I saw something like that at work.

Post #217,355 by Another Scott 8/3/05 11:01:46 PM Reply	I saw something like that at work. Warning: My memory on this is a little fuzzy... I had a Win95B machine that was visible to only some XP and 2k machines in the same Workgroup, and vice versa, but it was never consistent. I never could figure out what the problem was. Eventually it got to the point that the Win95B machine was invisible to most of the network. Installing just about every networking protocol on the Win95B machine helped for a while, but that didn't resolve the problem. I gave up and just had TCP/IP and NetBIOS on the Win95B machine, accepted that it wouldn't be a full member, and recently replaced it with a Win2k PC. We had a related problem recently where Win2k and XP machines weren't consistently visible in the same Workgroup. Someone eventually surmized that there was some battle between which PC on the network was going to be the Master Browser (IIRC), and it was somehow solved. I know even less of the details in that case. I think there's some sort of problem with the communication between the Win9x and 2k+ machines that eventually will bite one. The best solution seems to be to replace the 9x machines. But MS wouldn't make them incompatible on purpose, naaaah... I hope this helps tickle a solution for you. Luck! Cheers, Scott.
Post #217,358 by Andrew Grygus 8/3/05 11:19:08 PM Reply	Thanks, but that's just backwards from here. This errant Windows 2000 computer gets along fine with all the Windows 98 SE boxes but can't see or be seen by the other Windows 2000 boxes. I could see it the other way around, but this is kinda weird. All the Windows 98 SE computers all can see all the computers on the network, 98 or W2K, and access any that have shares. To check master browser problems we shut down all the computers and brought them up one at a time. No change at any stage. [link\|http://www.aaxnet.com\|AAx]
Post #217,359 by Another Scott 8/3/05 11:30:44 PM Reply	Flakey hub or switch somewhere? I know it's unlikely, but maybe there's a flakey [link\|http://z.iwethey.org/forums/render/content/show?contentid=208819\|switch] in the path from the Win2k machine. Does the bad Win2k machine have a system name or IP address that conflicts with another Win2k machine? Typo in the [link\|http://z.iwethey.org/forums/render/content/show?contentid=184447\|hosts] file? No, I don't think a bad switch would really act the way you describe, or the other things, but when you've checked everything, you have to check something else. I'm about all tapped out. Luck! Cheers, Scott.
Post #217,376 by Andrew Grygus 8/4/05 1:43:50 AM Reply	Switched switch ports with a working W2K box . . . . . no effect. The good one was still good and the bad one still bad. [link\|http://www.aaxnet.com\|AAx]
Post #217,392 by static 8/4/05 6:01:42 AM Reply	Microsoft and SMB. It is known that Microsoft use Samba's code to teach their own progranners how SMB works. This is because their own code is such a hodge-podge of bugfixes on bugfixes. This is also the reason why Samba has been accused of optionitis over the years. What I'm trying to lead up to is that Microsoft don't need to engineer incompatibilities between 98 and 2k: they have simpley acreted over time. Wade. Save Fintlewoodlewix
Post #217,547 by Ashton 8/4/05 5:04:29 PM Reply	Love. It. - perspicacious employment of__acreted (and note the Noblesse oblige in not speling that accreted ;-) ie Fuck off, CRC... <anticipation? or prescience> :-\ufffd
Post #217,603 by static 8/4/05 11:48:47 PM Reply	Meh. I was lazy. :-) Save Fintlewoodlewix

Welcome to IWETHEY!