File Sharing Wierdness

File Sharing Wierdness

Post by Al Tuttl » Thu, 27 Dec 2001 01:27:08



I have a small home network.  Two Linux boxes (running Samba) and two
Windows boxes, Ripley and Holmes.  Holmes is Win95 OSR2 with any and all
winsock updates.  Ripley is Win98se.  The deal is that when
finding/refreshing the network nieghborhood, Holmes is instant.  It
finds all the other servers and shares instantly.  Ripley does not.
Ripley takes up to 5 seconds to find the servers & shares.  I have
checked and double checked the setups on the machines to make sure they
are as close as possible.  I have checked that I have host and lmhost
files set and proper.

It jsut bugs me that the 98se machine is much slower than the 95
machine.  Mayby it's just an explorer setting that I can't find....
dunno.  

Anyone know how to make the network response faster?

-al

---- The Key is knowing how to use your neurosis. ----

        Linux - The Choice of the GNU generation

 
 
 

File Sharing Wierdness

Post by Dean Thompso » Thu, 27 Dec 2001 11:57:19


Hi,

Quote:> I have a small home network.  Two Linux boxes (running Samba) and two
> Windows boxes, Ripley and Holmes.  Holmes is Win95 OSR2 with any and all
> winsock updates.  Ripley is Win98se.  The deal is that when
> finding/refreshing the network nieghborhood, Holmes is instant.  It
> finds all the other servers and shares instantly.  Ripley does not.
> Ripley takes up to 5 seconds to find the servers & shares.  I have
> checked and double checked the setups on the machines to make sure they
> are as close as possible.  I have checked that I have host and lmhost
> files set and proper.

> It jsut bugs me that the 98se machine is much slower than the 95
> machine.  Mayby it's just an explorer setting that I can't find....
> dunno.

> Anyone know how to make the network response faster?

Where is the Linux question in that ?

Also could the speed distance be as a result of Win98 using different
networking code to Win95 ?

See ya

Dean Thompson

--
+____________________________+____________________________________________+

| Bach. Computing (Hons)     | ICQ     - 45191180                         |
| PhD Student                | Office  - <Off-Campus>                     |
| School Comp.Sci & Soft.Eng | Phone   - +61 3 9903 2787 (Gen. Office)    |
| MONASH (Caulfield Campus)  | Fax     - +61 3 9903 1077                  |
| Melbourne, Australia       |                                            |
+----------------------------+--------------------------------------------+

 
 
 

File Sharing Wierdness

Post by Al Tuttl » Thu, 27 Dec 2001 15:35:29



> Hi,

> > I have a small home network.  Two Linux boxes (running Samba) and two
> > Windows boxes, Ripley and Holmes.  Holmes is Win95 OSR2 with any and all
> > winsock updates.  Ripley is Win98se.  The deal is that when
> > finding/refreshing the network nieghborhood, Holmes is instant.  It
> > finds all the other servers and shares instantly.  Ripley does not.
> > Ripley takes up to 5 seconds to find the servers & shares.  I have
> > checked and double checked the setups on the machines to make sure they
> > are as close as possible.  I have checked that I have host and lmhost
> > files set and proper.

> > It jsut bugs me that the 98se machine is much slower than the 95
> > machine.  Mayby it's just an explorer setting that I can't find....
> > dunno.

> > Anyone know how to make the network response faster?

> Where is the Linux question in that ?

Well...  
1.  I'm doubtful about getting an intelligent answer to a networking
question anywhere else.
2.  I was thinking one possiblility might be some kind of user
authorization protocol that is different with Win98 (i think htere are
some issues with Samba and NT that way).

Quote:>Also could the speed distance be as a result of Win98 using different
>networking code to Win95 ?
>See ya
>Dean Thompson

Yeah... I was thinking that might be the case, but don't have enough
experience to tell.

---- The Key is knowing how to use your neurosis. ----

        Linux - The Choice of the GNU generation

 
 
 

File Sharing Wierdness

Post by ALia » Fri, 28 Dec 2001 20:25:20


Hi,

Just a very quick scan of your post, and the thing that is most probably
causing this is the Browser service. If the Win95 machine is winning browser
elections, it will be quicker to report the network to you than the Win98
machine which will query the Win95 for the list.

Its a while since i've had to support Win95 or Win98 but i seem to remember
something about Win98 having its default BrowseMaster setting less
aggressive than Win95. Win98 SHOULD win a browser election over Win95, but
the default setting might be overruling this.

Check your Win95 machine's registry for BrowseMaster and set it to 0 if its
currently set to 1. This will stop the Win95 from ever wanting to be the
BrowseMaster.

I would definitely focus on the BrowseMaster settings on the Windows boxes
or the Samba config. But then again, maybe its nothing to do with this. :)

ALiaS



> > Hi,

> > > I have a small home network.  Two Linux boxes (running Samba) and two
> > > Windows boxes, Ripley and Holmes.  Holmes is Win95 OSR2 with any and
all
> > > winsock updates.  Ripley is Win98se.  The deal is that when
> > > finding/refreshing the network nieghborhood, Holmes is instant.  It
> > > finds all the other servers and shares instantly.  Ripley does not.
> > > Ripley takes up to 5 seconds to find the servers & shares.  I have
> > > checked and double checked the setups on the machines to make sure
they
> > > are as close as possible.  I have checked that I have host and lmhost
> > > files set and proper.

> > > It jsut bugs me that the 98se machine is much slower than the 95
> > > machine.  Mayby it's just an explorer setting that I can't find....
> > > dunno.

> > > Anyone know how to make the network response faster?

> > Where is the Linux question in that ?

> Well...
> 1.  I'm doubtful about getting an intelligent answer to a networking
> question anywhere else.
> 2.  I was thinking one possiblility might be some kind of user
> authorization protocol that is different with Win98 (i think htere are
> some issues with Samba and NT that way).

> >Also could the speed distance be as a result of Win98 using different
> >networking code to Win95 ?

> >See ya

> >Dean Thompson

> Yeah... I was thinking that might be the case, but don't have enough
> experience to tell.

> ---- The Key is knowing how to use your neurosis. ----

>         Linux - The Choice of the GNU generation