For the checks that are failing, you must be using a username and password. The username and password may be the one you specified in the services control panel under the log on tab or in the check itself with the authenticate first box checked. This user MUST have administrator privileges on the remote machine or the check will fail. If you cannot do a net view \\<server> using that same user then you must troubleshoot that first.
Jason Passow Mississippi Welders Supply [EMAIL PROTECTED] ph: (507) 494-5178 fax: (507) 454-8104 "If you do everything right, nobody will realize you've done anything at all." Barron,Joseph wrote: > > You are right, I dont know WTH I was thinking. Too much multitasking. > > I get access denied > > But this makes sense to me. The local user account that is logged on > to the PC running SA does not exist on the remote machine, and I get > the *same result* if I run a NET VIEW on a machine where everything works. > > Joe > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > *From:* Rick Fogarty [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > *Sent:* Wednesday, March 01, 2006 4:35 PM > *To:* Servers Alive Discussion List > *Subject:* [SA-list] RE: [SA-list] RE: [SA-list] RE: [SA-list] What > can masquerade as a name resolut ion problem? > > I think he means NET VIEW and NOT NET SHARE as it appears you're > doing... No? > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > *From:* Barron,Joseph [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > *Sent:* Wednesday, March 01, 2006 3:50 PM > *To:* Servers Alive Discussion List > *Subject:* [SA-list] RE: [SA-list] RE: [SA-list] What can masquerade > as a name resolut ion problem? > > If I do that, I get a list of shares for that server. It does not show > the admin shares, however. (And I suppose it shouldnt.) > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > *From:* Dirk Bulinckx [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > *Sent:* Wednesday, March 01, 2006 3:40 PM > *To:* Servers Alive Discussion List > *Subject:* [SA-list] RE: [SA-list] What can masquerade as a name > resolution problem? > > What happens if from the system running SA (and as the user running > SA) you take an OS prompt and do a > > NET VIEW \\<server> > > (<server> is one were you get the 53 error). > > Dirk. > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > *From:* Barron,Joseph [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > *Sent:* Wednesday, March 01, 2006 9:20 PM > *To:* Servers Alive Discussion List > *Subject:* [SA-list] What can masquerade as a name resolution problem? > > My ServersAlive install was inactive for quite a long time. (Couple of > months.. Long story as to why.) > > Yesterday I fired it back up, installed the new API based eventlog > check, and away I went > > The majority of my tasks have been created once, then replicated. > > For the majority of hosts Im checking, all tasks are working well. > For two or three hosts, my perfmon and NTProcess checks fail with: > > Wednesday, March 01, 2006 2:29:39 PM XXXXXXXLS1 LMPC Support PC CPU Usage > > Wednesday, March 01, 2006 2:29:47 PM XXXXXXXLS1 Perfmon (Processor,% > Processor Time,0) gave errorThe network path was not found. > > ( 53) > > Wednesday, March 01, 2006 2:29:56 PM XXXXXXXLS1 LMPC Support PC CPU Usage > > Wednesday, March 01, 2006 2:30:02 PM XXXXXXXLS1 Perfmon (Processor,% > Processor Time,0) gave errorThe network path was not found. > > Wednesday, March 01, 2006 1:49:09 PM XXXXXXXLS1 LMPC Support PC EPO Agent > > Wednesday, March 01, 2006 1:49:15 PM ERR process check: ERR: 53 > > Wednesday, March 01, 2006 1:49:15 PM NT Process check of UpdaterUI on > SEUSCITYLS1 failed > > While the specifics vary from server to server and check to check (of > course) this is the output of every perfmon or NT Process check on the > three affected servers. > > Now, you might think this is obviously a name resolution problem. Its > not. (Well, at least not obviously so.) Please see the following > supporting details: > > n Even the problem servers are responding properly to Ping checks, NT > Service checks, and Eventlog checks, plus are responding to some > errorlevel checks that Ive implemented using simple batch files. In > all cases SA is given only a hostname, and resolves hostnames using > the hosts file. In fact, the checks that are failing are dependent on > a successful ping that is resolved using only the hostname. There is > no difference in syntax or content of hostname or authentication > information between working and non-working checks. > > n Other servers are responding properly to the same checks that are > failing on the problem servers. When I say same, I mean replicated > directly from the same source check as those that are currently failing. > > n While I theoretically own these machines, the nature of their use is > such that it would not be impossible for a well meaning local person > to make changes on that end. However, I wouldnt even know what to > look at, given that most checks work on the problem machines. > > I have checked the archive, apologies if Im missed a similar problem. > > Joe > > > *********************************************************************** > The information contained in this email and any attachments may be > confidential and is provided solely for the use of the intended > recipient(s). If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby > notified that any disclosure, distribution, or use of this e-mail, its > attachments or any information contained therein is unauthorised and > prohibited. If you have received this in error, please contact the > sender immediately and delete this e-mail and any attachments. > > No responsibility is accepted for any virus or defect that might arise > from opening this e-mail or attachments, whether or not it has been > checked by anti-virus software. > > To unsubscribe send a message with UNSUBSCRIBE as subject to > [email protected] > To unsubscribe send a message with UNSUBSCRIBE as subject to > [email protected] > _____________________________________________________________________ > This e-mail has been scanned for viruses by Verizon Business Internet > Managed Scanning Services - powered by MessageLabs. For further > information visit http://www.mci.com > > > *********************************************************************** > The information contained in this email and any attachments may be > confidential and is provided solely for the use of the intended > recipient(s). If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby > notified that any disclosure, distribution, or use of this e-mail, its > attachments or any information contained therein is unauthorised and > prohibited. If you have received this in error, please contact the > sender immediately and delete this e-mail and any attachments. > > No responsibility is accepted for any virus or defect that might arise > from opening this e-mail or attachments, whether or not it has been > checked by anti-virus software. > > To unsubscribe send a message with UNSUBSCRIBE as subject to > [email protected] > To unsubscribe send a message with UNSUBSCRIBE as subject to > [email protected] > _____________________________________________________________________ > This e-mail has been scanned for viruses by Verizon Business Internet > Managed Scanning Services - powered by MessageLabs. For further > information visit http://www.mci.com > > > *********************************************************************** > The information contained in this email and any attachments may be > confidential and is provided solely for the use of the intended > recipient(s). If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby > notified that any disclosure, distribution, or use of this e-mail, its > attachments or any information contained therein is unauthorised and > prohibited. If you have received this in error, please contact the > sender immediately and delete this e-mail and any attachments. > > No responsibility is accepted for any virus or defect that might arise > from opening this e-mail or attachments, whether or not it has been > checked by anti-virus software. > > To unsubscribe send a message with UNSUBSCRIBE as subject to > [email protected] To unsubscribe send a message with UNSUBSCRIBE as subject to [email protected]
