We have similar problems here. Windows xp/2k clients with offline files.
Once files are synchronised they can browse the network, without synchronising they cannot connect to anything on the network that has not been enabled for offline use.

Hope this is of some help





From: Ed Esgro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: "NT 2000 Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "NT 2000 Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: RE: Dialup Users
Date: Wed, 6 Nov 2002 08:06:03 -0500

Would it be possible that the name resolution is pointing to the wrong
server that only has a "data" share on it?

-----Original Message-----
From: Adam Smith [mailto:adam.smith@;sageautomation.com]
Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2002 6:26 PM
To: NT 2000 Discussions
Subject: Dialup Users


We have a Windows NT 4.0 PDC which is also our main file server.  We
also have a Windows 2000 server which is serving RAS.

When users dial up and authenticate using RAS, they all try and connect
to our main file server by putting '\\server' (Don't blame me -- I
didn't name it =)) into their Location bar in Windows Explorer. This is
not an issue, as it is a perfectly valid way of browsing network shares.

Unfortunately majority of the time, these users can either NOT resolve
the name 'server' or they can only see one or two shares on that server.
Today for example, one user rang me while dialled up saying he could
only see the "Data" share when he should have been presented with at
least four shares.  He was attempting to access a share called
"Resources."

I told the user to map a drive manually, with "net use Z:
\\server\resources."  The map was unsuccessful, as the specified share
could not be seen.  Running "Net View" displayed only the "Data" share.

I then instructed the user to do a "Net View \\192.168.0.2," and the
remote user was presented with *ALL* the shares he should have seen.  He
then had to map a drive to the IP address of the box, rather than its
NetBIOS name.  All I could think was "What a joke."

I've seen this so, so many times, and I find it totally rediculous.  To
me, this proves that if I were to write up an OSI Checklist I'd get the
following:

	DEAD		Application
	DEAD-ISH?	Presentation
	:)		Session
	:)		Transport
	:)		Network
	:)		Data Link
	:)		Physical

if all the rest are working, it *HAS* to be a fault of the Microsoft
Networking model.  What else could it be?


--
Adam Smith
Information Technology Officer
SAGE Automation Ltd.

[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.sageautomation.com

Phone:   (08) 8276 0703
Fax:     (08) 8276 0799
Mobile:  0414 895 273



------
You are subscribed as [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
To unsubscribe send a blank email to %%email.unsub%%





*****This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and
intended solely for the use of the addressee. If you have received this
email in error please notify [EMAIL PROTECTED] Any views or opinions
presented in this email are solely those of the author and do not
necessarily represent those of Stainsafe Inc. or any of its subsidiaries or
affiliates. The company accepts no liability for any damage caused by any
virus transmitted by this email.*****

------
You are subscribed as [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
To unsubscribe send a blank email to %%email.unsub%%

_________________________________________________________________
The new MSN 8: advanced junk mail protection and 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail


------
You are subscribed as [email protected]
Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to