[jcifs] problem with NbtAddress.getAllByAddress()

[ashish]

yep, this seems to work..
and i have got the answer to my own query regarding hex code.It is 16th byte
in the name.

Thanks


----- Original Message -----
From: Allen, Michael B (RSCH) <Michael_B_Allen at ml.com>
To: 'ashish' <ashishn at ntechra.com>; <crh at ubiqx.mn.org>
Cc: <jcifs at samba.org>
Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2002 3:45 PM
Subject: RE: [jcifs] problem with NbtAddress.getAllByAddress()


> Here Ashish, try this jar:
>
>   http://users.erols.com/mballen/jcifs-0.6.3uni.jar
>
> Does it solve your problem?
>
> Mike
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: ashish [SMTP:ashishn at ntechra.com]
> > Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2002 6:23 PM
> > To: crh at ubiqx.mn.org
> > Cc: jcifs at samba.org
> > Subject: Re: [jcifs] problem with NbtAddress.getAllByAddress()
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > I was just looking around different implemenations of netbios name query
> > request.
> > I came across samba's implementation.
> > http://samba.org/doxygen/samba/2.2/namequery_8c-source.html
> >
> > Here, code does set all flags to false in " name_status_query() "
function.
> >
> > Ok, I have one more query. I am not able to figure out how the hex code
> > related to name is populated.
> > Please help me out here...
> >
> > Thanks,
> > ashish
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Christopher R. Hertel <crh at ubiqx.mn.org>
> > To: ashish <ashishn at ntechra.com>
> > Cc: <jcifs at samba.org>
> > Sent: Monday, May 13, 2002 2:49 PM
> > Subject: Re: [jcifs] problem with NbtAddress.getAllByAddress()
> >
> >
> > > Sigh.
> > >
> > > Look, I'm sure this all makes sense in your mind, but you are
providing
> > > this information without context.  I can break down your hex string,
but
> > > only because I'm steeped in NBT lore at this point.
> > >
> > > Sigh...
> > >
> > > \xa2\x48  Transaction ID
> > > \x00\x00  Query request, with all flags false.
> > > \x00\x01  QD_COUNT = 1
> > > \x00\x00
> > > \x00\x00
> > > \x00\x00
> > > \x20\x43\x4b\x41\x41\x41\x41\x41\x41\x41\x41\x41\x41\x41\x41\x41\x41
> > > \x41\x41\x41\x41\x41\x41\x41\x41\x41\x41\x41\x41\x41\x41\x41\x41\x00
> > > Name = "*\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0", Suffix = '\0'
> > > \x00\x21  Q_TYPE  = NBSTAT
> > > \x00\x01  Q_CLASS = IN
> > >
> > >
> > > Okay, the only potential differences I see are that jCIFS seems to be
> > > generating a query with RD and B set.  These should be clear, to be
> > > RFC-correct.  (Note: the RFCs have a typo that makes this unclear.
> > > RFC1002:4.2.17 shows the B flag in the NBSTAT query packet.  It should
> > > show zero.)
> > >
> > > I have my own testing tools, and I can send NBSTAT queries with these
bits
> > > turned on.  I have no trouble with W/95 and W/98 boxes.  I don't have
XP
> > > to test, however.
> > >
> > > There is no reason that a system would pay attention to these bits,
> > > *unless* (to speed things up) someone were to write code that simply
reads
> > > the entire two-byte flags field as a single short int.  This would be
very
> > > fast, particularly since you wouldn't need to covert to/from network
byte
> > > order.  Just read the two bytes.  Microsoft may have done something
like
> > > this in newer code.  Again, I cannot test this right now.
> > >
> > > 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
> > > OnLineBook -- http://ubiqx.org/cifs/    -)-----   crh at ubiqx.org
> >
> >
>