Re: Can't establish a network.

I'm not sure what you mean by the thread being "terminated". Terminated by whom? Threads are never really terminated, they are just abandoned but can be revived by anyone at any given time, so to speak. They are terminated in the sense that when the issue is resolved or when no amount of trying fixes the problem the posters acknowledge that the issue is fixed or that the problem cannot be resolved and they move on, the thread just becomes inactive.

If you feel that you are getting further ahead in your troubleshooting efforts and that you prefer to start new threads with new topics to resolve the problem then you should do as you see fit. It is not for me to tell anyone how to post, I only suggested that it was difficult to follow your efforts and the suggestions made by the poster to help you resolve the errors and come to a successful conclusion with the network problem.

As for the network problem, are you making any progress? Did you verify the registry setting to see if it is causing the problem?

John

Don J wrote:

See added comments at bottom:

This is a classic example of my having started a new thread. My original posting for this thread was basically one I used to start a previous thread. The thread wasn't going anywhere. In fact the very first response ignored many of the questions I had posed, and shifted the discussion. I failed to catch it at the time and the thread took a very different direction. So I decided to start a new thread and keep it in the relevant direction.

The subjects covered by threads seems to evolve over time. This is very confusing and, I believe, counter productive. Is'nt it better to keep a single thread on a sigle topic? And to start a new thread for a new topic. My thinking is that each thread should be defined by the original question, and that when a new issue is raised it is good for a new thread. I think that starting a new thread for each new question will help rather than impede

Added Comments:

I note that this paticular newsgroup is very short: My original Post of the thread is time stamped today at 10:33AM. It is now 9:00PM. The thread containing the previous post has aleady been terminated.

With such a short lifespan for threads it seems to me that frequent definning of new threads has got to be more the rule than the exception. In fact I fail to see how the continuity of discussions can be maintained without defining each new thread somewhat before the previous thread is terminated. So if you look at the dates and times, my defining a new thread was a simple continuation of the old thread.

Don J

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Don J" <dej8801@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:562dnW7j1bhpQsnbnZ2dnUVZ_hqdnZ2d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

This is a classic example of my having started a new thread. My original posting for this thread was basically one I used to start a previous thread. The thread wasn't going anywhere. In fact the very first response ignored many of the questions I had posed, and shifted the discussion. I failed to catch it at the time and the thread took a very different direction. So I decided to start a new thread and keep it in the relevant direction.

The subjects covered by threads seems to evolve over time. This is very confusing and, I believe, counter productive. Is'nt it better to keep a single thread on a sigle topic? And to start a new thread for a new topic. My thinking is that each thread should be defined by the original question, and that when a new issue is raised it is good for a new thread.
I think that starting a new thread for each new question will help rather than impede

Don J

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"John John" <audetweld@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:%23$G4HKWnHHA.3544@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

In the registry got to:

HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\LSA
Value: RestrictAnonymous
Value Type: REG_DWORD

Set the value to 0

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/246261/

John

PS. Your multi-posting to all kinds of different groups and your constant start of new threads is not helping in your search for an answer nor is it helping the troubleshooting efforts by the would be helpers in this matter! The way you have sought help with this problem is a classic example on how *not* to ask for help on the newsgroups! You would be way better served by cross-posting this to a few relevant news groups and by *STICKING* to the thread and answering the questions asked by the helpers!

As it is now there is no single concerted effort to resolve the issues you have simply because no one knows what has or hasn't been tried to resolve the problem, and what has worked or not worked in the effort. I am sure that some of the networking experts are seeing your posts all over the place but due to the scattered approach that you have used to seek help many are probably ignoring your posts!

There is no magic solution to the kind of problem that you are having. Troubleshooting network problems can sometimes be complex and with all but the simplest network problems you usually have to follow a series of steps or troubleshooting measures to arrive to a successful resolution to the problem. By keeping your request for help under one thread a reader may spot a tiny but vital step that has been missed by another poster and add a contribution to the discussion, quite often a final successful resolution is obtained by a sort collaborative effort by many contributors. When the thread gets longer and when the troubleshooting gets more and more difficult is often the time when some of the experts come in to the rescue or when one of the helpers rereads the thread and spots a crucial step that is missing or gets the stroke of genius that solves the problem.

I am not saying this to be critical, I am only trying to help. Your posts are concise and you explain the problems in a clear manner but because of the scattered postings and lack of focus from all readers you are sabotaging the help effort. If my answer does not solve the problem try one last time by cross-posting to a few select groups. Give all the pertinent information about the problem and then stick to the thread!

John

Don J wrote:


Right clicking a folder on my system and selecting "Sharing and Security" from the displayed menu yields a dialog box that has no "Share this folder on the network" checkbox available. Is this OK?

On the same display is the statement "As a security measure, Windows has disabled remote access to this computer. However, you can enable remote access and safely share files by running the 'Network Setup Wizard'". I've
run the 'Network Setup Wizard', and it fails to establish a network, as evidenced by the fact that again selecting "Sharing and Security" yields the same screen as described above, with no changes.

I'm running Win'XP Home on two machines. I have firewalls disabled on both machines.

I'm successfully pinging each PC one from the other.

What do I do? How do I create a network? I am trying to set it up so that I can share folders on one machine with another.

Don J

--------------------------------------------------------------------------






.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: DirectPlay troubleshooting
    ... settings in your Contro Panel / Network Connections.. ... MS Games Help and Support Center: http://support.microsoft.com/?pr=gms ... | that when I try to set up a DirectPlay chat session between ... For more in depth troubleshooting, try this MS Network Troubleshooting article: ...
    (microsoft.public.games)
  • RE: Error binding to local domain
    ... away because I was away for a couple weeks and I do not force permissions on ... The permissions dialog just times out trying to resolve the ... >> following event "Windows cannot query for the list of Group Policy objects. ... >> An Active Directory, network connectivity, or network configuration problem ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.server.sbs)
  • Re: Cant establish a network.
    ... "John John" wrote in message ... That is not to say that you should keep on beating a dead horse, if the thread is going nowhere or if it has been hijacked by posters who have nothing of value to add to the problem at hand then you definitely should start a new thread. ... If you feel that you are getting further ahead in your troubleshooting efforts and that you prefer to start new threads with new topics to resolve the problem then you should do as you see fit. ... It is not for me to tell anyone how to post, I only suggested that it was difficult to follow your efforts and the suggestions made by the poster to help you resolve the errors and come to a successful conclusion with the network problem. ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsxp.general)
  • Re: Cant establish a network.
    ... The current newsgroup seems to do it about a day after each ... still see the replies coming from other posters in other groups. ... resolve the problem then you should do as you see fit. ... As for the network problem, ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsxp.general)
  • Re: Cant establish a network.
    ... That is not to say that you should keep on beating a dead horse, if the thread is going nowhere or if it has been hijacked by posters who have nothing of value to add to the problem at hand then you definitely should start a new thread. ... Maybe I'm dense but isn't this a system of daily forced abandonment? ... If you feel that you are getting further ahead in your troubleshooting efforts and that you prefer to start new threads with new topics to resolve the problem then you should do as you see fit. ... It is not for me to tell anyone how to post, I only suggested that it was difficult to follow your efforts and the suggestions made by the poster to help you resolve the errors and come to a successful conclusion with the network problem. ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsxp.general)
Loading