PC clients "renaming" themselves

[Steve Maser]

Hi all,

I've seen this problem and I'm not sure what's causing it.

I use Retro 4.3 on the Mac and have Win 98 PCs with the 5.1.5 
client.  When I set them up *in Retrospect*, I gave them a name like 
"@".  The PC itself is given the name 
""

On some of the laptops, all of a sudden they stop responding to 
the "backup server" script.  When I got to the Clients and click on 
the user in question, I get the message to the effect that:

"@" found:  renamed to "".


I've reset the name to the format I originally wanted, but then it 
happens again.

What's causing this?  I've always assumed that if the "backup 
server" wasn't finding them, it meant they were "off" -- but now they 
aren't off -- they are just getting "renamed" and, as such, the 
script isn't finding them anymore.

But I can guarantee the end user isn't renaming his client.

Any thoughts on this?

- Steve
-- 

Steve Maser ([EMAIL PROTECTED])| Thinking is man's only basic virtue,
Systems Project Coordinator  | from which all the others proceed.
Dept. of Mechanical Engineering  |  -- Ayn Rand


--
--
To subscribe:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Archives:

For urgent issues, please contact Dantz technical support directly at
[EMAIL PROTECTED] or 925.253.3050.

Re: PC clients

[Eric Ullman]

Hi David,

Here's some information on how Retrospect communicates with client systems.
For more information on client discovery methods, please see pages 91-95 in
the Retrospect 5.0 User's Guide and pages 83-84 in the Retrospect 4.2 User's
Guide.

I hope this helps!

Eric Ullman
Dantz Development

--

RETROSPECT CLIENT DISCOVERY METHODS

Retrospect can "discover" client computers, providing they are in the same
local subnet as the Retrospect server, via its own internal name service.
This method, called Multicast, uses a UDP broadcast mechanism, to which
client computers respond with their IP address. The UDP broadcast packets
have a time-to-live of one, so they do not attempt to travel outside of the
local subnet. Once the client machine has been identified via UDP,
Retrospect handles any further communication with the client through
point-to-point TCP/IP (i.e., the client's IP address). DHCP poses no threat
to this method of local client discovery.

Retrospect Server Backup for Win32 (and Retrospect 4.2 Mac) can be
configured to discover Retrospect clients in any IP subnet defined by the
administrator. Retrospect accomplishes this with an extended version of its
internal name service called Subnet Broadcast. UDP broadcasts are sent in
turn to each defined subnet, thereby discovering all client computers, no
matter what their assigned IP address may be at the time.

This method of client discovery has one possible drawback. The routers,
through which Retrospect communicates with remote subnets need to support
UDP multicast packet forwarding. Often, in an effort to cut down on
cross-subnet chatter, many routers on large networks are configured to
*disallow* such UDP broadcasts. This defeats Retrospect's subnet broadcast
ability.

We have also seen extreme cases where switched hubs are configured to block
UDP broadcasts. This prevents any version of Retrospect from discovering
clients that aren't on exactly the same network segment.

If a DNS service is in place, DNS name is also a reliable means to track
Retrospect clients, since the DNS database will update the client computers'
IP addresses. There may be a lag of several hours, between IP leases
expiring and the DNS server updating its database, but Retrospect will
eventually be able to find such clients.


SOLUTIONS

If you're having trouble communicating with client computers outside of the
local Retrospect server's IP subnet, try these possible fixes/workarounds:

1. Configure routers (and switched hubs) to allow UDP broadcasts, on TCP/IP
port 497. Retrospect only broadcasts using IANA-registered socket 497, so
filtering other ports would not prevent it from discovering remote clients
in defined IP subnets.

2. Implement and use DNS naming procedures for all your desktop and notebook
computers. Then add in each client computer directly, by DNS name.

3. Put one Retrospect server in each and every IP subnet.

4. Use static IP addressing, and add clients directly by their IP address.


--


> From: "Husk.David" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Reply-To: "retro-talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2000 15:08:38 -0500
> To: "'retro-talk'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: RE: PC clients
> 
> It turns out our problem was that a switch was filtering the multicast
> retrospect packets.  Is there a white paper that deals with how hand shaking
> is accomplished between the Retrospect client and server?



--
--
To subscribe:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Archives:<http://list.working-dogs.com/lists/retro-talk/>
Problems?:   [EMAIL PROTECTED]

RE: PC clients

[Husk.David]

It turns out our problem was that a switch was filtering the multicast
retrospect packets.  Is there a white paper that deals with how hand shaking
is accomplished between the Retrospect client and server?

> --
> From: Husk.David
> Reply To: retro-talk
> Sent: Friday, March 10, 2000 9:48 AM
> To:   'retro-talk'
> Subject:  PC clients
> 
> 
> We have just had a large number of PC clients sort of drop off of
> retrospect.  If we forget the clients then reinstall them into the
> database
> we can connect again.  What exactly does Retrospect check for in a PC
> client?  
> 
> I.E.  IP address? Mac Address?  NetBEUI name?  or what?
> 
> 
> Also which is faster RetroSpect for Mac or PC?  Does RetroSpect make use
> of
> dual processors in PC's?
> 
> 
> Thanks
> 
> 
> --
> --
> To subscribe:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> To unsubscribe:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Archives:<http://list.working-dogs.com/lists/retro-talk/>
> Problems?:   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> 


--
--
To subscribe:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Archives:<http://list.working-dogs.com/lists/retro-talk/>
Problems?:   [EMAIL PROTECTED]

RE: PC clients

[Rees Griffiths]

On 10/03/2000 14:02, Dan O'Donnell wrote:

> Photoshop and After Effects. But there aren't any MP macs anymore anyway, so
> it doesn't matter.

One can only hope that sometime after OS X becomes available that Apple may
decide to look at SMP Macs.

Cheers
Rees
_
Information Systems Manager,
Division of Environmental and Life Sciences,
Macquarie University, NSW, Australia 2109, + 61 2 9850 8202
http://www.bio.mq.edu.au/staff/rgriffiths/ for PGP public key



--
--
To subscribe:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Archives:
Problems?:   [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: PC clients

[Luke Jaeger]

and probably Bryce.

"O'Donnell, Dan (NBC)" wrote:
> 
> > > Does this mean that my multi-processor Mac clone (Daystar Genesis MP
> > > 2x200MHz) actually makes both processors available to Retrospect???
> >
> > Sorry. The Mac OS isn't SMP.
> >
> > Software needs to be specifically written to direct
> > operations to the CPUs. I'm
> > not sure how many apps were written that way (Photoshop?),
> > but the number was
> > relative small.
> 
> Photoshop and After Effects. But there aren't any MP macs anymore anyway, so
> it doesn't matter.
> 
> Because e-mail can be altered electronically,
> the integrity of this communication cannot be guaranteed.
> 
> --
> --
> To subscribe:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> To unsubscribe:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Archives:
> Problems?:   [EMAIL PROTECTED]

-- 


top of the world,

Luke Jaeger, Technology Coordinator
Disney Magazine Publishing
Northampton, Massachusetts
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Any opinions expressed in this message are my own and may not represent
the opinions of Disney Publishing, etc etc etc.

*


--
--
To subscribe:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Archives:
Problems?:   [EMAIL PROTECTED]

RE: PC clients

[O'Donnell, Dan (NBC)]

> > Does this mean that my multi-processor Mac clone (Daystar Genesis MP
> > 2x200MHz) actually makes both processors available to Retrospect???
> 
> Sorry. The Mac OS isn't SMP.
> 
> Software needs to be specifically written to direct 
> operations to the CPUs. I'm
> not sure how many apps were written that way (Photoshop?), 
> but the number was
> relative small.

Photoshop and After Effects. But there aren't any MP macs anymore anyway, so
it doesn't matter.

Because e-mail can be altered electronically,
the integrity of this communication cannot be guaranteed.


--
--
To subscribe:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Archives:
Problems?:   [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: PC clients

[Luke Jaeger]

Something tells me the answer is going to be no, since the mac's MP
implementation is so clunky. Don't apps like Photoshop need special
plug-ins to work with multiple processors?

I'd be happy to be wrong about this ...


"O'Donnell, Dan (NBC)" wrote:
> 
> Does this mean that my multi-processor Mac clone (Daystar Genesis MP
> 2x200MHz) actually makes both processors available to Retrospect???
> 
> 

-- 


top of the world,

Luke Jaeger, Technology Coordinator
Disney Magazine Publishing
Northampton, Massachusetts
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Any opinions expressed in this message are my own and may not represent
the opinions of Disney Publishing, etc etc etc.

*


--
--
To subscribe:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Archives:
Problems?:   [EMAIL PROTECTED]

RE: PC clients

[Craig Isaacs]

> Does this mean that my multi-processor Mac clone (Daystar Genesis MP
> 2x200MHz) actually makes both processors available to Retrospect???

Sorry. The Mac OS isn't SMP.

Software needs to be specifically written to direct operations to the CPUs. I'm
not sure how many apps were written that way (Photoshop?), but the number was
relative small.

Craig (who is signing off because it's already ~8PM in Paris)

_
Craig Isaacs
Dantz Development Corporation
www.betterbackup.com




--
--
To subscribe:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Archives:
Problems?:   [EMAIL PROTECTED]

RE: PC clients

[O'Donnell, Dan (NBC)]

> Craig (De Man!) wrote:
> > I'm told by Dantz that Retrospect itself knows of no second 
> processor, and
> > is not written in such a way to take advantage of a second 
> processor.
> 
> I am currently on a press tour in Europe and happen to be 
> sitting across from the
> Dantz CTO, Richard Zulch.
> 
> Retrospect is carefully architected to be multi-threaded. 
> Since Windows NT
> supports multiple processors symmetrically, threads will be 
> allocated between the
> number of processors available.
> 
> A two processor system will be faster than a single processor 
> system. A four
> processor system will not give you the same increase in 
> performance over a two
> processor system.

Does this mean that my multi-processor Mac clone (Daystar Genesis MP
2x200MHz) actually makes both processors available to Retrospect???

 
> 
> Craig
> _
> Craig Isaacs
> Dantz Development Corporation
> www.betterbackup.com
> 

Because e-mail can be altered electronically,
the integrity of this communication cannot be guaranteed.


--
--
To subscribe:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Archives:
Problems?:   [EMAIL PROTECTED]

RE: PC clients

[Craig Isaacs]

> I'm told by Dantz that Retrospect itself knows of no second processor, and
> is not written in such a way to take advantage of a second processor.

I am currently on a press tour in Europe and happen to be sitting across from the
Dantz CTO, Richard Zulch.

Retrospect is carefully architected to be multi-threaded. Since Windows NT
supports multiple processors symmetrically, threads will be allocated between the
number of processors available.

A two processor system will be faster than a single processor system. A four
processor system will not give you the same increase in performance over a two
processor system.

> Surely Dantz could do some benchmarking for the PC, varying RAM and
> processor speeds and number of processors. Assume Windows NT 4.0 Service
> Pack 4+.

The more RAM you give Retrospect, the faster it will go. The question is: at what
point do you get diminishing returns?

If you have more than a hundred clients and you want your backup window to be as
small as possible, get a fast 2 processor system with >512MB of RAM.

Craig
_
Craig Isaacs
Dantz Development Corporation
www.betterbackup.com




--
--
To subscribe:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Archives:
Problems?:   [EMAIL PROTECTED]

RE: PC clients

[Thone, Bradley A (Sbcsi)]

I'm told by Dantz that Retrospect itself knows of no second processor, and
is not written in such a way to take advantage of a second processor.

However, while Retrospect is using one processor, I bet NT could make use of
the second for other operations (networking, disk reads/writes, background
chores, etc.).

I have no evidence to support the following statement: I suspect that 3+
processors would give little or no benefit to overall backup operations.

I would get a dual processor machine with Pentium IIIs of some insane MHz.
Catalog matching is a lengthy, slow process. As for memory, I have not been
able to get a numeric answer from Dantz, nor even a ballpark figure. I've
given them my numbers (catalog size, catalog session count, catalog file
count, etc).

Surely Dantz could do some benchmarking for the PC, varying RAM and
processor speeds and number of processors. Assume Windows NT 4.0 Service
Pack 4+.

Just some thoughts.

Brad.

-Original Message-
From: Husk.David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, March 10, 2000 8:49 AM
To: 'retro-talk'
Subject: PC clients



We have just had a large number of PC clients sort of drop off of
retrospect.  If we forget the clients then reinstall them into the database
we can connect again.  What exactly does Retrospect check for in a PC
client?  

I.E.  IP address? Mac Address?  NetBEUI name?  or what?


Also which is faster RetroSpect for Mac or PC?  Does RetroSpect make use of
dual processors in PC's?


Thanks


--
--
To subscribe:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Archives:<http://list.working-dogs.com/lists/retro-talk/>
Problems?:   [EMAIL PROTECTED]


--
--
To subscribe:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Archives:<http://list.working-dogs.com/lists/retro-talk/>
Problems?:   [EMAIL PROTECTED]

PC clients

[Husk.David]

We have just had a large number of PC clients sort of drop off of
retrospect.  If we forget the clients then reinstall them into the database
we can connect again.  What exactly does Retrospect check for in a PC
client?  

I.E.  IP address? Mac Address?  NetBEUI name?  or what?


Also which is faster RetroSpect for Mac or PC?  Does RetroSpect make use of
dual processors in PC's?


Thanks


--
--
To subscribe:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Archives:<http://list.working-dogs.com/lists/retro-talk/>
Problems?:   [EMAIL PROTECTED]