Title: Re: [discuss] Speed question
OK I changed NTLM Host/Workstation from sstratpbook (me) to 10.2.0.2 (our proxy server), and here's my result (better but not optimum) accessing Software Update. Takes 2 minutes for step 2 to complete, don’t know enough about NTLM to know why. That seems to be the exact holdup. In the following, the delay is marked in red.

Sep  7 10:32:16 : Authoxy has started successfully
Sep  7 10:32:27 : Ready to NTLM!
Sep  7 10:32:27 : Entering Step 1
Sep  7 10:32:27 : Entering Step 2
Sep  7 10:32:27 : Found Connection: close. Hiding for NTLM Authentication
Sep  7 10:32:27 : Waiting for Step 2
Sep  7 10:34:27 : Step 2 is complete
Sep  7 10:34:27 : Entering Step 3
Sep  7 10:34:27 : Created Type 1 string of 60 characters
Sep  7 10:34:27 : Pausing in Step 3
Sep  7 10:34:27 : Entering Step 4
Sep  7 10:34:27 : Content-Length: 0
Sep  7 10:34:27 : NTLM: Target length is 4
Sep  7 10:34:27 : NTLM: Target length 2 is 4
Sep  7 10:34:27 : NTLM: Target offset is 56
Sep  7 10:34:27 : NTLM Flag: Negotiate OEM
Sep  7 10:34:27 : NTLM Flag: Request Target
Sep  7 10:34:27 : NTLM Flag: Negotiate NTLM
Sep  7 10:34:27 : NTLM Flag: Target Type Domain
Sep  7 10:34:27 : NTLM Flag: Negotiate Target Info
Sep  7 10:34:27 : NTLM Flag: UNKNOWN5
Sep  7 10:34:27 : NTLM: Target is: MBBC
Sep  7 10:34:27 : NTLM: Target length is 98
Sep  7 10:34:27 : NTLM: Target length 2 is 98
Sep  7 10:34:27 : NTLM: Target offset is 60
Sep  7 10:34:27 : NTLM: TargetInfo is: ^B^^H^M^B^B^C^^A^^H^I^N^E^T^^D^^P^m^b^b^c^.^e^d^u^^C^^Z^i^n^e^t^.^m^b^b^c^.^e^d^u^^E^^P^m^b^b^c^.^e^d^u^^^^^
Sep  7 10:34:27 : The nonce is: åyß–^[k6µ.
Sep  7 10:34:27 : Finished Step 4
Sep  7 10:34:27 : Entering Step 5
Sep  7 10:34:27 : Got Type 3 msg of 176 characters.
Sep  7 10:34:27 : Finished NTLM!

Hmmmm I did it again and it again took exactly 120 seconds to complete step 2... Sounds like a timeout or something is in operation here...

Settings: Authoxy on port 8081, points to proxy 10.2.0.2:8080, NTLM on, domain “mbbc” host/workstation 10.2.0.2
Network settings point to proxies to 127.0.0.1:8081, *.mbbc.edu is bypassed

Hmmmm again. I blanked out the NTLM host/workstation, left “mbbc” in the domain, and restarted Authoxy, same result.......

Testing.......

OK I KNOW I have to use NTLM, because if it’s not checked, Authoxy doesn’t work, and if it is checked, Authoxy DOES work. However, no matter what I put in the blanks for BOTH domain and host/workstation don’t seem to matter, I get a 120 second timeout in step 2.

Testing........ I left both fields blank for NTLM, and this is what happened:

Sep  7 11:08:37 : Authoxy has started successfully
Sep  7 11:08:46 : Ready to NTLM!
Sep  7 11:08:46 : Entering Step 1
Sep  7 11:08:46 : Entering Step 2
Sep  7 11:08:46 : Found Connection: close. Hiding for NTLM Authentication
Sep  7 11:08:46 : Waiting for Step 2
Sep  7 11:10:46 : Step 2 is complete
Sep  7 11:10:46 : Entering Step 3
Sep  7 11:10:46 : Created Type 1 string of 44 characters
Sep  7 11:10:46 : Pausing in Step 3
Sep  7 11:10:46 : Entering Step 4
Sep  7 11:10:46 : Content-Length: 2639
Sep  7 11:10:46 : No authentication challenge in NTLM authentication Step 4. Giving up.

I will consult with my system administrator, or maybe someone has an idea. Thanks for your help. Sooooooo close.  :)

--Steve

On 9/6/04 5:07 PM, "bruce" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Set in the NTLM your windows domain name eg for us its "curriculum2"
> and in the host, its NOT you/your workstation but the IP address of
> your proxy server 10.2.0.1 or whatever,
>
> Well thats what we do...
>
> Try that.
>
> Cheers,
> Bruce.
>
>
>> --> NTLM Authentication is on, set to my domain (mbbc) and my computer name
>> (sstratpbook)--I'm checking with our system admin to be sure that's correct
>>
>> Note: In Authoxy control panel, the number of daemons running increases with
>> each web access, but doesn't seem to decrease back to 1 after the web page
>> finishes loading. Don't know if that's normal.
>>
>> Any ideas? Thanks for your help--this tool has great potential for me to
>> provide a higher level of compatibility with our MS network, so I'm not
>> willing to give up yet!
>>
>> --Steve
>
>

Reply via email to