f



Help needed RISC OS and Windows XP Pro

Hi all,

On my home network I have the following computers, a SARiscPC(RISC OS
4.29/Samba/LanMan98), a ThinkPad(WindowsXP Pro/NTFS format) and another
Laptop(Windows ME/FAT32).

Both Laptops can see/access the RiscPC and each other. But the RiscPC
can only access the ME Laptop. When I try accessing XPPro from the
RiscPC I get an Access Denied message from LanMan98(V1.17).

TCP/IP is manually configured (as DHCP doesn't seem to work on RISC OS
4.29) and XP Firewall is switched off.

Any ideas?

Also, when sharing folders on XP Pro is it possible to turn on an access
password like you can on Windows ME?


Adam
-- 
Adam Wilde
StrongARM RISC OS 4.29 RiscPC User
0
Adam
12/6/2003 4:38:08 AM
comp.sys.acorn.networking 1780 articles. 0 followers. Post Follow

28 Replies
581 Views

Similar Articles

[PageSpeed] 48

In message <11d1615c4c.amwilde@ntlworld.com>
          Adam Wilde <awilde@ntlworld.com> wrote:

> On my home network I have the following computers, a SARiscPC(RISC OS
> 4.29/Samba/LanMan98), a ThinkPad(WindowsXP Pro/NTFS format) and another
> Laptop(Windows ME/FAT32).
> 
> Both Laptops can see/access the RiscPC and each other. But the RiscPC
> can only access the ME Laptop. When I try accessing XPPro from the
> RiscPC I get an Access Denied message from LanMan98(V1.17).

With the NT family you need a valid user name and password to connect
to shares. (And the correct permissions on the share and folder) either
use your normal user account or create another with the minimum
required rights.

(Of course XP is so different from what has gone before, this might not
apply, especially given what someone told me about connecting to XP systems
over the net - I hesitate to use the word hacking, in the same way using the
phrase breaking and entering doesn't apply to an unlocked house)

> TCP/IP is manually configured (as DHCP doesn't seem to work on RISC OS
> 4.29) 

I've noticed DHCP and lanman 98 don't seem to work together too,
perhaps we'd better report it.

> and XP Firewall is switched off.

I hope you're behind a router.

> Any ideas?
> 
> Also, when sharing folders on XP Pro is it possible to turn on an access
> password like you can on Windows ME?

-- 
Jess  icq: 91353267 msn: phantasm_39@hotmail.com     http://www.kentwebnet.com
     Hotmail is my spam trap - don't use for email
        mailto:nospam@itworkshop.uklinux.net
RISC OS 4.37 kinetic 64+128+2M Castle Storm DMA + 17GB  586-133 I-3 ADSL


-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----==  Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----
0
Jess
12/6/2003 10:12:16 AM
In message <11d1615c4c.amwilde@ntlworld.com>
          Adam Wilde <awilde@ntlworld.com> wrote:

> Hi all,
> 
> On my home network I have the following computers, a SARiscPC(RISC OS
> 4.29/Samba/LanMan98), a ThinkPad(WindowsXP Pro/NTFS format) and another
> Laptop(Windows ME/FAT32).
> 
> Both Laptops can see/access the RiscPC and each other. But the RiscPC
> can only access the ME Laptop. When I try accessing XPPro from the
> RiscPC I get an Access Denied message from LanMan98(V1.17).
> 
> TCP/IP is manually configured (as DHCP doesn't seem to work on RISC OS
> 4.29) and XP Firewall is switched off.
> 
> Any ideas?
> 
> Also, when sharing folders on XP Pro is it possible to turn on an access
> password like you can on Windows ME?


I'm totally amazed that this subject comes up several times a month and its
still not in the comp.sys.acorn.networking FAQ!

Oh hum...

Ok, in Windows 2000/XP you have to give permission to the ability to allow
people to access your computer from the network.

You need a user account (with a password) that exists in your XP to work
with Lanman98 and it should probably also be in the Administrators group
(at least to start off with).

Some people just use the default Administrator account or they're own
everyday login account.
(I create and use a unique account in Windows for extra security).
(Don't use an account which has a blank password, it doesn't seem to work
with Lanman98).

Once you've decided which Windows account you're going to use, you need to
add this name into the relevant policy section.

Here is where to find it:

Open Control Panel.
Open Administrative Tools.
Open Local Security policy.
Open Local Policies in left panel.
Click on 'User Rights Assignments' in left panel.
Look at the right panel.
Double click on 'Access this computer from the network'.
Add the account you've chosen.


Choose a folder you want to share.
Right click the folder and pop up the properties window.

If the folder is on a FAT32 drive then you'll only see the Shared section.

If the folder lies on a NTFS drive then you'll also see the Security
section.
Both of the sections need to include your chosen user account.

In the shared section make sure you go into the permissions section and add
your username.

In the Security section make sure you add your username and give it 'full
control' over that folder.

By default the sharing permissions is set to 'everyone' so anyone can get
access to your folder. 

Once you've got it working its best to remove this 'everyone' and just add
your 'Adminstrators' and your particular user account.
Especially if the PC has access to other computers or on the Internet.

Oh if you've switched on the internal XP firewall or got a 3rd party
firewall software program running then that will also stop Lanman98 getting
access to your PC. So turn these off until you've proven Lanman98 can get
access.

Internal 2000/XP firewall can be found here:

Open Control Panel.
Open 'Network and Dial-up connections'.
Right click the icon which is your connection and click on Properties.

Highlight the line 'Internet Protocol (TCP/IP)'
Click on Properties.
Under the General tab, click on the Advanced icon.

In XP you'll see a option 'Protect my computer or network'.
When its ON, so is your XP firewall.

In Win2000 you look in the Options tab and TCP/IP filtering properties.
When this is set to 'Permit all' in the 3 columns and the 'Enable TCP/IP
filtering' is ON then the firewall is OFF.



future goggle search phrase : lanman98xp 


-- 
Stuart Halliday
The Acorn Cybervillage
http://acorn.cybervillage.co.uk/
Support us - http://www.cafepress.com/AcornCV/
 Remove 'takeoutthisbit' to reply to my mail.
0
Stuart
12/6/2003 11:06:29 AM
In article <165f855c4c.stuart@stuarthalliday.takeoutthisbit.com.invalid>,
   Stuart Halliday <stuart@stuarthalliday.takeoutthisbit.com.invalid> wrote:
> In message <11d1615c4c.amwilde@ntlworld.com>
>           Adam Wilde <awilde@ntlworld.com> wrote:

> > Hi all,
> > 
> > On my home network I have the following computers, a SARiscPC(RISC OS
> > 4.29/Samba/LanMan98), a ThinkPad(WindowsXP Pro/NTFS format) and another
> > Laptop(Windows ME/FAT32).
> > 
> > Both Laptops can see/access the RiscPC and each other. But the RiscPC
> > can only access the ME Laptop. When I try accessing XPPro from the
> > RiscPC I get an Access Denied message from LanMan98(V1.17).
> > 
> > TCP/IP is manually configured (as DHCP doesn't seem to work on RISC OS
> > 4.29) and XP Firewall is switched off.
> > 
> > Any ideas?
> > 
> > Also, when sharing folders on XP Pro is it possible to turn on an access
> > password like you can on Windows ME?


> I'm totally amazed that this subject comes up several times a month
[snip] 

Indeed it does - and for some of us the problem still exists :(

I have had a lot of help over a number of months (thank you to all who have)
and yet still get 'session refused 0x82' (or 0x80 when using the host name
not number) when trying RPC LM98 1.21 to XPPro laptop.

No problem RPC accessing the W98 computer and no problem W98 computer
acessing the XP laptop. 

I have spent very many hours on this. One person who contacted me said he had
not had any success in the last year, despite similar help from lots of
people/RO companies.

Perhaps it is something simple. I don't know.
 
Cheers 
 Steve

0
CleckheatonFolkFesti
12/6/2003 1:46:03 PM
In article <4c5c93fac5cff@cobbles-end.co.uk>, CleckheatonFolkFestival
<URL:mailto:cff@cobbles-end.co.uk> wrote:
[snip]
> Perhaps it is something simple. I don't know.

Firewall enabled on the XP machine?

-- 
       _          .-----------------------------------------------.
 __ __| |_ __ __  |   NB: When replying, please remove "invalid"  |
/ _/ _` \ V  V /  |  in the address. I am trying more and more    |
\__\__,_|\_/\_/   |__      suggestions to foil spammers        ___|

0
Chris
12/6/2003 5:22:12 PM
In article <5d68805c4c.news@itworkshop.invalid>,
   Jess <phantasm_39@hotmail.com> wrote:

> I hope you're behind a router.


As in firewall plus router I presume?

A simple router is nice and transparent.

0
Steven
12/6/2003 5:23:55 PM
In article <ant0617120b0+gH=@Florida.my.home>,
   Chris Walker <chris_news@wymondham.demon.co.uk.invalid> wrote:
> In article <4c5c93fac5cff@cobbles-end.co.uk>, CleckheatonFolkFestival
> <URL:mailto:cff@cobbles-end.co.uk> wrote:
> [snip]
> > Perhaps it is something simple. I don't know.

> Firewall enabled on the XP machine?

No, not this.
Stuart's instructions mentioned this (as did many other people over the last
few months).

Perhaps it's not something simple...?!!
 
The frustrating thing is that I can use !UniPrint, !VNC, ping, etc.
I've tried a crossover cable and also with both connected through a switch.
Just can't access files/directories.

Cheers 
 Steve

0
CleckheatonFolkFesti
12/6/2003 6:08:32 PM
On 6 Dec, CleckheatonFolkFestival <cff@cobbles-end.co.uk> wrote:

[snip]
>   The frustrating thing is that I can use !UniPrint, !VNC, ping, etc.
> I've tried a crossover cable and also with both connected through a
> switch. Just can't access files/directories.
> 
A couple of things which may not have been mentioned - on the PC go to
Control Panel and open Network - do you have File and Printer Sharing
enabled?

You have actually set at least one folder as "Shared" in Properties,
presumably?
-- 
Brian Howlett
-------------------------------------
Champagne for our real friends!
And real pain for our sham friends...
0
Brian
12/6/2003 9:26:59 PM
Have you thought of running an FTP server on the XP box?
It should at least allow some kind of access to the files on the XP box.
I did this with a stubborn XP box and linux, it worked very well.

John Lahr

"Brian Howlett" <Brian_Howlett@btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:c52dbe5c4c.Brian@btinternet.com...
> On 6 Dec, CleckheatonFolkFestival <cff@cobbles-end.co.uk> wrote:
>
> [snip]
> >   The frustrating thing is that I can use !UniPrint, !VNC, ping, etc.
> > I've tried a crossover cable and also with both connected through a
> > switch. Just can't access files/directories.
> >
> A couple of things which may not have been mentioned - on the PC go to
> Control Panel and open Network - do you have File and Printer Sharing
> enabled?
>
> You have actually set at least one folder as "Shared" in Properties,
> presumably?
> -- 
> Brian Howlett
> -------------------------------------
> Champagne for our real friends!
> And real pain for our sham friends...


0
John
12/6/2003 10:14:56 PM
In message <4c5ca7ece5steve.pampling@argonet.co.uk>
          Steven Pampling <steve.pampling@argonet.co.uk> wrote:

> In article <5d68805c4c.news@itworkshop.invalid>,
>    Jess <phantasm_39@hotmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > I hope you're behind a router.
> 
> 
> As in firewall plus router I presume?
> 
> A simple router is nice and transparent.

NAT router is what I was thinking of, since there are several machines
in use.

-- 
Jess  icq: 91353267 msn: phantasm_39@hotmail.com     http://www.kentwebnet.com
     Hotmail is my spam trap - don't use for email
        mailto:nospam@itworkshop.uklinux.net
RISC OS 4.37 kinetic 64+128+2M Castle Storm DMA + 17GB  586-133 I-3 ADSL


-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----==  Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----
0
Jess
12/6/2003 11:18:53 PM
In article <716cc85c4c.news@itworkshop.invalid>,
   Jess <phantasm_39@hotmail.com> wrote:
> In message <4c5ca7ece5steve.pampling@argonet.co.uk>
>           Steven Pampling <steve.pampling@argonet.co.uk> wrote:

> > In article <5d68805c4c.news@itworkshop.invalid>,
> >    Jess <phantasm_39@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > 
> > > I hope you're behind a router.
 
> > As in firewall plus router I presume?
 
> > A simple router is nice and transparent.

> NAT router is what I was thinking of, since there are several machines
> in use.

I think I know what you mean, but NAT is just IP address translation and
doesn't block hacking.

0
Steven
12/7/2003 9:42:23 AM
In message <4c5d0181f6steve.pampling@argonet.co.uk>
          Steven Pampling <steve.pampling@argonet.co.uk> wrote:

> In article <716cc85c4c.news@itworkshop.invalid>,
>    Jess <phantasm_39@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > In message <4c5ca7ece5steve.pampling@argonet.co.uk>
> >           Steven Pampling <steve.pampling@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
> 
> > > In article <5d68805c4c.news@itworkshop.invalid>,
> > >    Jess <phantasm_39@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > 
> > > > I hope you're behind a router.
>  
> > > As in firewall plus router I presume?
>  
> > > A simple router is nice and transparent.
> 
> > NAT router is what I was thinking of, since there are several machines
> > in use.
> 
> I think I know what you mean, but NAT is just IP address translation and
> doesn't block hacking.

Yes it does, if you are making an entire network appear as one IP
address, where will a request for a port on the external ip end up?

-- 
Jess  icq: 91353267 msn: phantasm_39@hotmail.com     http://www.kentwebnet.com
     Hotmail is my spam trap - don't use for email
        mailto:nospam@itworkshop.uklinux.net
RISC OS 4.37 kinetic 64+128+2M Castle Storm DMA + 17GB  586-133 I-3 ADSL


-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----==  Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----
0
Jess
12/7/2003 12:13:19 PM
In article <c52dbe5c4c.Brian@btinternet.com>,
   Brian Howlett <Brian_Howlett@btinternet.com> wrote:
> On 6 Dec, CleckheatonFolkFestival <cff@cobbles-end.co.uk> wrote:

> [snip]
> >   The frustrating thing is that I can use !UniPrint, !VNC, ping, etc.
> > I've tried a crossover cable and also with both connected through a
> > switch. Just can't access files/directories.
> > 
> A couple of things which may not have been mentioned - on the PC go to
> Control Panel and open Network - do you have File and Printer Sharing
> enabled?
Yes
> You have actually set at least one folder as "Shared" in Properties,
> presumably?
Yes

Any suggestion's worth following up.
 
Many thanks
 
Cheers 
 Steve

0
CleckheatonFolkFesti
12/7/2003 1:08:17 PM
In article <OxsAb.1$tH2.3324@news.dircon.co.uk>,
   John Lahr <lw00jel@brunel.ac.uk> wrote:
> Have you thought of running an FTP server on the XP box?
> It should at least allow some kind of access to the files on the XP box.
> I did this with a stubborn XP box and linux, it worked very well.

I heard that some people have similar problems with Linux.

How do I do that then?
 
Cheers 
 Steve

> John Lahr

> "Brian Howlett" <Brian_Howlett@btinternet.com> wrote in message
> news:c52dbe5c4c.Brian@btinternet.com...
> > On 6 Dec, CleckheatonFolkFestival <cff@cobbles-end.co.uk> wrote:
> >
> > [snip]
> > >   The frustrating thing is that I can use !UniPrint, !VNC, ping, etc.
> > > I've tried a crossover cable and also with both connected through a
> > > switch. Just can't access files/directories.
> > >
> > A couple of things which may not have been mentioned - on the PC go to
> > Control Panel and open Network - do you have File and Printer Sharing
> > enabled?
> >
> > You have actually set at least one folder as "Shared" in Properties,
> > presumably?
> > -- 
> > Brian Howlett
> > -------------------------------------
> > Champagne for our real friends!
> > And real pain for our sham friends...

0
CleckheatonFolkFesti
12/7/2003 1:09:30 PM
In article <73530f5d4c.news@itworkshop.invalid>, Jess
<phantasm_39@hotmail.com> wrote:
> In message <4c5d0181f6steve.pampling@argonet.co.uk> Steven Pampling
>           <steve.pampling@argonet.co.uk> wrote:

> > In article <716cc85c4c.news@itworkshop.invalid>, Jess
> >    <phantasm_39@hotmail.com> wrote:
>  
> > > NAT router is what I was thinking of, since there are several
> > > machines in use.
> > 
> > I think I know what you mean, but NAT is just IP address translation
> > and doesn't block hacking.

> Yes it does, if you are making an entire network appear as one IP
> address, where will a request for a port on the external ip end up?

In your non-firewalled router.
Have a wander around in there and see what the local IP range is and move
on in...

We use similar things at work checking routes by telneting into a box to
use telnet to another box along the route and then from that one to another
and so on.

Some "hackers" are actually script kiddies. Some know there way through
these things and will actually exploit known quirks of a firewall if they
can identify the build. 

A NAT'ed box is just a convenient stepping stone for them.

0
Steven
12/7/2003 3:14:24 PM
In message <4c5d1fe76asteve.pampling@argonet.co.uk>
          Steven Pampling <steve.pampling@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
> In article <73530f5d4c.news@itworkshop.invalid>, Jess
> <phantasm_39@hotmail.com> wrote:
[snip]

> > Yes it does, if you are making an entire network appear as one IP
> > address, where will a request for a port on the external ip end up?
> 
> In your non-firewalled router.
> Have a wander around in there and see what the local IP range is and move
> on in...

You mean hack the router itself.

> We use similar things at work checking routes by telneting into a box to
> use telnet to another box along the route and then from that one to another
> and so on.

But you can't telnet in through a NAT router unless the port has been
forwarded.

> Some "hackers" are actually script kiddies. Some know there way through
> these things and will actually exploit known quirks of a firewall if they
> can identify the build. 
> 
> A NAT'ed box is just a convenient stepping stone for them.

But it's a lot more secure than having a system where people can use
two lines at the DOS prompt to connect to your hard drive. 

-- 
Jess  icq: 91353267 msn: phantasm_39@hotmail.com     http://www.kentwebnet.com
     Hotmail is my spam trap - don't use for email
        mailto:nospam@itworkshop.uklinux.net
RISC OS 4.37 kinetic 64+128+2M Castle Storm DMA + 17GB  586-133 I-3 ADSL


-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----==  Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----
0
Jess
12/7/2003 4:44:13 PM
I have observed Stuart Halliday <stuart@stuarthalliday.takeoutthisbit.com.invalid>'s posting which said:

<snip - good description of how-to>

Waaaaghh!
My brain! My brain!

My XP laptop from work appeared to be quite different from this
description of how to set it up.
I didn't get it working; now I have the added bonus of seemingly
destroying any reference to the network at work including my login etc.
The tech-bloke at work *will* be impressed ;-)

I did warn him in advance today, though :-)
Perhaps the difficulty is that work uses DCHP on an all Windows network
whereas at home I want a different (and manually set) IP addr.

> future goggle search phrase : lanman98xp 

Not a jolly lot just yet...

*bye
-- 
Robert Greenfield

Webmonster. Sensible Solutions: RISC OS Solutions.
<theboss@webmonster.co.nz>  -  http://www.webmonster.co.nz/


-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----==  Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----
0
Robert
12/11/2003 8:44:15 AM
In article <7587b5f4c%monster@caverock.net.nz>, Robert Greenfield
<URL:mailto:monster@caverock.net.nz> wrote:
> I have observed Stuart Halliday <stuart@stuarthalliday.takeoutthisbit.com.invalid>'s p
> osting which said:
> 
> <snip - good description of how-to>
> 
> Waaaaghh!
> My brain! My brain!
> 
> My XP laptop from work appeared to be quite different from this
> description of how to set it up.

Not having read Stuart's howto, I can only guess that your work setup
uses XP Pro and he was talking about XP Home.

> I didn't get it working; now I have the added bonus of seemingly
> destroying any reference to the network at work including my login etc.
> The tech-bloke at work *will* be impressed ;-)

Ensure you leave it with a note when he's not around, and keep some
cooling pads around for your ears...
> 
> I did warn him in advance today, though :-)
> Perhaps the difficulty is that work uses DCHP on an all Windows network
> whereas at home I want a different (and manually set) IP addr.

So go to the Network Control Panel for the device in question and
manually set an alternative and fixed IP address et al under the
appropriate tab. 
> 
> > future goggle search phrase : lanman98xp 
> 
> Not a jolly lot just yet...
> 
> *bye

-- 
Michael Gilbert: in his own write

OK, so there's the Trident in Bangor

0
Michael
12/11/2003 9:41:11 PM
In message <7587b5f4c%monster@caverock.net.nz>
          Robert Greenfield <monster@caverock.net.nz> wrote:

> I have observed Stuart Halliday <stuart@stuarthalliday.takeoutthisbit.com.
invalid>'s posting which said:
> 
> <snip - good description of how-to>
> 
> Waaaaghh!
> My brain! My brain!
 
> My XP laptop from work appeared to be quite different from this
> description of how to set it up.

Don't see how.

> I didn't get it working; now I have the added bonus of seemingly
> destroying any reference to the network at work including my login etc.
> The tech-bloke at work *will* be impressed ;-)

Impressed isn't the word I'd use..... ;-)

 
> I did warn him in advance today, though :-)
> Perhaps the difficulty is that work uses DCHP on an all Windows network
> whereas at home I want a different (and manually set) IP addr.

XP allows you to do both with one network connection setup..

You can have two network settings. One for static, one DHCP.

read this:
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;283676


Oh, and if the XP firewall is on then you of course can't connect to
another network unless you permit this traffic.



-- 
Stuart Halliday
The Acorn Cybervillage
http://acorn.cybervillage.co.uk/
Support us - http://www.cafepress.com/AcornCV/
 Remove 'takeoutthisbit' to reply to my mail.
0
Stuart
12/11/2003 9:47:56 PM
In article
<165f855c4c.stuart@stuarthalliday.takeoutthisbit.com.invalid>,
   Stuart Halliday
<stuart@stuarthalliday.takeoutthisbit.com.invalid> wrote:

[Snip]

> Ok, in Windows 2000/XP you have to give permission to the
> ability to allow people to access your computer from the
> network.

> You need a user account (with a password) that exists in your
> XP to work with Lanman98 and it should probably also be in the
> Administrators group (at least to start off with).

I began to hope that this detailed explanation would help me in
my struggle with Windows XP as I'm seeing it for the first time
....

[Snip]

> Once you've decided which Windows account you're going to use,
> you need to add this name into the relevant policy section.

> Here is where to find it:

> Open Control Panel.
> Open Administrative Tools.
> Open Local Security policy.
> Open Local Policies in left panel.
> Click on 'User Rights Assignments' in left panel.
> Look at the right panel.
> Double click on 'Access this computer from the network'.
> Add the account you've chosen.


> Choose a folder you want to share.
> Right click the folder and pop up the properties window.

[Snip lots more...]

..... None of this bears any resemblance to my XP Home Edition,
even after I searched for 'Local Security Policy' and as a result
followed the instructions to install a 'Snap-in', whatever that
is :-(

Are you referring to XP Professional, perhaps?


Brian.

-- 
______________________________________________________________

Brian Carroll, Ripon, North Yorkshire, UK  bric at f2s dot com
______________________________________________________________
0
Brian
12/12/2003 4:31:15 PM
In article <ant1121118689GWx@riscpc.local>, Michael Gilbert
<mgilbert@eclipse.co.uk> wrote:
> In article <7587b5f4c%monster@caverock.net.nz>, Robert
> Greenfield <URL:mailto:monster@caverock.net.nz> wrote:

[Snip]

> > .... Perhaps the difficulty is that work uses DCHP on an all
> > Windows network whereas at home I want a different (and
> > manually set) IP addr.

> So go to the Network Control Panel for the device in question
> and manually set an alternative and fixed IP address et al
> under the appropriate tab. 

My little network comprises 2 x RiscPCs RISC OS 4.37  4.02, ADSL
router and  2 PCs.  The old PC runs W98 using a fixed IP (that
was included in all the machines' 'hosts' files) and worked fine
both ways (ie, either RiscPC OK to and from the PC via
!SmbServer v0.08 and !LanMan98 v1.21). That PC is about to be
removed.

I have now linked in a new PC running Windows XP Home Edition on
exactly the same network and found similar problems to Adam
Wilde's connecting to the new machine.  Perhaps the descriptions
below might suggest solutions to his.

Eventually I found that whatever I fiddled with in the network
settings, XP insisted on using an IP address different from that
I had manually assigned (presumably DHCP?).  A result was that
Uniprint failed because one has to manually set the destination
machine's IP.  When I changed the manually-set IP in the
RiscPCs' host files to the one XP insists on using, things began
to work. :-)

Another problem was setting up the share in LanMan98, where I
found that to share the whole disc of the new PC I had to enter
"Name (C)" not just "Name".  This is actually what appears in XP
in My Computer -> Hard Disk Drives -> Name (C:) -> Properties ->
'Share this folder on the network' -> Share name,  but it's not
like this in W98.

I still have a problem :-(    Accessing RiscPC shares (whole
drives) from XP does work, but it takes ages to open a
directory. Judging from the RiscPC disc activity and Ethernet
activity lights, its as though the whole population of objects
contained in the directory is actually being read to the PC. 
W98 on the same RiscPC directory opens it immediately and
behaves in a normal filer-like manner.   In !SmbServer I have
'Null passwords', 'detect !LanMan98' and 'nameserver enabled'
all ticked, with the'NT1' protocol selected.  I have not changed
anything but do I need to?  Any suggestions for further fiddling?


Brian.

-- 
______________________________________________________________

Brian Carroll, Ripon, North Yorkshire, UK  bric at f2s dot com
______________________________________________________________
0
Brian
12/12/2003 4:34:47 PM
In message <4c5fba1e8abric_nospam@argonet.co.uk>
          Brian Carroll <bric_nospam@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
 
> ... None of this bears any resemblance to my XP Home Edition,
> even after I searched for 'Local Security Policy' and as a result
> followed the instructions to install a 'Snap-in', whatever that
> is :-(
> 
> Are you referring to XP Professional, perhaps?

Yes.

I've not got the Home edition so can't comment on how simpler it is.

Perhaps you just need to switch to the 'classic view' on the Control Panel
to see these things? I know the default view in the Control Panel is very
simple and hides a lot. When you pop up the Control Panel there should be a
classic view option on view.


-- 
Stuart Halliday
The Acorn Cybervillage
http://acorn.cybervillage.co.uk/
Support us - http://www.cafepress.com/AcornCV/
 Remove 'takeoutthisbit' to reply to my mail.
0
Stuart
12/12/2003 4:57:12 PM
In article
<aa7ebc5f4c.stuart@stuarthalliday.takeoutthisbit.com.invalid>,
   Stuart Halliday
<stuart@stuarthalliday.takeoutthisbit.com.invalid> wrote:
> In message <4c5fba1e8abric_nospam@argonet.co.uk> Brian Carroll
>           <bric_nospam@argonet.co.uk> wrote:

[Snip]

> > Are you referring to XP Professional, perhaps?

Thanks for this prompt reply, Stuart.

> Yes.

> I've not got the Home edition so can't comment on how simpler
> it is.

I suppose one would expect it to be simpler but it is still
byzantine and illogical to me, brought up on RISC OS, especially
as there seem to be multiple routes to everything :-(

Anyway it is very different and I was not able to find routes
through the maze comparable to your description, but did find
somewhere an opportunity to configure for 2 different networks.
So the functionality you explained must be there.

> Perhaps you just need to switch to the 'classic view' on the
> Control Panel to see these things? I know the default view in
> the Control Panel is very simple and hides a lot. When you pop
> up the Control Panel there should be a classic view option on
> view.

I'm already using Classic Start menu which is an option set from
Control Panel -> Taskbar and Start Menu. I must stop fiddling
about, though, until I learn more.

Brian.

-- 
______________________________________________________________

Brian Carroll, Ripon, North Yorkshire, UK  bric at f2s dot com
______________________________________________________________
0
Brian
12/12/2003 6:35:13 PM
Hi

I obtained a 'SpaceCube' PC from R-Comp to replace my PC card and run full
windows XP (Home edition). 

R-Comp had set the IP address in order that I could use their excellent
software for displaying the PC screen on my RISC PC. (Full colour and detail
- OK for everything except perhaps fast games), However my monitor,
keyboard, and PS2 mouse can be connected straight into the Spacecube if
required.

When I bought a copy of 'LanMan' for the RPC I set it up as follows:-
Server: <name>
Share C
Password <....>
Notypes: Y

I then gave files on the PC Network access as required. If you click on eg
"MyDocs" with the right mouse button and then on preferences you will be
able to tick a box which allows the folder to be shared on the network.

The significance of Notypes is that if it is YES RISCOS filetypes are not
transmitted to the PC.

If a file on RISCOS is typed as text and named xxxx/txt and Notypes is not
set to YES the filename on the PC will be xxx.txt,fff and will not be
recognised.  With the box ticked (YES) the transferred filetype is correct.

I can now transmit files both ways just as if the Spacecube disk was on my RPC.

Many thanks to R-Comp for all their help in putting me straight!!!

John





-- 
 __  __  __  __      __ ___   _____________________________________________
|__||__)/ __/  \|\ ||_   |   /
|  ||  \\__/\__/| \||__  |  /...Internet access for all Acorn RISC machines
___________________________/ mijassoft@argonet.co.uk


0
Mr
12/12/2003 8:09:59 PM
In message <aa7ebc5f4c.stuart@stuarthalliday.takeoutthisbit.com.invalid>
      Stuart Halliday <stuart@stuarthalliday.takeoutthisbit.com.invalid> wrote:

> In message <4c5fba1e8abric_nospam@argonet.co.uk>
>           Brian Carroll <bric_nospam@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
[snip]


> > Are you referring to XP Professional, perhaps?
> 
> Yes.
> 
> I've not got the Home edition so can't comment on how simpler it is.

The only time I encountered XPhome and networking, it was so poor that
the new machine was formatted and 2000 put on instead (within an hour
or so)

-- 
Jess   msn: phantasm_39@hotmail.com  icq: 91353267  
mailto:nospam@itworkshop.uklinux.net Hotmail is spamtrap, don't email it
RISC OS 4.37 kinetic 64+128+2M Castle Storm DMA + 17GB  586-133 I-3 ADSL
   http://www.itworkshop-online.co.uk     http://www.kentwebnet.com


-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----==  Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----
0
Jess
12/12/2003 10:14:25 PM
In article <c189d95f4c.news@itworkshop.invalid>, Jess
<phantasm_39@hotmail.com> wrote:
> In message
>       <aa7ebc5f4c.stuart@stuarthalliday.takeoutthisbit.com.invalid>
>       Stuart Halliday
>       <stuart@stuarthalliday.takeoutthisbit.com.invalid> wrote:

[Snip]

> > 
> > I've not got the Home edition so can't comment on how
> > simpler it is.

> The only time I encountered XPhome and networking, it was so
> poor that the new machine was formatted and 2000 put on
> instead (within an hour or so)

Thanks, that's really helpful  ;-)


Brian.

-- 
______________________________________________________________

Brian Carroll, Ripon, North Yorkshire, UK  bric at f2s dot com
______________________________________________________________
0
Brian
12/13/2003 8:58:39 AM
In article <4c5fba7195bric_nospam@argonet.co.uk>,
   Brian Carroll <bric_nospam@argonet.co.uk> wrote:

[Snip]

> My little network comprises 2 x RiscPCs RISC OS 4.37  4.02, ADSL
> router and  2 PCs.  The old PC runs W98 using a fixed IP (that
> was included in all the machines' 'hosts' files) and worked fine
> both ways (ie, either RiscPC OK to and from the PC via
> !SmbServer v0.08 and !LanMan98 v1.21). That PC is about to be
> removed.

[Snip]

> Eventually I found that whatever I fiddled with in the network
> settings, XP insisted on using an IP address different from that
> I had manually assigned (presumably DHCP?). 

If the IP it's setting is something starting with 169.254.x.x then that
falls in the IPIPA range. (From Win2k on Windows contains an automatic IP
assignment system so that network services still function if a DHCP
configured machine does not see a functioning DHCP server.)
If this is happening then clearly there is no DHCP server and the machine
isn't set for static IP

In general where people are using a router in their home network I'd
suggest they configure DHCP capable devices for DHCP and enable the DHCP
server function in the router (do any routers come without DHCP these
days?)

The RPC will clearly not do DHCP (without Select) so for a typical router
DHCP setup you'd pick say 192.168.2.1 - 192.168.2.100 for the DHCP
addresses and set the RPC to a fixed address above 2.100 (although machines
are supposed to check for clashes before taking an address and so an RPC
address of 192.168.100.10 should work quite nicely.

> Another problem was setting up the share in LanMan98, where I
> found that to share the whole disc of the new PC I had to enter
> "Name (C)" not just "Name".  This is actually what appears in XP
> in My Computer -> Hard Disk Drives -> Name (C:) -> Properties ->
> 'Share this folder on the network' -> Share name,  but it's not
> like this in W98.

All NTFS based machines produce default shares, with administrator access
rights, for the root of each drive. These are C$ for C: D$ for D: and so
on.

> I still have a problem :-(    Accessing RiscPC shares (whole
> drives) from XP does work, but it takes ages to open a
> directory. Judging from the RiscPC disc activity and Ethernet
> activity lights, its as though the whole population of objects
> contained in the directory is actually being read to the PC.

Standard for PC's I'm afraid.
We have a department that thinks thousands of files in one directory is a
good idea and that the fact that the system is slow to read anything from
that directory is because "the machine is crap" and "the network is
crap"[1]
Some of the slow down occurs because later versions of Windows check for
the security settings of shares etc Some of it is down to the indexing
functions in NTFS (2k and beyond)[2] which are supposed to speed up access
to files

[1] 100Mb to desktop. What do they want, lightspeed? Warp drive... ??

[2] It's a sort of integration of the old "findfast"[3] function into the
OS.

[3] Findfast was c*** and tended to slow down access as well as introducing
instabilities to the system. I've cured many a fault on old 9x and NT
machines with Orifice97 loaded simply by removing findfast.
IIRC removal of findfast actually made it into the MS Knowledge base as a
means of curing certain problems and speeding things up.
Anyway, the (Win2k+) integrated version seems no better.

0
Steven
12/13/2003 9:59:51 AM
In message <4c601484e7bric_nospam@argonet.co.uk>
          Brian Carroll <bric_nospam@argonet.co.uk> wrote:

> In article <c189d95f4c.news@itworkshop.invalid>, Jess
> <phantasm_39@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > In message
> >       <aa7ebc5f4c.stuart@stuarthalliday.takeoutthisbit.com.invalid>
> >       Stuart Halliday
> >       <stuart@stuarthalliday.takeoutthisbit.com.invalid> wrote:
> 
> [Snip]
> 
> > > 
> > > I've not got the Home edition so can't comment on how
> > > simpler it is.
> 
> > The only time I encountered XPhome and networking, it was so
> > poor that the new machine was formatted and 2000 put on
> > instead (within an hour or so)
> 
> Thanks, that's really helpful  ;-)

Sorry I thought that my answer impied that I have also used other
versions of XP and they weren't so limited (ie when /they/ got
formatted and upgraded to 2000, if possible, it wasn't because of the
networking deficiencies)

-- 
Jess   msn: phantasm_39@hotmail.com  icq: 91353267  
mailto:nospam@itworkshop.uklinux.net Hotmail is spamtrap, don't email it
RISC OS 4.37 kinetic 64+128+2M Castle Storm DMA + 17GB  586-133 I-3 ADSL
   http://www.itworkshop-online.co.uk     http://www.kentwebnet.com


-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----==  Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----
0
Jess
12/13/2003 10:44:57 AM
I have observed Stuart Halliday <stuart@stuarthalliday.takeoutthisbit.com.invalid>'s posting which said:

> In message <7587b5f4c%monster@caverock.net.nz>
>           Robert Greenfield <monster@caverock.net.nz> wrote:
> 
> > I have observed Stuart Halliday <stuart@stuarthalliday.takeoutthisbit.com.
> invalid>'s posting which said:

I said:

> > I didn't get it working; now I have the added bonus of seemingly
> > destroying any reference to the network at work including my login etc.
> > The tech-bloke at work *will* be impressed ;-)
> 
> Impressed isn't the word I'd use..... ;-)

Heh! Pete's a lovely bloke and just rolled his eyes a bit; all fixed
very quickly :-)

> > I did warn him in advance today, though :-)
> > Perhaps the difficulty is that work uses DCHP on an all Windows network
> > whereas at home I want a different (and manually set) IP addr.
> 
> XP allows you to do both with one network connection setup..
> 
> You can have two network settings. One for static, one DHCP.

Pete showed me the 'alternative IP setting' bit, so that bit's sorted...

> Oh, and if the XP firewall is on then you of course can't connect to
> another network unless you permit this traffic.

....and the firewall is off - at work there's a 'proper' one.

Anyway, progress has been made. Now the RiscPCs and XP laptop can all
ping each other successfully, but that's as far as I've got.
I can't get Samba shares seen in XP, nor can I log in to the XP box via
Omniclient. I'm expecting LanMan98 to arrive soon - is it easier/better
than Omniclient apart from 'long' filenames?

*bye
-- 
Robert Greenfield

Webmonster. Sensible Solutions: RISC OS Solutions.
<theboss@webmonster.co.nz>  -  http://www.webmonster.co.nz/


-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----==  Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----
0
Robert
12/14/2003 5:26:26 AM
Reply: