Re: Client performance problem windows 2003 server...

Hi Perra,

Glad to hear from you and let me know your action plan.

Yes. You are right that I have reconfirmed: the problematic client machine
which is installed Windows XP Pro uses the non-English system. You
mentioned that it should be Swedish operation system. I found the Swedish
Microsoft support forum is as following and you can contact there:

http://www.microsoft.com/sverige/partner/

In addition, if you have the same problem with non-English client, please
send one of them to me at v-amanwa@xxxxxxxxxxxxx and I'm very glad to
perform further research on this issue.

HTH!

Thanks & Regards

Amanda Wang [MSFT]

Microsoft Online Partner Support

Get Secure! - www.microsoft.com/security

====================================================================

When responding to posts, please "Reply to Group" via your newsreader so
that others may learn and benefit from your issue.

=====================================================================

--------------------
>From: <fc9a9f82-2129692850@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>References: <7C9E0C9C-D9DA-4D57-B9CF-AED3E4DC28E1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
<OJ0BRIqYFHA.3336@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
<rXCSomcZFHA.3336@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
<eSMob8eZFHA.584@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
<eEuVRqoZFHA.2996@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
<R#5uTOpZFHA.2184@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
<ycK8FypZFHA.3336@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
<#ESZc8AcFHA.3912@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
<tfMrfqZcFHA.3052@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
<4yMivKocFHA.1264@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
<7niWZbzcFHA.3404@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>Subject: Re: Client performance problem windows 2003 server...
>Date: Fri, 17 Jun 2005 14:33:09 +0200
>Lines: 503
>X-Priority: 3
>X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
>X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2180
>X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Original
>X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
>Message-ID: <urao6izcFHA.1044@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>Newsgroups: microsoft.public.windows.server.networking
>NNTP-Posting-Host: mail.wermtec.se 194.132.162.3
>Path: TK2MSFTNGXA01.phx.gbl!TK2MSFTNGP08.phx.gbl!TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl
>Xref: TK2MSFTNGXA01.phx.gbl
microsoft.public.windows.server.networking:16708
>X-Tomcat-NG: microsoft.public.windows.server.networking
>
>Hi
>
>I havent been givnen the time to try out your suggestions yet. I hope to
do
>that next week.
>The machines that is having problems are both w2k pro and wxp pro and the
>client machines log we sent was from a wxp pro and I think that was a
>swedish operation system. So I will have to continue this with you as
there
>is no Swedish Microsoft support forum. If this will be a issue i will get
>there and install an english client to be doing the errorsearching on.
>You said that the Win2Ks log is a non english version, if you are
reffering
>to the Windows 2000 server in site A (Server A) that is a English
>installation, the w2k3 server is an English version too, the wxp pro
client
>is the only non-english system that we are involving in this
problemsolving
>situation...
>
>I will get back to you as soon as possible with more answeres.
>Best Regards
>Perra
>
>"Amanda Wang [MSFT]" <v-amanwa@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
>news:7niWZbzcFHA.3404@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Hi,
>>
>> How are things going on your side after trying my previous suggestions?
>>
>> I have performed further research on your issue and found the following
>> things we need to confirm:
>>
>> 1. Make sure that all systems are up to the latest service packs because
>> there was a DFS performance issue in your previous post which had been
>> resolved by hotfix in SP2 for Windows 2000.
>>
>> 2. In my last reply I have checked userenv.log file and Win2k3's Network
>> MPSReport and given the related suggestions on them. However, after I
>> checked the Win2k's MPSReport today, I found it is a non-ENG version, we
>> will provide a best effort on this issue and you may need to seek
>> assistance from local product support team so that you can get the most
>> efficient support on it.
>>
>> I suggest you contact the local PSS or newsgroup. Currently we offer
>> Partner newsgroups in the following languages:
>>
>> English - http://members.microsoft.com/partner/newsgroups/default.aspx
>> Simplified Chinese - : http://www.mspartnersupport.com Traditional
>> Chinese
>> - http://www.microsoft.com/taiwan/community
>> Japanese
>>
-http://communities.microsoft.com/newsgroups/default.asp?ICP=JPN_DA&sLCID=jp
>> German
>>
-http://communities.microsoft.com/newsgroups/default.asp?icp=Germany_PSS_VAP
>> &slcid=de
>> Spanish - visit
>> http://www.microsoft.com/spain/partner/soporte/gruposnoticias/default.asp
>> for instructions to access Spanish partner newsgroups Portuguese -
>> http://www.microsoft.com/brasil/parceiros/sup/for/default.aspx for
>> instructions to access Portuguese partner newsgroups Greek -
>> http://www.microsoft.com/hellas/partner/default.asp for instructions to
>> access Greek partner newsgroups.
>>
>> If you are posting in a language that is not listed here, please visit
>> www.microsoft.com/partner and click on the Worldwide Sites link to find
>> the
>> appropriate resources for your language.
>>
>> Thanks for your understanding.
>>
>> Thanks & Regards
>>
>> Amanda Wang [MSFT]
>>
>> Microsoft Online Partner Support
>>
>> Get Secure! - www.microsoft.com/security
>>
>> ====================================================================
>>
>> When responding to posts, please "Reply to Group" via your newsreader so
>> that others may learn and benefit from your issue.
>>
>> =====================================================================
>>
>> --------------------
>>>X-Tomcat-ID: 245765645
>>>References: <7C9E0C9C-D9DA-4D57-B9CF-AED3E4DC28E1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> <OJ0BRIqYFHA.3336@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> <rXCSomcZFHA.3336@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> <eSMob8eZFHA.584@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> <eEuVRqoZFHA.2996@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> <R#5uTOpZFHA.2184@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> <ycK8FypZFHA.3336@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> <#ESZc8AcFHA.3912@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> <tfMrfqZcFHA.3052@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>MIME-Version: 1.0
>>>Content-Type: text/plain
>>>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>>>From: v-amanwa@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Amanda Wang [MSFT])
>>>Organization: Microsoft
>>>Date: Thu, 16 Jun 2005 14:50:00 GMT
>>>Subject: Re: Client performance problem windows 2003 server...
>>>X-Tomcat-NG: microsoft.public.windows.server.networking
>>>Message-ID: <4yMivKocFHA.1264@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>Newsgroups: microsoft.public.windows.server.networking
>>>Lines: 396
>>>Path: TK2MSFTNGXA01.phx.gbl
>>>Xref: TK2MSFTNGXA01.phx.gbl
>> microsoft.public.windows.server.networking:16672
>>>NNTP-Posting-Host: TOMCATIMPORT1 10.201.218.122
>>>
>>>Hello,
>>>
>>>Thanks for your effort on this issue.
>>>
>>>I have checked the MPSReports and userenv.log file. Then I would provide
>>>the results I have found separately as following:
>>>
>>>I. In userenv.log file, I found the error as following:
>>>
>>>USERENV(1d0.1d4) 10:43:29:812 MyRegUnLoadKey: Failed to unmount hive
>>>00000005
>>>USERENV(1d0.1d4) 10:43:29:822 DumpOpenRegistryHandle: 2 user registry
>>>Handles leaked from
>>>\Registry\User\S-1-5-21-923867646-1928005521-2076119496-1018
>>>USERENV(1d0.1d4) 10:43:29:832 UnloadUserProfileP: Didn't unload user
>>>profile <err = 5>
>>>USERENV(1d0.1d4) 10:43:30:422 UnloadUserProfile: UnloadUserProfileP
failed
>>>with 0
>>>USERENV(22c.230) 10:44:09:412 CUserProfile::CleanupUserProfile: Ref Count
>>>is not 0
>>>USERENV(22c.230) 10:44:09:412 CUserProfile::CleanupUserProfile: Ref Count
>>>is not 0
>>>USERENV(22c.230) 10:44:09:412 CUserProfile::CleanupUserProfile: Ref Count
>>>is not 0
>>>USERENV(22c.230) 10:46:44:876 GetUserDNSDomainName: MyGetUserNameEx
>> failed
>>>for NameDnsDomain style name with 1332
>>>USERENV(26c.2d0) 10:46:44:996 GetUserDNSDomainName: MyGetUserNameEx
>> failed
>>>for NameDnsDomain style name with 1332
>>>USERENV(26c.2d0) 10:46:45:006 GetUserDNSDomainName: MyGetUserNameEx
>> failed
>>>for NameDnsDomain style name with 1332
>>>USERENV(22c.230) 10:46:46:348 GetUserDNSDomainName: MyGetUserNameEx
>> failed
>>>for NameDnsDomain style name with 1332
>>>
>>>***According to these errors, it appears that the client cannot get the
>> DNS.
>>>
>>>
>>>II. In Win2k3's Network MPSReport, found the errors as following:
>>>
>>>Doing initial required tests
>>>
>>> Testing server: Verkstadsgatan\VERKTYG
>>> Starting test: Connectivity
>>> * Active Directory LDAP Services Check
>>> * Active Directory RPC Services Check
>>> [VERKTYG] DsBindWithSpnEx() failed with error 1753,
>>> Win32 Error 1753.
>>> Printing RPC Extended Error Info:
>>> Error Record 1, ProcessID is 9788 (DcDiag)
>>> System Time is: 6/1/2005 9:12:11:65
>>> Generating component is 2 (RPC runtime)
>>> Status is 1753: There are no more endpoints available from
the
>>>endpoint mapper.
>>> Detection location is 500
>>> NumberOfParameters is 4
>>> Unicode string: ncacn_ip_tcp
>>> Unicode string:
>>>ee5d8aed-846c-43c6-984c-9051a63a0fc9._msdcs.smedjan.local
>>> Long val: -481213899
>>> Long val: 65537
>>> Error Record 2, ProcessID is 9788 (DcDiag)
>>> System Time is: 6/1/2005 9:12:11:65
>>> Generating component is 2 (RPC runtime)
>>> Status is 1722: The RPC server is unavailable.
>>> Detection location is 761
>>> NumberOfParameters is 1
>>> Unicode string: 1025
>>> Error Record 3, ProcessID is 9788 (DcDiag)
>>> System Time is: 6/1/2005 9:12:11:65
>>> Generating component is 8 (winsock)
>>> Status is 1722: The RPC server is unavailable.
>>> Detection location is 313
>>> Error Record 4, ProcessID is 9788 (DcDiag)
>>> System Time is: 6/1/2005 9:12:11:65
>>> Generating component is 8 (winsock)
>>> Status is 10048: Only one usage of each socket address
>>>(protocol/network address/port) is normally permitted.
>>> Detection location is 311
>>> NumberOfParameters is 3
>>> Long val: 1025
>>> Pointer val: 0
>>> Pointer val: 0
>>> Error Record 5, ProcessID is 9788 (DcDiag)
>>> System Time is: 6/1/2005 9:12:11:65
>>> Generating component is 8 (winsock)
>>> Status is 10048: Only one usage of each socket address
>>>(protocol/network address/port) is normally permitted.
>>> Detection location is 318
>>> ......................... VERKTYG failed test Connectivity
>>>
>>>***The error point to the RPC server is unavailable and there are no more
>>>endpoints available from the endpoint mapper.
>>>
>>>
>>>Therefore, according to the above errors, we can confirm the issue should
>>>be a DNS replication issue. There are many reasons can cause the issue:
>>>
>>>1. Please refer to the following articles to configure an Authoritative
>>>Time Server first:
>>>
>>>216734 How to Configure an Authoritative Time Server in Windows 2000
>>>http://support.microsoft.com/?id=216734
>>>
>>>314054 How to Configure an Authoritative Time Server in Windows XP
>>>http://support.microsoft.com/?id=314054
>>>
>>>816042 How to configure the Windows Time service on a Windows Server
>>>2003-based http://support.microsoft.com/?id=816042
>>>
>>>2. Please check the configuration of two sites and refer to the
following
>>>articles:
>>>
>>>Windows Server 2003 Active Directory Branch Office Guide
>>>
>>>http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyID=9353a4f6-a8a8-40
bb
>> -
>>>9fa7-3a95c9540112&displaylang=en
>>>
>>>Deploying Active Directory for Branch Office Environments
>>>
>>>http://www.microsoft.com/technet/archive/windows2000serv/technologies/act
iv
>> e
>>>directory/deploy/adguide/addeploy/default.mspx
>>>
>>>Active Directory Branch Office Planning Guide
>>>
>>>http://www.microsoft.com/windows2000/techinfo/planning/activedirectory/br
an
>> c
>>>hoffice/default.asp
>>>
>>>Please pay more attention to the following contents in these articles:
>>>
>>>Configuring Automated Site Coverage
>>>Another situation that requires configuration of SRV resource records
>>>results from not having a domain controller in a particular site. This
>>>might happen because there are no users who require constant logon
access,
>>>or because replication to the site might be too expensive or too slow. To
>>>ensure that a domain controller is located in the site closest to a
client
>>>computer, if not the same site, Windows Server?2003 automatically
attempts
>>>to register a domain controller in every site by using an automated site
>>>coverage algorithm. The algorithm determines how one site can "cover" a
>>>second site when no domain controller exists in the second site. By
>>>default, the process uses the replication topology.
>>>The algorithm works as follows: each domain controller checks all sites
in
>>>the forest and then checks the replication cost matrix. A domain
>> controller
>>>advertises itself (registers a site-related SRV record in DNS) in any
site
>>>that does not have a domain controller for that domain and for which its
>>>site has the lowest-cost connections. This process ensures that every
site
>>>has a domain controller even though its domain controller might not be
>>>physically located in that site. The domain controllers that are
published
>>>in DNS are those from the closest site (as defined by the replication
>>>topology).
>>>In a branch office environment, automated site coverage should be
>> disabled.
>>>Figure 4.9 shows where this process fits into the overall DNS planning
>>>process.
>>>Figure 4.9 Configuring Automated Site Coverage
>>>
>>>In the branch office scenario, computers should not locate domain
>>>controllers in any other branch office. A client should always
communicate
>>>with a local domain controller, and if that is not available, use a
domain
>>>controller in the data center site. Automated site coverage makes it
>>>possible for a situation to occur where a client might be able to locate
a
>>>domain controller in another branch office. For this reason, automated
>> site
>>>coverage should be disabled in a branch office environment. Use the Group
>>>Policy snap-in to achieve this:
>>>1. Disable the "Automated Site Coverage by DC Locator DNS SRV Records"
>>>Group Policy on all domain controllers, not only in the branches but also
>>>in the data center. You can do this by modifying the Default Domain
>>>Controllers Group Policy.
>>>2. Do not register generic records, as described in "Finding a Domain
>>>Controller in the Data Center" earlier in this chapter.
>>>If both of these configurations are performed, then all clients within a
>>>branch office site will discover the local domain controller if it is
>>>available or the data center domain controller if no local domain
>>>controller is available.
>>>When a site with a domain controller for some domain is closer to another
>>>site than to the data center site, the administrator has the ability to
>>>configure that domain controller with the specific ("close") sites to be
>>>covered using the following Group Policy settings:
>>>" Sites Covered by the DC Locator DNS SRV Records
>>>" Sites Covered by the GC Locator DNS SRV Records
>>>" Sites Covered by the Application Directory Partition Locator DNS SRV
>>>Records
>>>However, physical proximity or network performance are not the only
>>>criteria. If firewalls or dial-on-demand lines do not allow traffic in
>> this
>>>direction, incorrectly applied site coverage will be bad for clients
>>>because they will fall back to an unreachable domain controller and not
to
>>>the data center.
>>>
>>>HTH! And I will continue checking the MPSReports to see if there are any
>>>other clues I can found. If you have anything update, please feel free
to
>>>let me know. I'm looking forward to your reply.
>>>
>>>Thanks & Regards
>>>
>>>Amanda Wang [MSFT]
>>>
>>>Microsoft Online Partner Support
>>>
>>>Get Secure! - www.microsoft.com/security
>>>
>>>====================================================================
>>>
>>>When responding to posts, please "Reply to Group" via your newsreader so
>>>that others may learn and benefit from your issue.
>>>
>>>=====================================================================
>>>
>>>--------------------
>>>>X-Tomcat-ID: 233018892
>>>>References: <7C9E0C9C-D9DA-4D57-B9CF-AED3E4DC28E1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>><OJ0BRIqYFHA.3336@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>><rXCSomcZFHA.3336@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>><eSMob8eZFHA.584@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>><eEuVRqoZFHA.2996@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>><R#5uTOpZFHA.2184@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>><ycK8FypZFHA.3336@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>><#ESZc8AcFHA.3912@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>>MIME-Version: 1.0
>>>>Content-Type: text/plain
>>>>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>>>>From: v-amanwa@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Amanda Wang [MSFT])
>>>>Organization: Microsoft
>>>>Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2005 11:08:53 GMT
>>>>Subject: Re: Client performance problem windows 2003 server...
>>>>X-Tomcat-NG: microsoft.public.windows.server.networking
>>>>Message-ID: <tfMrfqZcFHA.3052@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>>Newsgroups: microsoft.public.windows.server.networking
>>>>Lines: 131
>>>>Path: TK2MSFTNGXA01.phx.gbl
>>>>Xref: TK2MSFTNGXA01.phx.gbl
>>>microsoft.public.windows.server.networking:16613
>>>>NNTP-Posting-Host: tomcatimport2.phx.gbl 10.201.218.182
>>>>
>>>>Hello,
>>>>
>>>>Thanks for your response.
>>>>
>>>>First, I would like give a summary of this issue including setup
>>>>environment, main issue you encountered and the actions we have
>>>>performed.
>>>>
>>>>Setup environment:
>>>>============
>>>>A Windows 2000 server was at first installed in site A (both
>>>geographically
>>>>and in the site configuration) this is acting as the "primary" domain
>>>>controller.
>>>>This server is GC, DDNS, DHCP, WINS, Print and file server.
>>>>
>>>>Then at site B there is a windows 2003 server. This is acting as a GC,
>>>>DDNS,
>>>>WINS, file and print server.
>>>>
>>>>The sites are connected through a VPN tunnel with cisco pix firewalls.
>> The
>>>>internet connection is at site A a dedicated connection and at site B a
>>>>ADSL 1Mbit connection.
>>>>
>>>>Issue:
>>>>==============
>>>>When the connection between the two sites is terminated, the clients at
>>>>site B becomes extremely slow to logon and even to access the local
>> server
>>>>at site B.
>>>>
>>>>Actions:
>>>>====================
>>>>1. Yes every client in Site B is suffering from this
>>>>2. The DNS is replicated through sites and services
>>>>3. The DNS settings on site B is distributed the following way to the
>>>>clients: (the DHCP scope settings)
>>>>Primary dns: site Bs win2k3 server
>>>>Secondary dns: site As win2k server
>>>>Same setup for wins...
>>>>4. The mappings on the clients are mapped like this:
>>>>NET USE G: \\smedjan.local\DFSroot\Verktyg_Gemensam /PERSISTENT:NO
>>>>If change it to NET USE G: \\verktyg\Verktyg_Gemensam$ /PERSISTENT:NO
>>>>then the problem with slow connections disappears.
>>>>\\smedjan.local is the domain name and verktyg is the file server's
name.
>>>>a, the file server is Server B in site B
>>>>b, If don't map the shares there is no problem
>>>>
>>>>5. If change the group policy setting on the w2k3 server at site B the
>>>>policy won't be applied to the clients until the w2k server at site A
has
>>>>that group policy information. Even if run GPUPDATE on the clients and
>>>>server.
>>>>If make a change in the policies on w2k server at site A the clients
gets
>>>>that policy applied directly with GPUPDATE.
>>>>
>>>>Now from the above conclusion, we can find the issue should have two
>>>>aspects:
>>>>
>>>>1. It seems that Site B's clients cannot authenticate by Win2k3 server.
>>>It
>>>>may be caused by DNS replication.
>>>>2. It may be caused by the mappings and it looks like a DFSroot issue
>>>>
>>>>Therefore, we can perform the following steps to isolate the issue:
>>>>1. Terminate the connection between site A and B
>>>>2. Boot one client computer by using safe mode with network
>>>>3. Don't map the shares and check if the slow logon issue still persists
>>>on
>>>>this client.
>>>>4. How long will it take in logging on?
>>>>This test will help us isolate if the issue is caused by replication
>>>>between A and B or by DFSroot.
>>>>
>>>>The issue is complex and Network MPSReport and Userenv log on files are
>>>>very important for us to perform further research on it.
>>>>
>>>>I don't know why I haven't received your E-mail last time. Would you
>>>>please use two different E-mail accounts to send the information I
>>>>requested to me at v-amanwa@xxxxxxxxxxxxx? You effort on this issue
>> would
>>>>be appreciated and I'm looking forward to hearing from you.
>>>>
>>>>Thanks & Regards
>>>>
>>>>Amanda Wang [MSFT]
>>>>
>>>>Microsoft Online Partner Support
>>>>
>>>>Get Secure! - www.microsoft.com/security
>>>>
>>>>====================================================================
>>>>
>>>>When responding to posts, please "Reply to Group" via your newsreader so
>>>>that others may learn and benefit from your issue.
>>>>
>>>>=====================================================================
>>>>
>>>>--------------------
>>>>>From: <fc9a9f82-2129692850@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>>>References: <7C9E0C9C-D9DA-4D57-B9CF-AED3E4DC28E1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>><OJ0BRIqYFHA.3336@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>><rXCSomcZFHA.3336@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>><eSMob8eZFHA.584@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>><eEuVRqoZFHA.2996@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>><R#5uTOpZFHA.2184@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>><ycK8FypZFHA.3336@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>>>Subject: Re: Client performance problem windows 2003 server...
>>>>>Date: Mon, 13 Jun 2005 13:57:41 +0200
>>>>>Lines: 19
>>>>>X-Priority: 3
>>>>>X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
>>>>>X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2180
>>>>>X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Original
>>>>>X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
>>>>>Message-ID: <#ESZc8AcFHA.3912@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>>>Newsgroups: microsoft.public.windows.server.networking
>>>>>NNTP-Posting-Host: mail.wermtec.se 194.132.162.3
>>>>>Path: TK2MSFTNGXA01.phx.gbl!TK2MSFTNGP08.phx.gbl!TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl
>>>>>Xref: TK2MSFTNGXA01.phx.gbl
>>>>microsoft.public.windows.server.networking:16505
>>>>>X-Tomcat-NG: microsoft.public.windows.server.networking
>>>>>
>>>>>Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>>I will try to mail you the previously discussed files again.
>>>>>
>>>>>1. The Site B has server B in that site and Site A has server A in its
>>>>site.
>>>>>Do you want me to pu both of the servers in site A?
>>>>>
>>>>>2. \\smedjan.local is the domain name and verktyg is the file servers
>>>name.
>>>>>a, the file server is Server B in site B
>>>>>b, If I dont map the shares theere is no problem, so the mapping is a
>>>>>problem, or to find the right way to map drives seems to be a
problem...
>>>>>
>>>>>3. I will get you a report next time I go to my customer wich I hope
can
>>>>be
>>>>>this week.
>>>>>
>>>>>Best Regards
>>>>>Perra
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
>

.

Relevant Pages

  • Site-tosite VPN Issue
    ... Windows Server 2003 domain controller ... Mixture of PCs running Windows 2000 Profressional with SP3 and Windows XP ... the VPN to the Windows Server 2003 domain controller. ... 12.7MB file from the server to the client PC. ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.server.networking)
  • Re: Auto Sync Client Time with Server
    ... Should work automaticly if the client is well integrated in the AD-Structure ... Windows 2000 Time Services ... 2000 for the 'loose time synchronization' required by Kerberos. ... requests time synchronization with the domain controller. ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.server.sbs)
  • Re: Some clients cant access server
    ... Windows cannot obtain the domain controller name for your computer ... Group Policy processing aborted. ... This is from the client, ... Windows cannot access the file gpt.ini for GPO ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.server.sbs)
  • Re: Problem with an NT client in a Win 2k Domain
    ... Chriss,he client) utilize NetBI?OS, which if i recall ... correctly does use server message blocks. ... >> company uses a Windows 2000 Server as a Pimary Domain ... >> will not connect to the Domain Controller .. ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.server.active_directory)
  • Re: Client performance problem windows 2003 server...
    ... there and install an english client to be doing the errorsearching on. ... to the Windows 2000 server in site A that is a English ... >>be a DNS replication issue. ... >>results from not having a domain controller in a particular site. ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.server.networking)