NASLite Network Attached Storage

www.serverelements.com
Task-specific simplicity with low hardware requirements.
It is currently Fri Oct 31, 2014 6:51 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 11 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Sun Jan 04, 2009 4:53 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri May 26, 2006 5:00 pm
Posts: 41
Over the holidays I finally started playing with my copy of NanoNAS. I can access the share fine from XP PC's but not from Vista or Windows7 beta1 b7000. It's like the box is not even there. Anyone have any ideas what's going on?

TIA


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jan 04, 2009 5:42 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Apr 02, 2006 9:05 pm
Posts: 1648
Location: Up State NY in the USA!!!!
I am running NL2.0 and have no problems accessing it from any number of PCs, both Vista and XP. I would suspect that the networking on the vista machines is not correctly configured as a start. Make sure that everything is configured properly. One thing I do is use static addresses for the box if I think that I might be having a problem, it eliminates one more thing. DHCP works 99%5 of the time but that one percent can be a real bitch to figure out.

Mike


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jan 04, 2009 6:00 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 27, 2007 5:38 pm
Posts: 516
Location: gods own country
vista can be picky i have found even when everything is set up correctly - if it does not find Naslite a reboot of Vista or naslite or both usually solves it


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jan 04, 2009 9:34 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Aug 10, 2004 1:50 pm
Posts: 604
Location: Texas, USA
Are you trying to mount using \\x.x.x.x or are you just trying to browse it


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 07, 2009 3:55 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri May 26, 2006 5:00 pm
Posts: 41
Thanks to all for the input. To answer some of the questions...

I do have a DHCP server (MS 2003 DC) it's not part of the problem.
The nas is on a static ip.
I am trying to access it by using the ip.
I can connect to it by ip using a web browser.
XP works with it, no issues at all.

I recall seeing on a fourm somewhere a while back a discussion on issues with trying to access shares on XP from Vista. Someone said that Vista defaulted to higher security requirements and that turning that off would resolve the connection problems they were having. In that case it did "fix" the problem. I suspect that may be the issue here however I have not been able to find anything on the topic again.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jun 04, 2009 9:36 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Aug 10, 2004 1:50 pm
Posts: 604
Location: Texas, USA
Customer called with 2 new machines refusing to connect to nanonas. Vista is a crappy os in every respect including networking. Had to deal with that first thing Wednesday morning. http://social.msdn.microsoft.com/forums ... 6492483b0/ helped point me in the right direction if anyone is in the same boat. XP and Win7 RC appears not to have such problems so i'd say vista is broken for sure.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jun 04, 2009 1:05 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Apr 02, 2006 9:05 pm
Posts: 1648
Location: Up State NY in the USA!!!!
Both my girlfriend and I run Vista and have np problems with accessing the NL2.0 shares. We are running Ultimate edition of vista and I would be willing to bet that MS may in some way cripple the lesser versions of vista in the networking department just to be dicks and force an upgrade. I also have a windows 7 beta machine up as well and it works fine too.

I got nothing, I just went and mapped the drives and all was good from there.

Mike


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jun 07, 2009 11:14 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri May 26, 2006 5:00 pm
Posts: 41
Harvin wrote:
Someone said that Vista defaulted to higher security requirements and that turning that off would resolve the connection problems they were having. In that case it did "fix" the problem. I suspect that may be the issue here however I have not been able to find anything on the topic again.


I found the answer (just love Goggle)... "It turns out that NTLMv2, the authentication protocol, is required by default on Windows Vista. According to the Samba Features by Release wiki page, support for NTLMv2 in Samba wasn’t fully developed until Samba v3.0.21."

So it appears that either an older version of Samba is being used or NTLMv2 support is not turned on. Ralph/Tony? As Vista requires v2 by default and does not fallback to v1 if required you have to change the default. You can use secpol.msc to change it or update the registry manually using the lines below. My tests with Windows7 RC1 32/64bit indicate that MS changed the default again as they both worked without mods.

--------------
Windows Registry Editor Version 5.00

[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\Lsa]
"LmCompatibilityLevel"=dword:00000001
--------------


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jun 07, 2009 11:21 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri May 26, 2006 5:00 pm
Posts: 41
dimension wrote:
http://social.msdn.microsoft.com/forums/en-US/windowsgeneraldevelopmentissues/thread/80b401a1-1da2-43a3-a803-4136492483b0


I just looked at the link. That's pretty much the same thing I found. Some days I really hate MS. Let's just crank up the securty and the H*** with compatability.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jun 07, 2009 11:40 pm 
Offline
Site Admin

Joined: Tue Jul 13, 2004 4:11 pm
Posts: 1766
Location: Server Elements
We are aware of that however the problem with NanoNAS is space. Samba 3.X requires a minimum of 3.5M alone, so including that code into the floppy is impossible. As I mentioned in another post, we have 28K of free space to work with in the NanoNAS SMB floppy, so we are experimenting with various ways to try and accommodate Vista. It has not been easy, but we've made some progress that has been encouraging.

At this point however I'm not sure it's even possible to bring NanoNAS to a level that an out-of-the-box Vista can use. Though we haven't given up yet...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 08, 2009 1:12 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri May 26, 2006 5:00 pm
Posts: 41
Tony wrote:
We are aware of that however the problem with NanoNAS is space. Samba 3.X requires a minimum of 3.5M alone, so including that code into the floppy is impossible.


Thanks for the input Tony. I suspected that 3.x was to big for you to use. Frankly I find it amazing what can be done with linux with so little space. Take that MS....


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 11 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group