[jcifs] no name with type 0x00 with no scope for host

[Christopher R.Hertel]

> > In any case, the error message is somewhat confusing since the suffix
> > byte is not significant when doing a NODE STATUS REQUEST using the
> > wildcard name.  It is "okay" that no name with type 0x00 was found.  The
> > other node might have an 0x20 and an 0x03 name or other names.
> > 
> 	You're knowlege of the protocol is getting in your way. All the query says is "I'm
> 	looking for a name with type 0x00 at host 10.0.100.114 without scope". That's it.
> 	The response in this case was "Nope, no name with type 0x00 at 10.0.100.114
> 	without scope, sorry".

In a sense, the wildcard name doesn't have a suffix.  It's a 16-byte
constant string defined before Microsoft added the suffix byte concept.  
It doesn't use standard padding either.

> > I think this is why I got spun off on the whole "WindowsXP doesn't
> > register the 0x00 name" tangent.  From the error message, I thought that the
> > code was actually, really, truly looking for an 0x00 name.
> > 
> 	It is. It does a NODE_STATUS_REQUEST using the wild card "*\0\0\0\0\0..." name
> 	with a hex code of 0x00 and type of NBSTAT to port 137 of the specified IP. If no
> 	response comes back you get:
> 
> 	UnknownHostException: no name with type 0x00 with no scope for host 10.0.100.114

By specifying that "no name with type 0x00" was found, it suggests that
the query was specifically looking for a name with that suffix, and that
it may have missed other names.

You're right that in my case it is my knowledge of the protocol and the
environment that lead me astray.  I still think that the particular error
message is misleading.  If a "real" name and suffix are specified, then
I'd want to see "name <name> with suffix <suffix> and scope <scope> was
not found".  If the wildcard name is used, then I would like to see "no
status response from host <ip address>".  Or something along those lines.

This is all minor stuff, though.  I'm not too worried about it.  The only
reason it came up at all is because I was confused by the error message in
the first place.  Now that I know what you're trying to convey I don't
think it's a big deal.

Of course, we still don't know what's going on in Ashish's case.

Chris -)-----

--
Samba Team -- http://www.samba.org/     -)-----   Christopher R. Hertel
jCIFS Team -- http://jcifs.samba.org/   -)-----   ubiqx development, uninq.
ubiqx Team -- http://www.ubiqx.org/     -)-----   crh at ubiqx.mn.org