Re: Page Cannot Be Displayed
From: Ken (Ken_at_discussions.microsoft.com)
Date: 08/11/04
- Next message: Mal Osborne: "Re: Keep old domain"
- Previous message: Mal Osborne: "Re: Exchange log files are not purged"
- In reply to: Les Connor [SBS MVP]: "Re: Page Cannot Be Displayed"
- Next in thread: Ken: "Re: Page Cannot Be Displayed"
- Reply: Ken: "Re: Page Cannot Be Displayed"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 05:17:02 -0700
I appreciate the line Les,,,confusing? it sounds confusing, because IT IS
confusing <smile>...Yep, thing is, we can't figure out why it works for some
clients and not others (for instance those links fail if I try them now).
As a IT guy, ya know I hated posting specific info, but things are so
jacked, if someone "breaks in" they are doing better than us <sheez>,
besides, these are test boxes, no real production stuff is on em, and we will
obviously change things and wrap em up at "go-live"...
There is no real relationship between the domains, just a relationship
between users, hence some access to each is maintained by common users
(different log-ins). the common equipment & service ISP is a coincedental
function of availability and the person ordering the stuff (nice coincidence
for TS however)...
I'm about to test using that KB artical now...thX
"Les Connor [SBS MVP]" wrote:
> 159211 Diagnoses and Treatment of Black Hole Routers
> http://support.microsoft.com/?id=159211
>
> What is the MTU set to on the router ?
>
> --
> Les Connor [SBS MVP]
> -------------------------------------
> SBS Rocks !
>
>
>
> "Les Connor [SBS MVP]" <les.connor@DEL.cfive.ca> wrote in message
> news:O8FEv7yfEHA.2848@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> > Did you fix something?
> >
> > I can connect to both these servers and the link to the RWW works, and
> > they provide certificates that look ok. (I really don't know why you'd
> > publish your default web site, though ;-/)
> >
> > It appears that the problem isn't on the servers, and doesn't exist
> > between where I sit and the servers. Hope that helps.
> >
> > Have you tested for a black-hole router (MTU size).
> >
> > --
> > Les Connor [SBS MVP]
> > -------------------------------------
> > SBS Rocks !
> >
> >
> >
> > "Les Connor [SBS MVP]" <les.connor@DEL.cfive.ca> wrote in message
> > news:OWdBkwyfEHA.4092@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> >> It all looks very confusing to an outsider ;-/.
> >>
> >> Are these two sbs installations related to each other in any way? If
> >> they're in separate physical locations and can and do exist
> >> independently, I'd suggest reducing the description down to one network
> >> and working on it.
> >>
> >> I do have a question or two, though. These Netopia routers, do they have
> >> lan and wan interfaces, with IP's assigned to them. I'm not sure I
> >> understand the reason for the IP addressing on the external nic - sorry
> >> if you explained it somewhere.
> >>
> >> Another approach may be to test your connectivity within the lan,
> >> completely - ensuring all resources are accessible. Once that is proven,
> >> then if external access is not right at least we have an idea of where to
> >> look.
> >>
> >> --
> >> Les Connor [SBS MVP]
> >> -------------------------------------
> >> SBS Rocks !
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> "Ken" <Ken@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> >> news:F7A79D08-4ABC-469D-BE65-4AA7201FC9E9@microsoft.com...
> >>> OH and BTW, I've been reading post about this issue on more than a few
> >>> sites
> >>> (just plain ole due dillegence)...while misery loves company, I'm
> >>> starting to
> >>> wonder if something else is amiss, that DNS packet size issue may not be
> >>> the
> >>> culprit...
> >>> has anyone actually resolved this issue? If so I could'nt find any
> >>> followup
> >>> (or thank you's <smile>)...Again any help appreciated
> >>>
> >>> "Ken" wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Just for clarity (xcuse the long post), here is a clearer picture of
> >>>> what is
> >>>> going on:
> >>>> 1) A XP Home machine serviced by SBC (Ameritech) can connect to:
> >>>> http://400sc.mergerx.net AND https://400sc.mergerx.net/remote, and
> >>>> log-on w/o
> >>>> issue. It cannot connect to http://thg-server.tophatgolf.com (page
> >>>> cannot be
> >>>> displayed)
> >>>>
> >>>> 2) A NT Workstation (at Cleveland Clinic) can connect to:
> >>>> http://400sc.mergerx.net , https://400sc.mergerx.net/remote AND to
> >>>> http://thg-server.tophatgolf.com, it can also log on w/o issue...
> >>>>
> >>>> 3) A XP pro machine serviced by SBC (Ameritech) cannot connect to:
> >>>> http://400sc.mergerx.net, https//400sc.mergerx.net/remote, or
> >>>> http://thg-server.tophatgolf.com. HOWEVER, it can connect to all
> >>>> websites via
> >>>> AOL (using SBC's DSL broadband), although log-on to RWW fails (page
> >>>> cannot be
> >>>> displayed)
> >>>>
> >>>> 4) Workstations connected locally to EITHER domain (Tophatgolf.local OR
> >>>> Mergerx.local) on either network cannot connect to either remote
> >>>> servers
> >>>> website: (http://THG-Server.tophatgolf.com OR
> >>>> http://400sc.mergerx.net).
> >>>> however they can get the servers homepage and logon to the respective
> >>>> servers
> >>>> (when physically on the same network)..note: local workstations
> >>>> belonging to
> >>>> each domain all have XP Pro
> >>>>
> >>>> 5) We have physically moved thg-server.tophatgolf.com to the /29
> >>>> network
> >>>> 68.21.227.161 (gw x.x.x.166), once there, SOME pages could be resolved
> >>>> (for
> >>>> workstation in example #1). Obviously we ran the ICW again for this
> >>>> particular sub-net
> >>>>
> >>>> Noteworthy. both /29 networks use SBCglobal as the ISP; same service
> >>>> level,
> >>>> same Netopia routers. NAT, DHCP is disabled, basically, all firewall
> >>>> functions of the router are disabled, and we have compared each routers
> >>>> settings page by page. We have likewise compared DHCP, DNS, & Remote
> >>>> Access
> >>>> page by page. I am a experience netAdmin (15yrs)..I'm stumped. Named
> >>>> servers
> >>>> are 206.141.193.55 & 66.73.20.40 (both networks)
> >>>>
> >>>> -I've checked certificates, trusted sites, you name it..I'm baffled.
> >>>> topology is simple, DSL router (netopia) > NIC #1 Switch> NIC #2 and
> >>>> workstations
> >>>>
> >>>> here are the IP config's:
> >>>>
> >>>> Windows IP Configuration
> >>>>
> >>>> Host Name . . . . . . . . . . . . : 400SC
> >>>> Primary Dns Suffix . . . . . . . : MergeRX.local
> >>>> Node Type . . . . . . . . . . . . : Unknown
> >>>> IP Routing Enabled. . . . . . . . : Yes
> >>>> WINS Proxy Enabled. . . . . . . . : Yes
> >>>> DNS Suffix Search List. . . . . . : MergeRX.local
> >>>>
> >>>> Ethernet adapter Network Connection:
> >>>>
> >>>> Connection-specific DNS Suffix . :
> >>>> Description . . . . . . . . . . . : Intel(R) PRO/1000 MT Network
> >>>> Connection
> >>>> Physical Address. . . . . . . . . : 00-11-11-1F-78-F9
> >>>> DHCP Enabled. . . . . . . . . . . : No
> >>>> IP Address. . . . . . . . . . . . : 68.21.227.165
> >>>> Subnet Mask . . . . . . . . . . . : 255.0.0.0
> >>>> Default Gateway . . . . . . . . . : 68.21.227.166
> >>>> DNS Servers . . . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.1.3
> >>>> Primary WINS Server . . . . . . . : 192.168.1.3
> >>>> NetBIOS over Tcpip. . . . . . . . : Disabled
> >>>>
> >>>> Ethernet adapter Server Local Area Connection:
> >>>>
> >>>> Connection-specific DNS Suffix . :
> >>>> Description . . . . . . . . . . . : Realtek RTL8139 Family PCI Fast
> >>>> Ethernet
> >>>> NIC
> >>>> Physical Address. . . . . . . . . : 00-30-BD-2E-C1-BE
> >>>> DHCP Enabled. . . . . . . . . . . : No
> >>>> IP Address. . . . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.1.3
> >>>> Subnet Mask . . . . . . . . . . . : 255.255.255.0
> >>>> Default Gateway . . . . . . . . . :
> >>>> DNS Servers . . . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.1.3
> >>>> Primary WINS Server . . . . . . . : 192.168.1.3
> >>>>
> >>>> AND for the 2nd Server:
> >>>>
> >>>> Windows IP Configuration
> >>>>
> >>>> Host Name . . . . . . . . . . . . : thg-server
> >>>> Primary Dns Suffix . . . . . . . : TopHatGolf.local
> >>>> Node Type . . . . . . . . . . . . : Unknown
> >>>> IP Routing Enabled. . . . . . . . : Yes
> >>>> WINS Proxy Enabled. . . . . . . . : Yes
> >>>> DNS Suffix Search List. . . . . . : TopHatGolf.local
> >>>>
> >>>> Ethernet adapter Network Connection:
> >>>>
> >>>> Connection-specific DNS Suffix . :
> >>>> Description . . . . . . . . . . . : Realtek RTL8139 Family PCI Fast
> >>>> Ethernet
> >>>> NIC
> >>>> Physical Address. . . . . . . . . : 00-40-F4-99-FC-AF
> >>>> DHCP Enabled. . . . . . . . . . . : No
> >>>> IP Address. . . . . . . . . . . . : 68.76.93.146
> >>>> Subnet Mask . . . . . . . . . . . : 255.0.0.0
> >>>> Default Gateway . . . . . . . . . : 68.76.93.150
> >>>> DNS Servers . . . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.1.2
> >>>> Primary WINS Server . . . . . . . : 192.168.1.2
> >>>> NetBIOS over Tcpip. . . . . . . . : Disabled
> >>>>
> >>>> Ethernet adapter Server Local Area Connection:
> >>>>
> >>>> Connection-specific DNS Suffix . :
> >>>> Description . . . . . . . . . . . : Intel(R) PRO/1000 MT Network
> >>>> Connection
> >>>> Physical Address. . . . . . . . . : 00-C0-9F-3D-27-DA
> >>>> DHCP Enabled. . . . . . . . . . . : No
> >>>> IP Address. . . . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.1.2
> >>>> Subnet Mask . . . . . . . . . . . : 255.255.255.0
> >>>> Default Gateway . . . . . . . . . :
> >>>> DNS Servers . . . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.1.2
> >>>> Primary WINS Server . . . . . . . : 192.168.1.2
> >>>>
> >>>> We are not trying to do any trust or other complexities, it's just
> >>>> users in
> >>>> both domains need access to each domains sharepoint site. As mentioned,
> >>>> as
> >>>> far as I can tell, the assorted browsers are configured properly. We
> >>>> can
> >>>> figure out if this a browser specific issue, a OS issue, a local DNS
> >>>> issue, a
> >>>> WAN issue or what the heck..These are BRAND NEW Dell SC servers, again
> >>>> the
> >>>> OS's are darn near shrink wrapped, plain vanillia (wizard configs
> >>>> only).
> >>>> These are scheduled for production now. We can't by CAL's or anything
> >>>> w/o
> >>>> resolution...I appreciate ANY guesses..Thanks folks
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> "Marina Roos [SBS-MVP]" wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> > Hi Ken,
> >>>> >
> >>>> > Can you post the ipconfig/all from the servers? You know that XP Home
> >>>> > can't
> >>>> > join a domain, right?
> >>>> >
> >>>> > --
> >>>> > Regards,
> >>>> >
> >>>> > Marina
> >>>> > Microsoft SBS-MVP
> >>>> >
> >>>> > "Ken" <Ken@discussions.microsoft.com> schreef in bericht
> >>>> > news:078344A7-D4BC-44DF-AC9B-C9163314B0C8@microsoft.com...
> >>>> > > Urgent Mystery of Mysteries...we got 2 NEW Dell servers running SBS
> >>>> > > 2003
> >>>> > (no
> >>>> > > ISA), both have correct A records with EasyDNS, both have same DSL
> >>>> > > service
> >>>> > > with SBC, both have fixed IP's, both have same service level, both
> >>>> > > have
> >>>> > been
> >>>> > > configured "plain jane" using ICW, ect (each is regestered with a
> >>>> > different
> >>>> > > TLD with Easy DNS however). We have spent WEEKS combing through the
> >>>> > routers,
> >>>> > > IIS, ect to find ANY differences. We have re-installed SBS 2003 on
> >>>> > > both
> >>>> > > several times; yet for whatever reason we get a "page cannot be
> >>>> > > displayed"
> >>>> > > sort of "willy nilly". Some clients can connect to both (a NT
> >>>> > > workstation
> >>>> > a a
> >>>> > > hospital), some cannot connect to either using SBC, some XP Home
> >>>> > > pc's can
> >>>> > > connect to one and not the other, stranger still, the server home
> >>>> > > page
> >>>> > will
> >>>> > > work using AOL, but not SBC (same PC). Worse, we can change
> >>>> > > locations, and
> >>>> > > the issue seems to "partially" resolve (2 seperate locations using
> >>>> > different
> >>>> > > /29 networks). At this juncture, we cannot "go-live" and it is
> >>>> > > holding up
> >>>> > > business, any help APPRECIATED (I can forgoe security concerns and
> >>>> > > reveal
> >>>> > > domain, IP's, ect..whats the difference at this point?)
> >>>> >
> >>>> >
> >>>> >
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>
>
>
- Next message: Mal Osborne: "Re: Keep old domain"
- Previous message: Mal Osborne: "Re: Exchange log files are not purged"
- In reply to: Les Connor [SBS MVP]: "Re: Page Cannot Be Displayed"
- Next in thread: Ken: "Re: Page Cannot Be Displayed"
- Reply: Ken: "Re: Page Cannot Be Displayed"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
