RE: Can't see other computers/nodes on network!

The only difference with XP Pro and home is XP Pro offers some extra office
application processes, I've developed and maintained webservers and numerous
software for use with XP, and with my own personal experiences comparing the
various operating systems top to bottom the only exception so far being
Windows Vista. Most of the exploitable and well known programs which leave
ports open on windows is targetted, so I try and do things differently and
leave less holes open.

For instance, when i look at server logs, most the time I view exploit
attempts on Windows Server, 2000, Unix, and various microsft office products
such as frontpage extensions, IIS, you name it. Why? Because it's common for
businesses to include these technologies and the information that's given as
standard for security is exactly what bad guys seem to target most.

When everyone's talking about upgrading to XP Pro I cring a bit as I know
there's really not that big a deal to it.

I find myself using the same 3rd party utilities on Windows Server 2003 I
did on home and have more control and less configuration issues. For example,
if it took me a few minutes to get website up and running on XP, the security
was simply turn off all exploitable processes and install any security
patches, manually monitor process and network packet activity, use a good
firewall, use 3rd party browser and secure, don't install questionable
software, and don't navigate to questionable sites or open qustionable email,
turn off Terminal Services, Remote Desktop, any built in windows application
that's designed to give remote network capabilities seems to always be a
target for exploit, vs. a custom developed app like NetworkLink .Net which
little information would be known about.

Windows Server 2003 is confusing really, most might not admit that, but I'm
one to say it, you have to know what does what and the details of what steps
need taken to accomplish things differently, even if you've been doing this
for years.

For simple website solution you could use something like KF Web Server,
compare the simplicity, integration and configuration to that compared to the
built-in functions, I don't mess with FTP at all that's pretty old protocol
method for file transfer and you got more control creating a custom file
sharing program.

Guess what I'm really trying to say is Windows Server 2003 just doesn't cut
it for me, nor did Pro, but future looks brighter with Vista, and for the
next 10 years I think Bill Gates will bring us some new and exciting tools to
make things much more easy to work with so we can simply focus on other
things by making applications and devices more intelligent to begin with for
a more structured workflow, less with configuration struggles and random
errors, or unorganized information and the lack of getting information you
need the most.

The fact why I installed Windows Server 2003 was because I had too, not
because I wanted too, it was not the preferred choice, it was because Windows
Server 2003 was required to install Visual Studio 2005 Team Suite Foundation
Server, and even that let me down like others as after weeks I couldn't get
it installed, development since struggling with this OS has slowed everything
down not sped up, if I went through the hassle of uninstalling it right now
it'd set me back even more, but I know XP Home would have support for all my
hardware and software more so than the OS installed now, especially with
networking hardware, and it takes 5 - 10 minutes to startup during restart,
XP home was only a few seconds to a minute big difference when things are
time critical.

More and more people are using laptops so portable compact solutions are
also important, until now I hosted every service and handled every
development task, weither audio editing, graphics editing, video editing,
software development, site development, or other tasks on 1 machine, not
multiple, I'm just now branching for convenience and portability and other
than the new headaches of Server OS configuration, it's getting to be fun.




--
Knight Technologies (http://knight-technologies.us)
E4 Chat (http://e4chat.com)


"James Price" wrote:

> Ok, so when you are on a workstation and you go to \\knight-tech\ you don't
> see anything?
>
> or you should see:
>
> \\knight-tech\share1
> \\knight-tech\share2
> \\knight-tech\share3
>
> Now from the server if you type \\workstation_name\ you should see what ever
> shares you have created for example:
>
> \\workstation_name\Knight_memos
> \\workstation_name\Knight_Projects
> etc.
>
> I read some of your post to Doug and it seems like you are a little unclear
> on the difference between some of the products (Server, XP Pro, XP Home,
> etc). While for the most part the differences are not that much it's
> important to understand as each is designed for a type of use in mind.
>
> Server is designed as a platform for delivering services (www, FTP, File &
> Print, Streaming Media and SECURITY). I capitalized security b/c aside from
> performance tuning to provide services, providing an extensible security
> platform is the primary role of a server compared to a workstation with a
> file share.
>
> A quick note on the difference between a Domain vs. a Workgroup, in a domain
> all computers share a common security infrastructure (Active Directroy) where
> accounts (computer and user) are centralized and accessible on anywhere in
> the domain. In a workgroup, security accounts computer and users are only
> exist locally and security is managed on each computer, this is fine if you
> have 5 XP workstations in a workgroup, but problematic if you have 500 in an
> office building.
>
> Workstation (XP Pro & Home Ed.) is designed to be a rich multimedia and
> application environment with broad support for a variety of devices. Desktop
> applcation performance is at its peak here but network operations and
> background processes are not as efficient.
>
> The difference between XP Pro and XP Home, well I'm probably not the guy to
> best explain it but it is my understanding that it has more to do with
> licensing of "enterprise" feaures than anything. For instance XP Home Ed.
> does not include the integrated terminal services CAL the Pro includes, what
> else is different I couldn't really say.
>
> Now as to your seeing MSHOME in the Network Neighborhood that your XP
> workstation in a workgroup, so I think that answers my question as to whether
> its in a domain or not.
> --
> James E. Price III
> Fairway Consulting Group, Inc.
> O: 954-727-5126
> C: 305-970-4902
> E: jprice@xxxxxxxxxx
> W: www.fcgroup.us
>
>
> "Knight Technologies" wrote:
>
> > Ok, the first thing I see is that the server isn't using the same DNS server
> > as the workstation, Server is using 127.0.0.1 and the workstation is using
> > 192.168.0.10. Now I'm guessing that the reason you can still browse the
> > Internet on the server is that during the domain setup it setup DNS on the
> > server itself and it's probably configured to forward to either 192.168.0.10
> > or something on the Internet.
> >
> > Yes, 192.168.0.10 which is the router, and the router forwards to the
> > appropriate remote ISP DNS servers for proper resolve.
> >
> > Is the workstation a member of the same domain as the server (knight-tech2)?
> > Not sure what you mean there.
> >
> > Do you have 2 NICs in the server by any chance, if not then no big deal?
> > Just 1.
> >
> > You can also probable ping and get some degree of name resolution b/c you're
> > on a flat LAN meaning that everything on the 192.168.0.0/24 network can
> > broadcast for NetBIOS and they will get a response b/c there isn't anything
> > to stop them. Not a bad thing but not ideal either.
> >
> > I understand that, I normally turn off any unused processes and features to
> > improve security and performance unless while troubleshooting.
> >
> > In general terms the way this should work is that your server(s) provide
> > pretty much all your network services except (switching, routing (unless your
> > using ISA or RRAS)), so you want to configure DNS, DHCP (and WINS if you
> > really need it, if you are AD and W2K or higher you shouldn't need WINS). So
> > a client gets DHCP from the server and the DHCP info should include:
> >
> > 1) Default GW
> > 2) DNS Server
> >
> > The DHCP and DNS is handled via the router which has DHCP server built-in,
> > this is how the clients get their internal/LAN/private network IP address
> > assignments. 192.168.0.100, 192.168.0.101, etc.
> >
> > Try creating a shared printer or share a directory and see if you can see
> > that by browsing \\servername\
> >
> > This is exactly the problem I am trying to find solution for, I have folders
> > shared and can see them on the main server, however, the clients/workstations
> > cannot see the shares on the server, likewise the computers do not show up in
> > network neighborhood.
> >
> > In other words, on server I see this:
> > knight-tech
> > knight-tech2
> > X:\Shared Folder
> > Y:\Shared Folder2
> > Z:\Shared Folder3
> >
> > On client/workstation I see this:
> > Mshome
.

Relevant Pages