clutch

The client determines the mode, and if that's your home directory for your ftp site, then yes.

Also, check ALL of your permissions on the files/directories that you want to allow access to (share permissions, ftp site permissions, NTFS permissions).

FTP servers tend to have some issues when used behind Firewalls and/or NAT systems. You can get around that by using "Passive" mode, whereby the server initiates the alternate port negotiation rather than the client. When using FTP, you do use ports other than 20/21 but this is generally transparent to the user. I use IIS 5 behind a PIX 520 and a Linksys consumer router, both of which work fine is using passive mode on the client.

Normally, the uplink is "linked" to another port on the unit. If you look, you might see a graphic of a line, drawn between the uplink port and the #1 port. If so, make sure to use ONLY the uplink port, and NOT the #1 port. If you try to use both, the unit may default to the #1 port and not permit communication via the uplink. The manual for the unit should explain this further if you need more information.

Using a regular patch cable, connect from the uplink of one to a regular port on the other. That should do it. The uplink port is just a port that is already set to "crossover" the appropriate pins, and will then behave like a crossover cable. Also, check and make sure that the uplink port is set properly. There may be a button or switch to activate the use of that port (sometimes they share the same connection internally as the first or last port on the unit).

Bummer, I forgot to mention that about the licenses. They aren't like Novell where you have an actual disk that you use to add the licenses you need. I know that workstation only allows for 10 connections, it's just odd that server would be capping you guys without being configured for a limit manually.

I always use per seat since we have multiple servers, but you can call places like CDW (www.cdw.com) or check pricewatch (www.pricewatch.com) for licensing online. However, I would try to reduce the number of licenses to 100 or something to that effect and see what happens.

Oh, and if security is REALLY your bag, then you may want to consider implementing IPSec policies on your workstations. This is for Win2K, so I don't know if the snap-ins are available in XP as of yet: http://www.microsoft.com/windows2000/techinfo/planning/security/ipsecsteps.asp

Well, browsing across two different classes of networks will be a problem. You aren't using a traditional router, and there doesn't seem to be a common workgroup that you are all using. Also, you guys are using Network Address Translation (NAT) to get both of your PCs to connect using the same IP assigned by your network admin. The best thing to do would be to setup a FTP server on your Win2K Server for sharing out and receiving files. Here's a spiffy guide to setting up a peer to peer network in Windows 2000 Pro, and I am trying to find the one I saw on Technet a few days ago for setting up a domain with Win2K Server. http://support.microsoft.com/support/kb/articles/Q258/7/17.ASP

Can you browse them directly using "\\PCName\share"? If you can do this, yet not see the machines in Network Neighborhood, then it's due to not having a successful Master Browser selection on your network. A machine will always try to be the network Master Browser by default, and this just means that the machine in particular will hold and record the names of the computers on the network and their corresponding addresses. Usually, this is something you see with people that use TCP/IP w/NetBIOS that don't have a WINS box setup on their network. Sometimes, a Master Browser doesn't get selected due to repeated elections, it can't be contacted by the requesting client, or it doesn't pick up a freshly booted machine and hence doesn't cache its location. In general, name resolution without a DNS or WINS box on a network tends to be flaky at best.

TCP/IP would be a much better solution than IPX/SPX, as some apps will not work with that protocol (by the same token some apps, like games, will only work with that protocol) and IPX is on its way out. File and Print Sharing will work fine though, and you can enable NetBIOS over IPX/SPX to get the same "feel" as NetBEUI. I did this for a classroom network that contained both Novell 4.x and NT servers a couple of years ago. We could only use one protocol at a time for our telephony software (it ran in DOS on 486s, and had some hefty drivers to be loaded into conventional memory) and this was the only one that worked consistently enough on both systems. All 16 client systems had no problem connecting to both servers and sharing resources. Now, what IP range is the modem giving out? Are they "real" (public) IPs, or just 192.blah blah or 10.blah blah? If each workstation can be pinged directly from the outside, then they are more than likely getting public addresses. Also, I have seen that some providers have canned NetBIOS traffic over IP, so there may not even be an issue for you.

I wasn't paying attention to this thread, so see my response in http://www.ntcompatible.com/vb/showthread.php?threadid=14984

OK, I guess you want some attention to this as it's posted twice. Cool. Here's the deal, if a PC is connected to others on a network, then it should be using some sort of NAT/PAT system to get out to the Internet. In that case, NetBIOS over TCP/IP isn't an issue. In addition, if you are running a switched system, packet sniffers get factored out as well (unless there is a system that is compromised and has a monitor on it designed for upper layer reading, but since it's compromised it wouldn't really matter anyway). NetBEUI is faster, but that's it. That's the only thing to gain with it. It generates a ton of message traffic, and is non-routable by nature. You can't use WINS with it on a small network for more reliable, centrally contolled NetBIOS name resolution. There is just little reason to mess with it. You claim that it's more secure, when in fact its "security" hinges on its faults rather than its abilities. Also, most of these systems are designed for a couple network functions in mind; ICS and AD. Both of which require TCP/IP to function. So, in other words, why bother?

I have used this, and it works quite well: http://www.tweakfiles.com/video/nvidiarefreshratefix.html Also, I did have the same issue where the refresh program wouldn't allow for much adjustment in the refresh rate, and it turned out that the particular driver version just didn't recognize my monitor properly regardless of the monitor driver used. I am using the 12.41 drivers right now, and they work quite well and pick "see" my monitor just fine.

Nice.

Are there any rules set that may be dumping email immediately upon arrival to "deleted files"?

I have never seen NET SEND support that many characters before. But, it's a fake any due to the plural reference to Microsoft (MS docs always have themselves in a singular reference such as "Microsoft is").

This would normally be done in the Policy Editor, but this link shows how to do it in both NT and 2K: http://www.windows2000faq.com/Articles/Index.cfm?ArticleID=14894

You can't just add the right to the "Domain Users" group? Also, the second link shows an automated procedure using scripting to adjust users' rights.

Here is a good link for the info you may need. It also contains another link for user rights. http://www.windows2000faq.com/Articles/Index.cfm?ArticleID=14434 One other thing that you *might* need to do is set the server as the default timekeeper for the domain. For that, you can go here: http://support.microsoft.com/support/kb/articles/Q135/6/46.asp This should help, good luck.

That's a legendary one, bud. Lemme dig up the link on that and I will post it here. Help is on the way...

ummm...OK, I guess. I am not sure what you are talking about with the "Adams Family" references, but you seem dedicated to Linux so that's cool. I don't think you can appreciate the position I am coming from, since you don't work in any support capacity for end users. Also, when I mention "desktop", I am referring to applications as well (like ERP, accounting, asset tracking, maintenance, PLC interfacing, and on and on...) and their availability. That is where I am coming from, and therefore my logic.

If you are just looking for something to forward email out, you should be able to do it with the SMTP service in Win2K. Are you looking to host email as well? If so, do you have a domain name registered for that server?

I thought his was "Windows Lite".

Wow, that is pretty cool. Thanks for the link!