Search Results

Search found 18384 results on 736 pages for 'adhoc network'.

Page 8/736 | < Previous Page | 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15  | Next Page >

  • big speed difference on a network link with and without VPN tunnel

    - by xirtyllo
    Scenario: We have a network link between two offices. The link is provided by a third party company through a VLAN on their network, but to us it is totally transparent -as if we had a simple ethernet cable going from one location to the other-. We have one router at each side of the link, with 3 VPN tunnels in between the two. The test: When I test the speed of the network link with the routers in place, with one laptop directly connected to the router on each side, I consistently get ~30/35Mbps. But if I take out the routers and I test the link connecting the laptops directly to the ethernet cable at each side, I consistently get ~85/88Mbps. It's quite a big performance hit, and I would tend to think that the VPN tunnels are responsible for the slow down. Is it normal that this configuration (two routers with three VPN tunnels between them) takes away so much bandwidth? More info: The encryption algorithm used for the VPN tunnels is AES128. The routers model is Zyxel USG200 and Zyxel USG1000, and their CPU, memory, and storage use is well within normal limits. The nominal bandwidth of the network link is 100Mbps. The network link in question is supplied by a third party company (the building in between our two offices). Basically it passes through their network as a VLAN, but the VLAN is completely transparent to us (e.g. no configuration required on our side, just like one single cable from end to end). Unfortunately (or maybe fortunately) I cannot directly test different routers configurations as I'm not the person in charge of it.

    Read the article

  • How do I stop my ethernet network connection from dropping?

    - by Sean Hill
    My ethernet-based network connection doesn't stay up consistently. I'm running a ping against the gateway and it will: Work for a minute Freeze, time out, or give multi-second response times Repeat If it's stuck and I disable/enable networking through the network manager applet everything will work fine again for a minute. After 280 packets transmitted I'm getting 41% packet loss. I've tried a different cable and connection to the gateway but this had no effect. The distance to the gateway is just about 3 feet. Seems to work fine if I switch over to Windows, but Ubuntu is my main OS and I can't even use it right now as I depend on the network. My setup... OS: Ubuntu 11.04, dual-booting Windows 7 Mobo: Gigabyte Z68X-UD4-B3 CPU: Intel Core i7 2600K Edit A little clarification... Network Manager is still showing me as connected, but I am unable to reach to gateway or anything beyond. At no point does NM suggest the connection is lost and calling ifconfig shows that I still have an IP address. I tried connecting to a different gateway with a different cable and the same problem arises. As requested: lspci | grep -i eth 07:00.0 Ethernet controller: Realtek Semiconductor Co., Ltd. RTL8111/8168B PCI Express Gigabit Ethernet controller (rev 06) dmesg | tail -f [ 14.024709] EXT4-fs (sda5): re-mounted. Opts: errors=remount-ro,commit=0 [ 14.026443] EXT4-fs (sda7): re-mounted. Opts: commit=0 [ 14.176101] hda-intel: IRQ timing workaround is activated for card #2. Suggest a bigger bdl_pos_adj. [ 23.917731] eth0: no IPv6 routers present [ 726.109697] r8169 0000:07:00.0: eth0: link up [ 733.169494] r8169 0000:07:00.0: eth0: link up [ 753.930119] r8169 0000:07:00.0: eth0: link up [ 880.787332] r8169 0000:07:00.0: eth0: link up [ 1159.161283] r8169 0000:07:00.0: eth0: link up [ 1406.623550] r8169 0000:07:00.0: eth0: link up Edit @roland-taylor: Network is always available under Windows. Pings do not timeout, applications do not complain of no network availability, large downloads are not interrupted or slowed.

    Read the article

  • Need for explanation: NetBIOS over TCP/IP on VMware network adapter disturbs access to network share

    - by gyrolf
    (Moved here from StackOverflow) Some time ago nearly all workstations in our team (Windows XP SP2) exhibited intermittend but frequent delays when accessing shares on the network. Typically the first access to a share which hadn't been accessed for some time resulted in a nearly frozen workstation for up to 30 seconds. Then everything started working fine again. Using TCPView from Sysinternals I saw that during this delays there was a connection to the netbios-ssn port on the file server which was in state SYN_SENT. First try: Disable NetBIOS over TCP/IP for the intranet network adapter. Problem solved, but I didn't like to manipulate our centrally managed network configuration for the intranet. Second try: Disable NetBIOS over TCP/IP only for the VMWare network adapter (VMNet1 used for host only communications). Problem solved again! My questions: Why does NetBIOS over TCP/IP on one network adapter disturb NetBIOS over TCP/IP on another network adapter? Is this problem specific to VMWare network adapters? Has anybody else seen this phenomen? Additional information: VMWare Workstation version 6.0.3 At the time I started seriously analysing the problem it was no more possible to find out what had been changed to our systems at the time the problems started.

    Read the article

  • Looking for a host based network monitor solution

    - by Ole Martin Handeland
    Hi all! Problem So, my hosting company has a network usage graph for my dedicated server. It seems that one day earlier this month, my network usage suddenly spiked with several hundred megabytes transferred (usually it's in the tens, not hundreds). It was probably me, but i just can't be sure who or what it was. Question So my question is; does anyone know of any host based solution for monitoring network usage that would tell me the client's IP-address, the port/service he/she used? What I don't want I'm just guessing that someone will suggest i use nagios, munin, zabbix, cacti, mrtg - I've also looked at those, but a graph over network usage will not give me the answers I'm looking for. :-) Almost there I've already looked at a lot of monitoring solutions, and I've tried [ntop][http://www.ntop.org/], [darkstat][http://unix4lyfe.org/darkstat/] and others. Darkstat just didn't give me the answers. Although it listed a lot of statistics, and i could list the clients - it doesn't show me the network usage for a particular period. Ntop is by far the best I've seen so far - but i think it mostly shows current network usage, not the historical part. I could run apt-get upgrade and download a whole bunch of software, but not see it in the log afterwards.

    Read the article

  • Photoshop CS5 performance over network drive (cifs)

    - by grub
    Hello Everyone I did install a QNAP NAS TS410 for a customer (professional photographer) with 3 Hitachi Deskstar 7200rpm 2TB disk configured as RAID5. The NAS and the workstations are connected over a Gigabit network. He and his co-worker are accessing the photos (about 1TB of photos) over a mapped network drive from their windows machines (Windows XP - 32bit and Windows 7 Ultimate - 32bit). Both are using Photoshop CS5 to edit the photos. The problem is that to save a edited photo takes a really long time, it takes about 3 times as long to save a photo as to open it. After some tests I can exclude the network, the NAS and the windows machines as source of the issue. I think the problem is the Photoshop software and its handling of the network drives. Officially network drives are not supported by Adobe. I do not have any experience with the Adobe products, especially with Adobe Photoshop CS5. What are your recommendation to solve the performance issue? Should my customer copy the photos to the local drive, edit them and upload them again to the network drive or is Adobe Drive or Adobe Version Cue the answer? One requirement is that the photos need to be accessible / editable from both computers even when one of them is offline. Adobe Version Cue needs a dedicated service running to be usable, so this solution is not possible as far as I understand the Cue software. Thank you for your input to this issue and have a nice day :-) Greetings grub

    Read the article

  • Setting up /etc/network/interface file for KVM ubuntu 10.10

    - by Charles Thornton
    I am trying to setup KVM on Unbuntu 10.10 IFCONFIG DUMP: hydra(~}$ifconfig eth0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:1b:fc:cb:77:eb inet addr:172.20.20.3 Bcast:172.20.20.255 Mask:255.255.255.0 inet6 addr: fe80::21b:fcff:fecb:77eb/64 Scope:Link UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 RX packets:1345 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:1541 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:1000 RX bytes:820414 (820.4 KB) TX bytes:317708 (317.7 KB) Interrupt:23 Base address:0xc000 lo Link encap:Local Loopback inet addr:127.0.0.1 Mask:255.0.0.0 inet6 addr: ::1/128 Scope:Host UP LOOPBACK RUNNING MTU:16436 Metric:1 RX packets:8 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:8 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:0 RX bytes:480 (480.0 B) TX bytes:480 (480.0 B) virbr0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 0a:1e:fb:b4:77:84 inet addr:192.168.122.1 Bcast:192.168.122.255 Mask:255.255.255.0 inet6 addr: fe80::81e:fbff:feb4:7784/64 Scope:Link UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 RX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:56 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:0 RX bytes:0 (0.0 B) TX bytes:8934 (8.9 KB) hydra(~}$ QUESTION:: How should /etc/network/interfaces be setup?? The following attempt just kills my internet connection! --------- /etc/network/interfaces ------------- # This file describes the network interfaces available on your system # and how to activate them. For more information, see interfaces(5). # The loopback network interface auto lo iface lo inet loopback # The primary network interface auto eth0 iface eth0 inet manual auto br0 iface br0 inet static address 172.20.20.3 netmask 255.255.255.0 network 172.20.20.0 broadcast 172.20.20.255 gateway 172.20.20.1 bridge_ports eth0 bridge_fd 9 bridge_hello 2 bridge_maxage 12 bridge_stp off What am I doing wrong????

    Read the article

  • Vmware Player Network adaptors have no network or internet access in windows 7 enterprise

    - by daffers
    As per the title. My VMWare player installation has setup the two network adaptor VMnet1 and VMnet8 and they are picked up as unidentified networks with no network access (i need this to activate my windows server installation on it). The option to change the network location is not available (this might be because of network policy on the domain despite having set this as configurable in the local security policy section). Is there anyway i can change how these networks are detected or alter the configuration of vmware to get around this?

    Read the article

  • Vmware Player network adapters have no network or internet access in Windows 7 enterprise [closed]

    - by daffers
    As per the title. My VMWare player installation has setup the two network adaptor VMnet1 and VMnet8 and they are picked up as unidentified networks with no network access (i need this to activate my windows server installation on it). The option to change the network location is not available (this might be because of network policy on the domain despite having set this as configurable in the local security policy section). Is there anyway i can change how these networks are detected or alter the configuration of vmware to get around this?

    Read the article

  • Vmware Player network adapters have no network or internet access in Windows 7 enterprise

    - by daffers
    As per the title. My VMWare player installation has setup the two network adaptor VMnet1 and VMnet8 and they are picked up as unidentified networks with no network access (i need this to activate my windows server installation on it). The option to change the network location is not available (this might be because of network policy on the domain despite having set this as configurable in the local security policy section). Is there anyway i can change how these networks are detected or alter the configuration of vmware to get around this?

    Read the article

  • How to create an adhoc network between laptops in java?

    - by Muaz
    Hello, I want to create an adhoc between labtops were they will communicate using wireless communication. I will use java for this but still I do not know how to start.. I think I'll have to use sockets for the connections right? How will a laptop notice other laptops in its local network or the other way around? Do i need a server to handle the communication between laptops? Another thing, how to broadcast a message from one laptop to other laptops in the network? Please reply as soon as you can. Any help will be appreciated. Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • Windows 7 blocks network access to network-installed apps

    - by VokinLoksar
    Windows 2008 R2 domain. Users, running Windows 7 Enterprise, are trying to run some software from a network share. Specifically, I've tested this with MATLAB and PuTTY. When starting, MATLAB has to contact a licensing server to get its license. This action fails for regular users when they start MATLAB from the network share. However, if they copy the installation directory to a local disk everything works fine. Running MATLAB as an admin user from the network share also works. Same story with PuTTY. If the executable is launched from the share, regular users cannot connect to any servers. Something is blocking network communications for programs that are launched from a network drive. Here's the only other mention I could find of the same problem: https://social.technet.microsoft.com/Forums/en-US/w7itpronetworking/thread/4504b192-0bc0-4402-8e00-a936ea7e6dff It's not the Windows firewall or the IE security settings. Does anyone have any clue as to what this is?

    Read the article

  • Network Printer or Share Printer on Server?

    - by Joeme
    Hi, Small office, <10 users. USB printer which also has a network port. Is it better to share the printer by plugging the usb into the sevrer, and do a windows share, or use the built in network port? We are using the built in network port at the moment, but don't have control to delete jobs in the queue that get stuck. Thanks, Joe

    Read the article

  • IIS Strategies for Accessing Secured Network Resources

    - by ErikE
    Problem: A user connects to a service on a machine, such as an IIS web site or a SQL Server database. The site or the database need to gain access to network resources such as file shares (the most common) or a database on a different server. Permission is denied. This is because the user the service is running under doesn't have network permissions in the first place, or if it does, it doesn't have rights to access the remote resource. I keep running into this problem over and over again and am tired of not having a really solid way of handling it. Here are some workarounds I'm aware of: Run IIS as a custom-created domain user who is granted high permissions If permissions are granted one file share at a time, then every time I want to read from a new share, I would have to ask a network admin to add it for me. Eventually, with many web sites reading from many shares, it is going to get really complicated. If permissions are just opened up wide for the user to access any file shares in our domain, then this seems like an unnecessary security surface area to present. This also applies to all the sites running on IIS, rather than just the selected site or virtual directory that needs the access, a further surface area problem. Still use the IUSR account but give it network permissions and set up the same user name on the remote resource (not a domain user, a local user) This also has its problems. For example, there's a file share I am using that I have full rights to for sharing, but I can't log in to the machine. So I have to find the right admin and ask him to do it for me. Any time something has to change, it's another request to an admin. Allow IIS users to connect as anonymous, but set the account used for anonymous access to a high-privilege one This is even worse than giving the IIS IUSR full privileges, because it means my web site can't use any kind of security in the first place. Connect using Kerberos, then delegate This sounds good in principle but has all sorts of problems. First of all, if you're using virtual web sites where the domain name you connect to the site with is not the base machine name (as we do frequently), then you have to set up a Service Principal Name on the webserver using Microsoft's SetSPN utility. It's complicated and apparently prone to errors. Also, you have to ask your network/domain admin to change security policy for both the web server and the domain account so they are "trusted for delegation." If you don't get everything perfectly right, suddenly your intended Kerberos authentication is NTLM instead, and you can only impersonate rather than delegate, and thus no reaching out over the network as the user. Also, this method can be problematic because sometimes you need the web site or database to have permissions that the connecting user doesn't have. Create a service or COM+ application that fetches the resource for the web site Services and COM+ packages are run with their own set of credentials. Running as a high-privilege user is okay since they can do their own security and deny requests that are not legitimate, putting control in the hands of the application developer instead of the network admin. Problems: I am using a COM+ package that does exactly this on Windows Server 2000 to deliver highly sensitive images to a secured web application. I tried moving the web site to Windows Server 2003 and was suddenly denied permission to instantiate the COM+ object, very likely registry permissions. I trolled around quite a bit and did not solve the problem, partly because I was reluctant to give the IUSR account full registry permissions. That seems like the same bad practice as just running IIS as a high-privilege user. Note: This is actually really simple. In a programming language of your choice, you create a class with a function that returns an instance of the object you want (an ADODB.Connection, for example), and build a dll, which you register as a COM+ object. In your web server-side code, you create an instance of the class and use the function, and since it is running under a different security context, calls to network resources work. Map drive letters to shares This could theoretically work, but in my mind it's not really a good long-term strategy. Even though mappings can be created with specific credentials, and this can be done by others than a network admin, this also is going to mean that there are either way too many shared drives (small granularity) or too much permission is granted to entire file servers (large granularity). Also, I haven't figured out how to map a drive so that the IUSR gets the drives. Mapping a drive is for the current user, I don't know the IUSR account password to log in as it and create the mappings. Move the resources local to the web server/database There are times when I've done this, especially with Access databases. Does the database have to live out on the file share? Sometimes, it was just easiest to move the database to the web server or to the SQL database server (so the linked server to it would work). But I don't think this is a great all-around solution, either. And it won't work when the resource is a service rather than a file. Move the service to the final web server/database I suppose I could run a web server on my SQL Server database, so the web site can connect to it using impersonation and make me happy. But do we really want random extra web servers on our database servers just so this is possible? No. Virtual directories in IIS I know that virtual directories can help make remote resources look as though they are local, and this supports using custom credentials for each virtual directory. I haven't been able to come up with, yet, how this would solve the problem for system calls. Users could reach file shares directly, but this won't help, say, classic ASP code access resources. I could use a URL instead of a file path to read remote data files in a web page, but this isn't going to help me make a connection to an Access database, a SQL server database, or any other resource that uses a connection library rather than being able to just read all the bytes and work with them. I wish there was some kind of "service tunnel" that I could create. Think about how a VPN makes remote resources look like they are local. With a richer aliasing mechanism, perhaps code-based, why couldn't even database connections occur under a defined security context? Why not a special Windows component that lets you specify, per user, what resources are available and what alternate credentials are used for the connection? File shares, databases, web sites, you name it. I guess I'm almost talking about a specialized local proxy server. Anyway, so there's my list. I may update it if I think of more. Does anyone have any ideas for me? My current problem today is, yet again, I need a web site to connect to an Access database on a file share. Here we go again...

    Read the article

  • AutoCAD 11 and network file shares

    - by gravyface
    Small network of perhaps half a dozen engineers, currently working on local copies of AutoCAD project files, which are then copied back up to file server (2008 Standard, 1-2 year old Dell server hardware, RAID 5 SAS disks (10k? not positive)) at end of day. To me, this sounds horribly inefficient and error-prone, however, I've been told that "AutoCAD and network files = bad idea" and this is gospel. The network is currently 10/100 (perhaps this is the reason for the "gospel") but all the workstations are within 2 years old and have GbE NICs so an upgrade of the core switch is long overdue. However, I know certain applications don't like network access, at all, and any sign of latency or disruption brings the whole thing crashing down. Anyone care to chime in?

    Read the article

  • Can't connect two PCs to a Network Switch at the same time (Windows 7)

    - by puk
    I have two computers connected to a network switch and every once in a while one of the computers will lose its internet connection. It's almost always the same computer every time. However, if I play around with the control panel, I can switch it, so that now the other computer is not connected. Restarting either of the computers does not help either. In Windows, the worlds-greatest-trouble-shooter tells me that a network cable is unplugged and that I should try plugging it in...Disabling and re-enabling my NIC does not fix this problem, neither does swapping cables around. When rebooting, the BIOS complains about how the Ethernet Cable is not plugged in. If it's in any way important, My set up at the office is like so: Modem - Routher - Network Switch 1 - Network Switch 2. I have tried turning off the energy saving option for my NIC, and I tried manually setting the link-speed to 100Mbps Full Duplex without any luck. Also, I have a Realtek PCIe GBE Family controller on both computers Does anyone have any idea why this is happening every 5-10 days? EDIT: I have also tried using a completely different Network Switch and the problem still persists as before.

    Read the article

  • Wake network adapter from deep sleep mode

    - by BeatMe
    I recently buyed a new Mainboard (Asrock ALiveXFire) and got some trouble with the network adapter. After switching my Windows 7 x64 in energey saving mode and returning from it, my network adapter couldn't be found. After some googling I found out, that apparently my network adapter has been put in a deep sleep mode and didn't reactivate. Their solution was to switch the PC off, take out the RAM and the CMOS battery for some time. After that, the adapter should be powered on again, but that didn't happen for me. I waited several hours before turning my PC on again, but that didn't help. Formatting and reinstalling didn't help either. The network adapter is not found in the hardware manager and reinstalling the drivers didn't help. I have the newest BIOS installed on the mainboard. I literally don't know what to try next. I'm thinking of returning my board, but I would like to avoid the hassle.

    Read the article

  • Limit Windows PC Network/Internet Throughput

    - by Jon Cram
    I have a Vista x64 machine on a fairly fast Internet connection and either buggy drivers for the onboard Ethernet or faulty onboard Ethernet hardware. If I sustain too high a throughput on the Ethernet connection the network connection within Windows fails and I have to restart the machine to restore connectivity. I don't believe I can fix this issue (I'm erring towards faulty hardware) but would like to mitigate the effects by limiting my network throughput. I'm in a position where I would like to download a 5GB file from the Internet (a game install via Steam) and am certain that as this will take a few hours I will not be able to complete the download before my network connection within Windows fails. From downloading content through a BitTorrent client I have found that by limiting the download throughput to around 150 kilobytes per second I can maintain a steady network connection. I can't directly limit the throughput of the download through the Steam client and would instead like to find out how I can limit the throughput of my Ethernet connection within Windows. Any suggestions on how I can achieve this?

    Read the article

  • Network share not always available on Windows 2003

    - by JP Hellemons
    Hello everybody, we have a windows 2003 server with a shared directory/folder. I've seen this thread but this wasn't any help: http://superuser.com/questions/58890/the-specified-network-name-is-no-longer-available I have a ping -t running from 3 pc's (vista and two windows 7) they all work. the problem occurss when two users enter the network share then this 'network share is no longer available' appears and the explorer windows turn white. after f5 or refresh the shared directory is back. this is really strange. there is no anti virus or kasparsky running on either end. this is all in the same LAN. the internet connection is really stable, so it's really strange. because a stable internet connection should imply that the local network connection is also stable and that this is a windows issue. can it be a router issue? I have checked the eventlog on the server for diskfailure related messages, but there are none. EDIT: can this be related to mapping a shared directory to a drive letter? and that there is a router between me and the mapped network drive? or is it just windows that is not working well with two users on the same shared folder? should I install samba or something?

    Read the article

  • IIS Strategies for Accessing Secured Network Resources

    - by Emtucifor
    Problem: A user connects to a service on a machine, such as an IIS web site or a SQL Server database. The site or the database need to gain access to network resources such as file shares (the most common) or a database on a different server. Permission is denied. This is because the user the service is running as doesn't have network permissions in the first place, or if it does, it doesn't have rights to access the remote resource. I keep running into this problem over and over again and am tired of not having a really solid way of handling it. Here are some workarounds I'm aware of: Run IIS as a custom-created domain user who is granted high permissions If permissions are granted one file share at a time, then every time I want to read from a new share, I would have to ask a network admin to add it for me. Eventually, with many web sites reading from many shares, it is going to get really complicated. If permissions are just opened up wide for the user to access any file shares in our domain, then this seems like an unnecessary security surface area to present. This also applies to all the sites running on IIS, rather than just the selected site or virtual directory that needs the access, a further surface area problem. Still use the IUSR account but give it network permissions and set up the same user name on the remote resource (not a domain user, a local user) This also has its problems. For example, there's a file share I am using that I have full rights to for sharing, but I can't log in to the machine. So I have to find the right admin and ask him to do it for me. Any time something has to change, it's another request to an admin. Allow IIS users to connect as anonymous, but set the account used for anonymous access to a high-privilege one This is even worse than giving the IIS IUSR full privileges, because it means my web site can't use any kind of security in the first place. Connect using Kerberos, then delegate This sounds good in principle but has all sorts of problems. First of all, if you're using virtual web sites where the domain name you connect to the site with is not the base machine name (as we do frequently), then you have to set up a Service Principal Name on the webserver using Microsoft's SetSPN utility. It's complicated and apparently prone to errors. Also, you have to ask your network/domain admin to change security policy for the web server so it is "trusted for delegation." If you don't get everything perfectly right, suddenly your intended Kerberos authentication is NTLM instead, and you can only impersonate rather than delegate, and thus no reaching out over the network as the user. Also, this method can be problematic because sometimes you need the web site or database to have permissions that the connecting user doesn't have. Create a service or COM+ application that fetches the resource for the web site Services and COM+ packages are run with their own set of credentials. Running as a high-privilege user is okay since they can do their own security and deny requests that are not legitimate, putting control in the hands of the application developer instead of the network admin. Problems: I am using a COM+ package that does exactly this on Windows Server 2000 to deliver highly sensitive images to a secured web application. I tried moving the web site to Windows Server 2003 and was suddenly denied permission to instantiate the COM+ object, very likely registry permissions. I trolled around quite a bit and did not solve the problem, partly because I was reluctant to give the IUSR account full registry permissions. That seems like the same bad practice as just running IIS as a high-privilege user. Note: This is actually really simple. In a programming language of your choice, you create a class with a function that returns an instance of the object you want (an ADODB.Connection, for example), and build a dll, which you register as a COM+ object. In your web server-side code, you create an instance of the class and use the function, and since it is running under a different security context, calls to network resources work. Map drive letters to shares This could theoretically work, but in my mind it's not really a good long-term strategy. Even though mappings can be created with specific credentials, and this can be done by others than a network admin, this also is going to mean that there are either way too many shared drives (small granularity) or too much permission is granted to entire file servers (large granularity). Also, I haven't figured out how to map a drive so that the IUSR gets the drives. Mapping a drive is for the current user, I don't know the IUSR account password to log in as it and create the mappings. Move the resources local to the web server/database There are times when I've done this, especially with Access databases. Does the database have to live out on the file share? Sometimes, it was just easiest to move the database to the web server or to the SQL database server (so the linked server to it would work). But I don't think this is a great all-around solution, either. And it won't work when the resource is a service rather than a file. Move the service to the final web server/database I suppose I could run a web server on my SQL Server database, so the web site can connect to it using impersonation and make me happy. But do we really want random extra web servers on our database servers just so this is possible? No. Virtual directories in IIS I know that virtual directories can help make remote resources look as though they are local, and this supports using custom credentials for each virtual directory. I haven't been able to come up with, yet, how this would solve the problem for system calls. Users could reach file shares directly, but this won't help, say, classic ASP code access resources. I could use a URL instead of a file path to read remote data files in a web page, but this isn't going to help me make a connection to an Access database, a SQL server database, or any other resource that uses a connection library rather than being able to just read all the bytes and work with them. I wish there was some kind of "service tunnel" that I could create. Think about how a VPN makes remote resources look like they are local. With a richer aliasing mechanism, perhaps code-based, why couldn't even database connections occur under a defined security context? Why not a special Windows component that lets you specify, per user, what resources are available and what alternate credentials are used for the connection? File shares, databases, web sites, you name it. I guess I'm almost talking about a specialized local proxy server. Anyway, so there's my list. I may update it if I think of more. Does anyone have any ideas for me? My current problem today is, yet again, I need a web site to connect to an Access database on a file share. Here we go again...

    Read the article

  • Western Digital My Book World drops off network

    - by Macha
    Most of my storage in my house relies on a WD My Book World Edition 500GB network drive. I threw out the vendor crapware they give you to access it (a trial version of Mionet) after it starting nagging me to upgrade, and set it up as a standard network drive using Window's Map Network Drive. However, since then, it has been dropping off the network after 30 minutes of non-usage. The only way to get it back on is to switch it off and on again at the plug socket. Does anyone know what is causing this, and hopefully how to fix it? EDIT: it's the original "blue rings" version with the latest firmware.

    Read the article

  • Network Explorer Intermittently Fails to Display all Computers in Work Group

    - by graf_ignotiev
    I run a small computer lab of 10 computers and occasionally, when using the network explorer (a.k.a Network Browser) some or all of the remote computers will fail to appear. If I try to access a remote computer by its name I get an unspecified error (code 0x80004005), but I am still able to access it with the computer's IP address. The strangest part is that the problem will inexplicably go away after waiting awhile. Each computer is running Windows 7 x64 Enterprise and has identical hardware, software and configuration. They are all on the same subnet and in the same workgroup. I've spent days researching the problem and have tried the following solutions: Updated the BIOS, chipset and network adapter drivers Changed Power Settings in Network Adapter Properties so that the computer will not turn it off Disabled the Computer Browser service Changed the DHCP node type to broadcast Reviewed the Event Viewer logs Steps 3 and 4 have seemed to help the problem a little bit, but not completely. I'm beginning to suspect that the problem might lie with our router which is a ZyXEL ZyWALL 2WG, as the packets sent by Network Discovery may not be returning in time, but I wanted to get some perspective in the issue before I went any further.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15  | Next Page >