the network  except for drivec Sys 2
> >
> > drivec Sys 2 shows up but has a red X through it. When I click on it
> >
> > a window pops up saying, “An error occurred while reconnecting to drive Sys 2
> >
> > Microsoft windows network. The network path was not found.
> >
> > 
> >
> > Sys 4 all is correct, can access all other computers on network.
> >
> > 
> >
> > Sys 5 After clicking on my computer under Network drives I see
> >
> > drivec on Sys 1 , drivec on Sys 2 drivec on Sys 3 and drivec Sys 4, which is
> > all other computers on network.
> >
> > However when I click on drive Sys 2,  a window pops up saying, “An error
> > occurred while reconnecting to drive Sys 2
> >
> > Microsoft windows network. The network path was not found. Unlike Sys 3
> > there was no red X through Sys 2
> >
> > 
> >
> > System OS as follows
> > Sys1=Window 2000
> > Sys2=XP Pro
> > Sys3=Windows 2000
> > Sys4=Windows 2000
> > Sys5= XP PRo
> >
> > Thanks for your help
> >
> >

-"Dave Cox" wrote:

> Thanks for your response.  That may be something to consider, and I
> appreciate your suggestions.  Let's see if anyone else has anything to offer.
>
> "Anteaus" wrote:
>
> >
> > -Not the answer you were hoping for, I suspect, but I would suggest you
> > rethink your network configuration. It makes far more sense to allocate ONE
> > computer as the place where shared data is put. You then only need to get
> > four connections working, instead of twenty.
> >

"Anteaus" wrote:

> I could offer a few more hints:
>
> Do not share the whole of the C: drive read/write. This is an
> open-invitation to a virus, once a foothold has been gained,  to infect every
> computer on your network. (It is also an open invitation to a disgruntled
> employeee to knock-out all of your computers in one go as a parting-shot!)
>
> Network Places is seldom reliable on its own. If you need to be able to
> 'find' all other computers, then you need to install a DNS server and
> register each computer's name and IP address in your local zone. 
> Alternatively for a small site you could use WINS, or place a LMHOSTS file on
> each computer containing the names and IPs of the other computers.
>
> You might also have an issue with network-card powersave bugs. see:
> http://mylogon.net/support/psave/
>
> I might add that the need to share data from every computer may seem
> essential to the user who has become dependent that way of working, but kick
> the habit and then you wonder why you ever did it! The only reason I could
> envisage for doing this is if the computers are laptops which are not always
> connected, and must take the data with them. (Even at that, synchronising
> with a central data-store may be a better arrangement.) For fixed desktops I
> simply cannot think of any reason to do this.
>
> One of the key problems it generates is the sheer difficulty of ensuring
> that data is backed-up. If data could be in literally any place on five
> computers - and not even necessarily in the "My Documents" folders thereon -
> how do you even begin to implement any kind of disaster-recovery plan?
>
>
> -"Dave Cox" wrote:
>
> > Thanks for your response.  That may be something to consider, and I
> > appreciate your suggestions.  Let's see if anyone else has anything to offer.
> >
> > "Anteaus" wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > -Not the answer you were hoping for, I suspect, but I would suggest you
> > > rethink your network configuration. It makes far more sense to allocate ONE
> > > computer as the place where shared data is put. You then only need to get
> > > four connections working, instead of twenty.
> > >
>

"Dave Cox" wrote:

> Thanks Anteaus.  I will let you know what we decide to do.
>
> "Anteaus" wrote:
>
> > I could offer a few more hints:
> >
> > Do not share the whole of the C: drive read/write. This is an
> > open-invitation to a virus, once a foothold has been gained,  to infect every
> > computer on your network. (It is also an open invitation to a disgruntled
> > employeee to knock-out all of your computers in one go as a parting-shot!)
> >
> > Network Places is seldom reliable on its own. If you need to be able to
> > 'find' all other computers, then you need to install a DNS server and
> > register each computer's name and IP address in your local zone. 
> > Alternatively for a small site you could use WINS, or place a LMHOSTS file on
> > each computer containing the names and IPs of the other computers.
> >
> > You might also have an issue with network-card powersave bugs. see:
> > http://mylogon.net/support/psave/
> >
> > I might add that the need to share data from every computer may seem
> > essential to the user who has become dependent that way of working, but kick
> > the habit and then you wonder why you ever did it! The only reason I could
> > envisage for doing this is if the computers are laptops which are not always
> > connected, and must take the data with them. (Even at that, synchronising
> > with a central data-store may be a better arrangement.) For fixed desktops I
> > simply cannot think of any reason to do this.
> >
> > One of the key problems it generates is the sheer difficulty of ensuring
> > that data is backed-up. If data could be in literally any place on five
> > computers - and not even necessarily in the "My Documents" folders thereon -
> > how do you even begin to implement any kind of disaster-recovery plan?
> >
> >
> > -"Dave Cox" wrote:
> >
> > > Thanks for your response.  That may be something to consider, and I
> > > appreciate your suggestions.  Let's see if anyone else has anything to offer.
> > >
> > > "Anteaus" wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > > -Not the answer you were hoping for, I suspect, but I would suggest you
> > > > rethink your network configuration. It makes far more sense to allocate ONE
> > > > computer as the place where shared data is put. You then only need to get
> > > > four connections working, instead of twenty.
> > > >
> >