|
|||||||
![]() |
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
|
|
#1 |
|
Member (10 bit)
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Buffalo NY
Posts: 512
|
"Not accessible" & "Network path not found" messages
Two boxes, both w/ XP Pro, both have same username and workgroup ID (not that it matters), both are setup up for simple file sharing on all drives and both go to a router.
Both have internet access, box one can 'see' both computers, box two can't 'see' either computer and neither can see one another. I can 'ping' the router on both, I can ping eaches own address, but can't neither can ping one another. How can you not see your own address under 'View workgroup computers'? What's wrong? |
|
|
|
|
|
#2 |
|
Forum Administrator
Staff
Premium Member
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Joplin MO
Posts: 36,467
|
1. http://forum.pcmech.com/showthread.php?t=165490
2. Make sure file and print sharing is enabled in the Windows firewall exception list on both computers - and uninstall any 3rd party firewall. If you are using a 3rd party firewall, you must disable the Windows firewall and configure the 3rd party properly. Most commercial 3rd party firewalls can be configured properly, but freebies can be more difficult, if even possible. For example, Zone Alarm Free requires you put the whole router subnet in the trusted zone *and* the Internet firewall dropped down to Medium protection. What I do to get around this is install NetBEUI for file sharing, then I can leave ZA at defaults. |
|
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
Member (10 bit)
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Buffalo NY
Posts: 512
|
I'm using Kaspersky Antivirus V6, I'm NOT using Windows Firewall (it's disabled).
I'll look that over. |
|
|
|
|
|
#4 |
|
Forum Administrator
Staff
Premium Member
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Joplin MO
Posts: 36,467
|
If you don't want to keep screwing around, install NetBEUI. If it doesn't work you have a core OS issue with one or both of the computers.
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/301041 |
|
|
|
|
|
#5 |
|
Member (10 bit)
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Buffalo NY
Posts: 512
|
That link refers to Home & Pro. I only have Pro running.
Both boxes have passwords. File & Printer Sharing is enabled. Why NetBEUI?? Last edited by videobruce; 02-29-2008 at 07:48 AM. |
|
|
|
|
|
#6 |
|
Forum Administrator
Staff
Premium Member
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Joplin MO
Posts: 36,467
|
The second link explains how to install NetBEUI on *any* version of XP. The first link was for you to review and see if anything in it applied.
Why? NetBEUI is an old protocol, it predates TCP/IP in Microsoft networkable operating systems. It has NetBIOS incorporated, it requires NO configuration, it is NOT Internet-capable, it's secure, it just WORKS. It was made for simple LAN file and print sharing. It's one of those old school things that is being abandoned, but it still has its uses. The only downside to its use is it's quite "chatty" and will degrade LAN performance when you get more than 4 or 5 systems up and talking to each other. I use it on my LAN because I don't feel like messing with TCP/IP issues with firewalls, etc. Whenever you use TCP/IP for filesharing on a LAN, you have potential exposure to the outside world that needs to be properly secured. My machines have both TCP/IP and NetBEUI installed, the TCP/IP works for the Internet and NetBEUI works for LAN filesharing - I have NetBIOS over TCP/IP disabled - bingo, my LAN shares are effectively invisible to the Internet. Here's a long read for you: http://www.grc.com/su-explain.htm It was written before Win2K/XP, but its basic principles still apply. In XP, you can accomplish essentially the same thing by simply disabling NetBIOS over TCP/IP. This is done in TCP/IP properties, advanced, WINS tab. In a nutshell, I'm not necessarily telling you to install NetBEUI, but it's a easy thing to do to try to get filesharing working when it's not cooperating, and it has its security advantages. |
|
|
|
|
|
#7 | ||
|
Member (10 bit)
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Buffalo NY
Posts: 512
|
Quote:
I also tried my Laptop that has a unmodified version of XP installed and there are no issues there. Box 1 that work either way thoiugh I find Box 1 to be slow in reconizing the Laptop where the Laptop 'sees' the network much faster. Box 1 & 2 have a nLite complied version of XP Pro, the Laptop just has a XP Pro w/sp2 slipstreamed. Before you ask, I did look over the services and don't see any issues. Other than the 'slower' response of Box 1 compared to what it should be, both used the same CD. Quote:
Last edited by videobruce; 03-01-2008 at 08:17 AM. |
||
|
|
|
|
|
#8 |
|
Member (10 bit)
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Buffalo NY
Posts: 512
|
How about the SAME identical MAC address on BOTH MBs' ethernet controller???
I switched to the 2nd controller on one box (w/ a different address from the first controller) and all is AOK. I thought every ethernet device (even the same model) had a different address?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#9 |
|
Forum Administrator
Staff
Premium Member
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Joplin MO
Posts: 36,467
|
I'll have to remember that!
|
|
|
|
|
|
#10 |
|
Member (10 bit)
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Buffalo NY
Posts: 512
|
The temporary solution is to use the 2nd adapter on the 2nd MB w/ the different address.
The manufacture suppects a corrupted bios and suggested re-flashing both MBs', but directly in DOS, not through Windows which I did the first time using their "LiveUpdate". Anyway, how could the addresses from one MB transfer to another? The only common link is the router. There are stickers on the MB w/ each address, but not in hexdecimal and all four addresses are different. |
|
|
|
![]() |
| Bookmarks |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|