Re: [H] lmhosts file?
j maccraw, I'll try and answer inline below, as best that I can... :) At 17:14 01/14/2008 -0800, you wrote: LMHOSTS is a stand-in for DNS in the sense that it does domain-to-ip translation. Thanks. I suspected this from my reading. And why I asked I should update my file before bringing another 'new' ip addy on the LAN. I do get that this may be really old fashioned, but it works for me ATM. Odds are that your router is your DNS server and as such should be able to resolve all of you lan machine names into IP's w/o using the lmhosts kludge. To the best of my knowledge this is just not the case. All of my clients and my current router use either OpenDNS addresses, or, the suggested two DNS servers for BellSouth. And no, I do not allow my current router to do 'DNS Relay' either. I may enable this feature in the future, however. All this extra mental gymnastics go out the window if you'd just see the light and use DHCP. I mean who cares what IP address a system is on if you can get there by name anyway Yes, I do understand what you say. Let's just say I am a creature of habit. I like to uniquely assign my clients IP addy's AND have them stay that way until I decide otherwise. Let's just agree that this is my limited bit of control within my LAN ATM! LOL! Like Tomato---Tomahto, no? No LEDs lit WOULD mean that some part of the router is dead since having a physical link lights a light reguardless of what a higher layer does. Thank you. That is what I thought also, but could not find supporting docs to support this observation. I suspect that the 'router' side (w/telnet) works since I can talk telnet to it. The 'switch' port LEDs only light up if/when I force a rom0 or f/w upload. So, I do know that the LEDs do work! Just not when I need them too! LOL! Really odd. Really fun tool In the AM I'll put power to the brick again and see it the last rom0/firmware upload worked. For some unknown reason I keep getting a 'retry' during the f/w upload at the same place each time I do it (about 13 minutes into a 20 minute upload). Perhaps I have a bad dot-bin file. Have a new one to try also. Old password is reset! Old IP addy is reset! Old everything else is reset! Making forward progress so far. Thanks for your patience. Yes, I am mule-headed. Best, Duncan snip
[H] lmhosts file?
If I believe I need to bring another device (an old router) on to my LAN for continued troubleshooting, should I update my current client's lmhost file to disclose this new device B4 I plug the brick in? The reason to put the device on my LAN is to try and see if the http interface works or not. So far, only the old telnet (rs-232c) works to this device :( Thanks, Duncan
Re: [H] lmhosts file?
Why would you need to touch your lmhosts file at all? You should only touch hosts, and even then you don't need to change that if you're just bringing something you want to telnet to on your network. DHSinclair wrote: If I believe I need to bring another device (an old router) on to my LAN for continued troubleshooting, should I update my current client's lmhost file to disclose this new device B4 I plug the brick in? The reason to put the device on my LAN is to try and see if the http interface works or not. So far, only the old telnet (rs-232c) works to this device :( Thanks, Duncan
Re: [H] lmhosts file?
Ben, I do not know. Why I asked. I suppose I asked because in testing my old router yesterday, it would not respond to pings or a direct http call even though I had given it an IP addy that was unique and on my chosen subnet. Oddly, the router looked (externally) as though the switch portion was dead. No LEDs, no activity, no nothing In or Out.. still troubleshooting. The only touching I do to my hosts file is every month when I download a new host file from sysInternals; and, then install it on each client. I read somewhere that the lmhosts file is used so my clients 'know' who everyone is. Did I miss something? Yes, I do not have an active domain or domain controller. All my clients use the default 'workgroup' in my network setups. No, I do not use DHCP. Thanks. Best, Duncan At 11:58 01/14/2008 -0500, you wrote: Why would you need to touch your lmhosts file at all? You should only touch hosts, and even then you don't need to change that if you're just bringing something you want to telnet to on your network. DHSinclair wrote: If I believe I need to bring another device (an old router) on to my LAN for continued troubleshooting, should I update my current client's lmhost file to disclose this new device B4 I plug the brick in? The reason to put the device on my LAN is to try and see if the http interface works or not. So far, only the old telnet (rs-232c) works to this device :( Thanks, Duncan
Re: [H] lmhosts file?
If you're just trying to ping something to see if it's alive, you don't need to touch any files on your PC. You shouldn't really need to touch hosts/lmhosts unless netbios isn't enabled on your network, or you want to reach a device on your network that doesn't use netbios and you want to use a hostname instead of an IP. DHSinclair wrote: Ben, I do not know. Why I asked. I suppose I asked because in testing my old router yesterday, it would not respond to pings or a direct http call even though I had given it an IP addy that was unique and on my chosen subnet. Oddly, the router looked (externally) as though the switch portion was dead. No LEDs, no activity, no nothing In or Out.. still troubleshooting. The only touching I do to my hosts file is every month when I download a new host file from sysInternals; and, then install it on each client. I read somewhere that the lmhosts file is used so my clients 'know' who everyone is. Did I miss something? Yes, I do not have an active domain or domain controller. All my clients use the default 'workgroup' in my network setups. No, I do not use DHCP. Thanks. Best, Duncan At 11:58 01/14/2008 -0500, you wrote: Why would you need to touch your lmhosts file at all? You should only touch hosts, and even then you don't need to change that if you're just bringing something you want to telnet to on your network. DHSinclair wrote: If I believe I need to bring another device (an old router) on to my LAN for continued troubleshooting, should I update my current client's lmhost file to disclose this new device B4 I plug the brick in? The reason to put the device on my LAN is to try and see if the http interface works or not. So far, only the old telnet (rs-232c) works to this device :( Thanks, Duncan
Re: [H] lmhosts file?
Thankyou Ben, This makes sense to me. Yes, I do still have netbios enabled on the network, each client. I do still recall, from years ago, that netbios should be disabled as a security enhancement (grc.com?), but I have not gotten back to that yet, and, my network may not be fully enabled yet cuz I think I keep dicking with it, I suppose!! I do accept that a lot of pebcak still exists at this address! I'll leave my 'hosts' and 'lmhosts' files alone! Just checking :) Ah, 'hostname' call. Nope, not yet. I have not yet assigned the device a hostname. Thankyou. I will continue my troubleshooting of the brick. Best, Duncan At 13:03 01/14/2008 -0500, you wrote: If you're just trying to ping something to see if it's alive, you don't need to touch any files on your PC. You shouldn't really need to touch hosts/lmhosts unless netbios isn't enabled on your network, or you want to reach a device on your network that doesn't use netbios and you want to use a hostname instead of an IP. DHSinclair wrote: Ben, I do not know. Why I asked. I suppose I asked because in testing my old router yesterday, it would not respond to pings or a direct http call even though I had given it an IP addy that was unique and on my chosen subnet. Oddly, the router looked (externally) as though the switch portion was dead. No LEDs, no activity, no nothing In or Out.. still troubleshooting. The only touching I do to my hosts file is every month when I download a new host file from sysInternals; and, then install it on each client. I read somewhere that the lmhosts file is used so my clients 'know' who everyone is. Did I miss something? Yes, I do not have an active domain or domain controller. All my clients use the default 'workgroup' in my network setups. No, I do not use DHCP. Thanks. Best, Duncan At 11:58 01/14/2008 -0500, you wrote: Why would you need to touch your lmhosts file at all? You should only touch hosts, and even then you don't need to change that if you're just bringing something you want to telnet to on your network. DHSinclair wrote: If I believe I need to bring another device (an old router) on to my LAN for continued troubleshooting, should I update my current client's lmhost file to disclose this new device B4 I plug the brick in? The reason to put the device on my LAN is to try and see if the http interface works or not. So far, only the old telnet (rs-232c) works to this device :( Thanks, Duncan
Re: [H] lmhosts file?
You don't want netbios traffic coming in from the outside world, but netbios traffic between the windows hosts on your LAN is perfectly acceptable. DHSinclair wrote: Thankyou Ben, This makes sense to me. Yes, I do still have netbios enabled on the network, each client. I do still recall, from years ago, that netbios should be disabled as a security enhancement (grc.com?), but I have not gotten back to that yet, and, my network may not be fully enabled yet cuz I think I keep dicking with it, I suppose!! I do accept that a lot of pebcak still exists at this address! I'll leave my 'hosts' and 'lmhosts' files alone! Just checking :) Ah, 'hostname' call. Nope, not yet. I have not yet assigned the device a hostname. Thankyou. I will continue my troubleshooting of the brick. Best, Duncan
Re: [H] lmhosts file?
LMHOSTS is a stand-in for DNS in the sense that it does domain-to-ip translation. Odds are that your router is your DNS server and as such should be able to resolve all of you lan machine names into IP's w/o using the lmhosts kludge. All this extra mental gymnastics go out the window if you'd just see the light and use DHCP. I mean who cares what IP address a system is on if you can get there by name anyway No LEDs lit WOULD mean that some part of the router is dead since having a physical link lights a light reguardless of what a higher layer does. DHSinclair wrote: Ben, I do not know. Why I asked. I suppose I asked because in testing my old router yesterday, it would not respond to pings or a direct http call even though I had given it an IP addy that was unique and on my chosen subnet. Oddly, the router looked (externally) as though the switch portion was dead. No LEDs, no activity, no nothing In or Out.. still troubleshooting. The only touching I do to my hosts file is every month when I download a new host file from sysInternals; and, then install it on each client. I read somewhere that the lmhosts file is used so my clients 'know' who everyone is. Did I miss something? Yes, I do not have an active domain or domain controller. All my clients use the default 'workgroup' in my network setups. No, I do not use DHCP. Thanks. Best, Duncan Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ
[H] LMHOSTS file?
I have a server, but have not yet established a domain. So, I suppose my server is not yet my domain controller. And, by default I do not have a WINS server either on this LAN. I spent the entire day trying to read a WindShark scan from yesterday (4.4K). Completely comprehending what I see make take that rest of time4me... :) It does seen that everybody on my LAN is chronically clueless about who else is about.. :) (and my one XP machine seems to be the most clueless.) Lots of who is calls and client broadcasts about here I are. It seems to me that if I create a LMHOSTS file that defines all my LAN folk there won't be so much apparent confusion. I can say that stuff happens even without the LMHOSTS file, but maybe I can make stuff a bit easier with it. Right or Wrong? Is the LMHOSTS file safe from peeking/sneaking/malware probes? It is a sort of LAN road map as I read it. Best, Duncan
