Mapping drive error
Christopher R. Hertel
crh at nts.umn.edu
Tue Jun 15 18:11:55 GMT 1999
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
More information about the samba-technical
mailing list