Re: Network Monitor Driver on XP ??
From: David Wang [Msft] (someone_at_online.microsoft.com)
Date: 05/19/04
- Previous message: William Hymen: "Re: Running a login script only when the script has changed"
- In reply to: Joe Richards [MVP]: "Re: Network Monitor Driver on XP ??"
- Next in thread: Joe Richards [MVP]: "Re: Network Monitor Driver on XP ??"
- Reply: Joe Richards [MVP]: "Re: Network Monitor Driver on XP ??"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Tue, 18 May 2004 21:08:32 -0700
Yes. Hence the prefix of "Suspending reality for a moment". ;-)
I mostly question why NetMon needs to be installed on 1500 PCs, unattended.
I think the user *thought* that it needs to be installed on all PCs in order
to monitor network traffic to/from it... which is far from the case. Just a
handful should be sufficient.
-- //David IIS This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights. // "Joe Richards [MVP]" <humorexpress@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:efeOOuOPEHA.2976@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl... Errr.... If the user is only interested in seeing the traffic visable to the one machine OR if the network topology is everything on one shared segment like say a hub yes I agree with you. I won't discount the first but the second is highly unlikely unless running Token Ring. You don't generally put 1500 PCs on a shared ethernet segment, that many PCs goes onto switches and you can't see all traffic when you are plugged into the normal switch ports, only broadcast traffic, multicast traffic, and directed traffic in which you are involved. Depending on the router configurations and subnet masking, you won't even see broadcasts from all of the 1500 machines from a single machine. If you plug into the mirror ports of switches, you will get more info, but most likely, still wouldn't see all of the traffic for all 1500 machines. joe -- Joe Richards Microsoft MVP Windows Server Directory Services www.joeware.net David Wang [Msft] wrote: > You do not need to silent install this on all 1500 boxes at all. > > Why do you need to install this on all 1500 boxes? Suspending reality for a > moment -- if there are 1500 PCs and they are all on the same network > segment, you only need one machine with the network monitor driver installed > to be able to capture data frames of all 1500 PCs. You do not need the > driver at every PC to be able to capture network traffic everywhere -- the > cable going into that PC is the same that's going into your PC, and > electrical signals go across the entire cable, not from point-to-point... so > your PC can capture that other PC's network packets. > > All you need is one such network monitor inside of each network segment to > be able to sniff traffic on the entire segment. Installing this > individually on each PC simply makes it possible for each PC to view their > traffic -- which I doubt is what you're interested in. > > However, I think that the version with XP is intentionally restricted to > only capture/display data sent to the PC it's on. You're not getting > anything by installing it on all machines -- you need to run the version > which is not restricted. >
- Previous message: William Hymen: "Re: Running a login script only when the script has changed"
- In reply to: Joe Richards [MVP]: "Re: Network Monitor Driver on XP ??"
- Next in thread: Joe Richards [MVP]: "Re: Network Monitor Driver on XP ??"
- Reply: Joe Richards [MVP]: "Re: Network Monitor Driver on XP ??"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
Loading