Mapping drive error

[Christopher R. Hertel]

Roberto,

> I hope that addresing this mail directly to you is not an inconvenience. If
> so, please forgive me.

Not a problem, though you might get better results from the list as a whole.

> Well, I mapped both ports. As a matter of fact, I allowed any kind of
> traffic between the W95 box and the samba server. And, as I said in a latter
> posting, I use the lmhosts file for name resolution. So I am force to
> discard name resolution issues.

LMHosts is *supposed* to work on its own, but I'm not sure that it does in
all cases.  Samba is fine without the name service, but I have a
department that is trying to run Samba without running nmbd and they are
also reporting that some systems cannot connect.  It is *possible* that
some Windows code needs to talk to port UDP/137 (or UDP/138-though I doubt
it) in order to complete a connection.  Anyway, I want to know if this is 
a possibility before I try digging any further.

> Latter I allowed only TCP/139. The packet trace is a bit odd, but since the
> smblient (on another samba server in the same subnet as the W95 box)  was
> able to connect without a problem, I am inclined to think that it was some
> kind of misunderstanding between W95 and Samba.

I don't understand.  Did opening your firewall fix the problem?

> It is the strange message W95 pop-ups what it's bothering me. I would like
> to know what it does means.

Tell me once again what the message is.

> Well, when I know what is happening I would make a ***huge*** report to the
> lost.

That would be great!

> Thanks for your time.
> 
> Bets regards
> 
> 
> Roberto Lopez
> rrln at esegi.es

Chris -)-----

-- 
             -- I have a shoehorn, the kind with teeth. --
                                  ---
Christopher R. Hertel -)-----                   University of Minnesota
crh at nts.umn.edu              Networking and Telecommunications Services