Re: Very slow network browsing from W2K but not NT
From: Roland Hall (nobody_at_nowhere)
Date: 10/26/04
- Next message: Roland Hall: "Re: Expected file transfer speeds over Gigabit?"
- Previous message: Paivijt: "Re: why vpn option disabled in connection wizard"
- In reply to: Paul Welsh: "Re: Very slow network browsing from W2K but not NT"
- Next in thread: Paul Welsh: "Re: Very slow network browsing from W2K but not NT"
- Reply: Paul Welsh: "Re: Very slow network browsing from W2K but not NT"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2004 03:07:01 -0500
"Paul Welsh" wrote in message
news:613ecd8e.0410250737.4e501734@posting.google.com...
: "Roland Hall" <nobody@nowhere> wrote in message
news:<OMzod5SuEHA.3916@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl>...
: > Is this a DC?
: > http://www.jsiinc.com/SUBK/tip5300/rh5361.htm
: >
: > The Netware Client is Client32?
: > Which is first in the binding order on a W2K computer and an NT one?
: >
: > Should one assume there are two Cisco routers and two private networks?
:
: Hi Roland
:
: No, the server isn't a DC. On the contrary, it isn't even on a
: Windows Domain. It's on a workgroup called Workgroup, ie, the
: default, because this is predominantly a NetWare server environment.
:
: On NT, the NetWare Client is the Novell Client 4.80 and the order is:
: Client Access Network, NetWare Services, Microsoft Windows Network.
:
: On Windows 2000, the NetWare Client is the Novell Client for Windows
: 4.90.0.0 SP1a and the order is: Novell NetIdentity Credential
: Provider, NetWare Services, Microsoft Windows Network, Lotus Notes
: Single Logon.
:
: In other words, NetWare is at the top on both NT and W2K. I tried
: changing the order under Windows 2000 (putting Microsoft Windows
: Network at the top) but to no avail.
:
: The NT client is using the same DNS and DHCP server as the W2K client.
: The NT client is using a WINS server but the server being accessed
: isn't listed in the WINS database. I have tried pointing the W2K
: client to the WINS server but it makes no difference.
:
: Yes, there are 2 Cisco 2600 routers at each end of a private circuit
: (2 Mb at least, could be 4 Mb) connecting 2 offices. The private
: 10.0.0.0 IP address space is being used.
:
: I'm sure that the Windows Explorer on the W2K client gathers extra
: info that the NT 4 Windows Explorer doesn't. When I highlight a file
: for a few seconds, then try highlighting another one, that's when the
: delay is most noticeable.
I assume the server is running in mixed mode and the NetBIOS over TCP/IP?
Are there helper addresses in the router configs and what is the duplex
setting on all? You stated browsing on the server but not from where or I
missed it. I assume using a remote W2K Pro across the WAN to the server is
slow.
Are there Cisco switches involved and if not, what are the interconnectivity
devices on the LANs these workstations and the server are connected to? And
it would help to know if using Cisco, how many switches involved and are
there redundant links? If so, is spanning tree enabled and if so, is
portfast enabled on those ports, and hopefully not on trunk ports.
-- Roland Hall /* This information is distributed in the hope that it will be useful, but without any warranty; without even the implied warranty of merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose. */ Online Support for IT Professionals - http://support.microsoft.com/servicedesks/technet/default.asp?fr=0&sd=tech How-to: Windows 2000 DNS: http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;EN-US;308201 FAQ W2K/2K3 DNS: http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;EN-US;291382
- Next message: Roland Hall: "Re: Expected file transfer speeds over Gigabit?"
- Previous message: Paivijt: "Re: why vpn option disabled in connection wizard"
- In reply to: Paul Welsh: "Re: Very slow network browsing from W2K but not NT"
- Next in thread: Paul Welsh: "Re: Very slow network browsing from W2K but not NT"
- Reply: Paul Welsh: "Re: Very slow network browsing from W2K but not NT"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|