If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
How to tell which protocol (NetBUI or TCP/IP) each Network Neighborhood connection is using
In article , "Dick Kistler"
wrote: Geez, if I wanted to make my life simple(and didn't need internet access) NetBEUI would be the ticket. Perhaps you can explain why Microsoft doesn't support it any more. It would be an ideal second protocol for home users, if they wanted to access the internet and also use a second protocol for file and printer sharing. NetBEUI is available on the Windows XP CD-ROM. Please see this Microsoft Knowledge Base article: How to install NetBEUI on Windows XP http://support.microsoft.com/?id=301041 It's an "unsupported" protocol, which means that Microsoft hasn't tested it extensively and won't give technical help with NetBEUI problems. As I understand it, Microsoft wanted to drop NetBEUI completely, but they were convinced to include it on the CD for compatibility with old networks that use NetBEUI. Why would they want to drop it? Probably because the Internet uses TCP/IP and most XP computers are connected to the Internet. I don't think that a second protocol is "ideal" under any circumstances. Windows networking works best with a single protocol, and using more than one can cause network browsing problems. Windows XP has a built-in Internet Connection Firewall, so there's no need to use a protocol other than TCP/IP for file and printer sharing. -- Best Wishes, Steve Winograd, MS-MVP (Windows Networking) Please post any reply as a follow-up message in the news group for everyone to see. I'm sorry, but I don't answer questions addressed directly to me in E-mail or news groups. Microsoft Most Valuable Professional - Windows Networking http://mvp.support.microsoft.com Steve Winograd's Networking FAQ http://www.bcmaven.com/networking/faq.htm |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
How to tell which protocol (NetBUI or TCP/IP) each Network Neighborhood connection is using
Steve Winograd [MVP] wrote:
In article , "Dick Kistler" wrote: Geez, if I wanted to make my life simple(and didn't need internet access) NetBEUI would be the ticket. Perhaps you can explain why Microsoft doesn't support it any more. It would be an ideal second protocol for home users, if they wanted to access the internet and also use a second protocol for file and printer sharing. NetBEUI is available on the Windows XP CD-ROM. Please see this Microsoft Knowledge Base article: How to install NetBEUI on Windows XP http://support.microsoft.com/?id=301041 Yes, I know this. I have installed NetBEUI on my XP machine to make it easier to communicate with Windows 95. It's an "unsupported" protocol, which means that Microsoft hasn't tested it extensively and won't give technical help with NetBEUI problems. I understand this, but I haven't seen a believable reason for the decision. There must be millions of systems that use NetBEUI. As I understand it, Microsoft wanted to drop NetBEUI completely, but they were convinced to include it on the CD for compatibility with old networks that use NetBEUI. Why would they want to drop it? Probably because the Internet uses TCP/IP and most XP computers are connected to the Internet. So Microsoft decided to drop it to make it easy on themselves, not for the millions of users that use NetBEUI. I see that once upon a time, there were many protocols offered standard with Windows. Now there are only 2-TCP/IP and NWLink(and NetBEUI if you have to have it). I understand that you can do everything with TCP/IP. I also understand that the only thing standing between my computer and the internet is the quality of the firewall in my router and maybe the quality of the firewall on my pc. My experience is that more layers are better. I don't think that a second protocol is "ideal" under any circumstances. Windows networking works best with a single protocol, and using more than one can cause network browsing problems. Windows XP has a built-in Internet Connection Firewall, so there's no need to use a protocol other than TCP/IP for file and printer sharing. I understand that in computer software, as in everything else, simpler is better. However, you do increase your security somewhat if you use a different protocol for file and printer sharing than for communications with the internet. In addition, if the protocol is not routable, like NetBEUI is, you get a little more security. In fact, some sites recommend this as the only way to go, and that using a single protocol for both internet connection and file/printer sharing is crazy. It seems to me that the network browsing problem could be worked(so far, I haven't observed it). I just would like a straight answer from Microsoft about why they don't support NetBEUI. I could handle it. Even if they said something like "We stopped supporting NetBEUI because a. It's something we used during the MSDOS era and we are flushing anything that we can that we used back then. b. If you use an unroutable protocol on your network, it will make it difficult for our "trusted computer" system to work. or c. We couldn't see how NetBEUI could make us any bucks, since the number of NetBEUI users is dropping. If we could get rid of NWLink, we'd dump it too." I guess I could live with it. Dick Kistler |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
How to tell which protocol (NetBUI or TCP/IP) each Network Neighborhood connection is using
In article , "Dick Kistler"
wrote: Steve Winograd [MVP] wrote: In article , "Dick Kistler" wrote: Geez, if I wanted to make my life simple(and didn't need internet access) NetBEUI would be the ticket. Perhaps you can explain why Microsoft doesn't support it any more. It would be an ideal second protocol for home users, if they wanted to access the internet and also use a second protocol for file and printer sharing. NetBEUI is available on the Windows XP CD-ROM. Please see this Microsoft Knowledge Base article: How to install NetBEUI on Windows XP http://support.microsoft.com/?id=301041 Yes, I know this. I have installed NetBEUI on my XP machine to make it easier to communicate with Windows 95. It's an "unsupported" protocol, which means that Microsoft hasn't tested it extensively and won't give technical help with NetBEUI problems. I understand this, but I haven't seen a believable reason for the decision. There must be millions of systems that use NetBEUI. As I understand it, Microsoft wanted to drop NetBEUI completely, but they were convinced to include it on the CD for compatibility with old networks that use NetBEUI. Why would they want to drop it? Probably because the Internet uses TCP/IP and most XP computers are connected to the Internet. So Microsoft decided to drop it to make it easy on themselves, not for the millions of users that use NetBEUI. I see that once upon a time, there were many protocols offered standard with Windows. Now there are only 2-TCP/IP and NWLink(and NetBEUI if you have to have it). I understand that you can do everything with TCP/IP. I also understand that the only thing standing between my computer and the internet is the quality of the firewall in my router and maybe the quality of the firewall on my pc. My experience is that more layers are better. I don't think that a second protocol is "ideal" under any circumstances. Windows networking works best with a single protocol, and using more than one can cause network browsing problems. Windows XP has a built-in Internet Connection Firewall, so there's no need to use a protocol other than TCP/IP for file and printer sharing. I understand that in computer software, as in everything else, simpler is better. However, you do increase your security somewhat if you use a different protocol for file and printer sharing than for communications with the internet. In addition, if the protocol is not routable, like NetBEUI is, you get a little more security. In fact, some sites recommend this as the only way to go, and that using a single protocol for both internet connection and file/printer sharing is crazy. It seems to me that the network browsing problem could be worked(so far, I haven't observed it). I just would like a straight answer from Microsoft about why they don't support NetBEUI. I could handle it. Even if they said something like "We stopped supporting NetBEUI because a. It's something we used during the MSDOS era and we are flushing anything that we can that we used back then. b. If you use an unroutable protocol on your network, it will make it difficult for our "trusted computer" system to work. or c. We couldn't see how NetBEUI could make us any bucks, since the number of NetBEUI users is dropping. If we could get rid of NWLink, we'd dump it too." I guess I could live with it. Dick Kistler I can't speak for Microsoft, Dick. If you want an answer from them, you'll have to ask them. NetBEUI was the default protocol in Windows 95. TCP/IP has been the default protocol in every version of Windows since Windows 98. Nothing in Windows networking has ever required NetBEUI. Even in Windows 95, you can install TCP/IP and remove NetBEUI. I think that a home broadband router gives all the security that's needed, because: 1. The LAN computers have private IP addresses that aren't accessible from the Internet. 2. The router's WAN interface has an accessible public IP address, but the router has no access to shared resources on the LAN computers. I think that a properly configured software firewall gives all the security that's needed. If I wanted multiple levels of security, I'd use both a broadband router and a software firewall, but I wouldn't add another protocol. Can we agree to disagree? :-) -- Best Wishes, Steve Winograd, MS-MVP (Windows Networking) Please post any reply as a follow-up message in the news group for everyone to see. I'm sorry, but I don't answer questions addressed directly to me in E-mail or news groups. Microsoft Most Valuable Professional - Windows Networking http://mvp.support.microsoft.com Steve Winograd's Networking FAQ http://www.bcmaven.com/networking/faq.htm |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
How to tell which protocol (NetBUI or TCP/IP) each Network Neighborhood connection is using
In article , "Steve
Winograd [MVP]" wrote: I think that a home broadband router gives all the security that's needed, because: 1. The LAN computers have private IP addresses that aren't accessible from the Internet. 2. The router's WAN interface has an accessible public IP address, but the router has no access to shared resources on the LAN computers. I think that a properly configured software firewall gives all the security that's needed. If I wanted multiple levels of security, I'd use both a broadband router and a software firewall, but I wouldn't add another protocol. I just thought of one more point that I'd like to add. No matter what protocol the LAN uses for file and printer sharing, every computer that connects to the Internet needs a firewall to block access to ports that cam be exploited by Blaster, Sasser, etc. That firewall can be hardware (e.g. home broadband router) or software (e.g. ZoneAlarm, Norton Internet Security, XP's Internet Connection Firewall). -- Best Wishes, Steve Winograd, MS-MVP (Windows Networking) Please post any reply as a follow-up message in the news group for everyone to see. I'm sorry, but I don't answer questions addressed directly to me in E-mail or news groups. Microsoft Most Valuable Professional - Windows Networking http://mvp.support.microsoft.com Steve Winograd's Networking FAQ http://www.bcmaven.com/networking/faq.htm |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
How to tell which protocol (NetBUI or TCP/IP) each Network Neighborhood connection is using
Dick Kistler I can't speak for Microsoft, Dick. If you want an answer from them, you'll have to ask them. NetBEUI was the default protocol in Windows 95. TCP/IP has been the default protocol in every version of Windows since Windows 98. Nothing in Windows networking has ever required NetBEUI. Even in Windows 95, you can install TCP/IP and remove NetBEUI. Yes, you can do this, but my experience(admittedly small) is that it is difficult to do file and printer sharing with Win 95, Windows XP and TCP/IP, and adding the second protocol makes it easy to do this. I don't know why, and would like to know. I think that NetBEUI has a longer history. That it was the primary non-Netware protocol on MSDOS networks before interest in the internet came along. My guess is that there are lots of computers using it, under conditions that don't require internet access, since it has a lower overhead than IPX/SPX for small networks and doesn't require any configuration. I think that a home broadband router gives all the security that's needed, because: 1. The LAN computers have private IP addresses that aren't accessible from the Internet. 2. The router's WAN interface has an accessible public IP address, but the router has no access to shared resources on the LAN computers. I think that a properly configured software firewall gives all the security that's needed. If I wanted multiple levels of security, I'd use both a broadband router and a software firewall, but I wouldn't add another protocol. I understand this, and use both the router's firewall and a software firewall in my network. My interest in a second protocol came from an incident in which an internet site was able to learn the network ip address of one of my computers. This should be impossible as I understand how NAT routers work. I could not find anything wrong with the configuration of the router. It's possible that there is something wrong with the router, of course, but since it otherwise works ok, I think that is unlikely. Luckily, the software firewall I run logged and stopped the attack. So, I started looking at a second protocol for another protection layer, and found that neither NetBEUI or NWLink work for my situation. And that nobody could give me good, technical answers to why. There are sites that religiously advocate using a second protocol, and regard anyone who only uses one as nuts. Also there are people like you that can't see any reason to use a second protocol. So far, I haven't seen any good, technical discussions that would allow a choice between the two options. I, however have a situation in which one protocol doesn't seem to be enough, and in which two protocols don't work. And no-one seems to have any real reasons for why this is so. The lack of a real reason that MS stopped support for NeBEUI is just one of small pieces of the puzzle. Perhaps this is the wrong forum for this discussion, but it seems to me that having a second protocol that is not routable, and that is easy to configure(and doesn't cause browsing problems) would be a good strategic thing for Microsoft to do to make networks more resistant to outside attack. In addition to whatever firewalling you do. That's all. Dick Kistler Oh, by the way, some of the sarcasm about MS's motives came from the fact that they seem to be operating, like most large corporations, in a mode that considers their own problems to be more important than their customers. Cases in point: 1. Dropping support for NetBEUI 2. Short end of life for Win 95, 98, 98SE also MSDOS 3. Dropping the ball on potential uses of Windows PE 4. Overly integrating Internet Explorer with the OS 5. Dropping support for distinctive ring from Window XP Not meant to be comprehensive, just the things I personally have run across in my work. |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
How to tell which protocol (NetBUI or TCP/IP) each Network Neighborhood connection is using
In article , "Dick Kistler"
wrote: NetBEUI was the default protocol in Windows 95. TCP/IP has been the default protocol in every version of Windows since Windows 98. Nothing in Windows networking has ever required NetBEUI. Even in Windows 95, you can install TCP/IP and remove NetBEUI. Yes, you can do this, but my experience(admittedly small) is that it is difficult to do file and printer sharing with Win 95, Windows XP and TCP/IP, and adding the second protocol makes it easy to do this. I don't know why, and would like to know. In my experience, it's easy to network all versions of Windows (even Windows for Workgroups 3.11) with TCP/IP. If TCP/IP doesn't work, the most likely problem is that a misconfigured firewall is blocking access. I think that NetBEUI has a longer history. That it was the primary non-Netware protocol on MSDOS networks before interest in the internet came along. My guess is that there are lots of computers using it, under conditions that don't require internet access, since it has a lower overhead than IPX/SPX for small networks and doesn't require any configuration. Yes, the lack of configuration is an advantage of NetBEUI. If I wanted multiple levels of security, I'd use both a broadband router and a software firewall, but I wouldn't add another protocol. I understand this, and use both the router's firewall and a software firewall in my network. My interest in a second protocol came from an incident in which an internet site was able to learn the network ip address of one of my computers. This should be impossible as I understand how NAT routers work. I could not find anything wrong with the configuration of the router. It's possible that there is something wrong with the router, of course, but since it otherwise works ok, I think that is unlikely. Luckily, the software firewall I run logged and stopped the attack. This is interesting. What was the attack? What address was being attacked? Even if a web site finds out the private IP address (e.g. 10.x.x.x, 192.168.x.x) that a router gives to your computer, the web site can't attack that address. Internet routers don't have routes to private IP addresses, so they drop all packets addressed to them. After all, there are probably thousands of different computers with IP address 192.168.0.1 at any moment. A web site can only attack the router's public IP address I recently went to an Internet site that displayed my computer's private IP address after running a "firewall" test. However, the information from the web site is misleading. My firewall didn't reveal the address -- it was Java running in my web browser that did. When I turned off Java, the web site couldn't see the private IP address. To try it, go to www.auditmypc.com and run Firewall Test 1. It works by causing the browser to create and execute a reference to this URL: http://www.auditmypc.com/freescan/ui...ww.xxx.yyy.zzz where "www.xxx.yyy.zzz" is your private IP address. For example, if you click this link, it will tell you that your IP address is 192.168.0.1: http://www.auditmypc.com/freescan/ui...?a=192.168.0.1 So, I started looking at a second protocol for another protection layer, and found that neither NetBEUI or NWLink work for my situation. And that nobody could give me good, technical answers to why. There are sites that religiously advocate using a second protocol, and regard anyone who only uses one as nuts. Also there are people like you that can't see any reason to use a second protocol. So far, I haven't seen any good, technical discussions that would allow a choice between the two options. I've seen some of those sites, and I think that they exaggerate the difficulty of securing a TCP/IP-only network. One flagrant example is http://grc.com which, in my opinion, is long on scare tactics and short on technical accuracy. I, however have a situation in which one protocol doesn't seem to be enough, and in which two protocols don't work. And no-one seems to have any real reasons for why this is so. The lack of a real reason that MS stopped support for NeBEUI is just one of small pieces of the puzzle. Perhaps this is the wrong forum for this discussion, but it seems to me that having a second protocol that is not routable, and that is easy to configure(and doesn't cause browsing problems) would be a good strategic thing for Microsoft to do to make networks more resistant to outside attack. In addition to whatever firewalling you do. That's all. Dick Kistler Oh, by the way, some of the sarcasm about MS's motives came from the fact that they seem to be operating, like most large corporations, in a mode that considers their own problems to be more important than their customers. Cases in point: 1. Dropping support for NetBEUI 2. Short end of life for Win 95, 98, 98SE also MSDOS 3. Dropping the ball on potential uses of Windows PE 4. Overly integrating Internet Explorer with the OS 5. Dropping support for distinctive ring from Window XP Not meant to be comprehensive, just the things I personally have run across in my work. #5 really annoys me, too. You didn't mention what I consider to be the worst flaw in Windows XP: the use of "simple file sharing", which offers no access control, in Windows XP Home Edition networking. -- Best Wishes, Steve Winograd, MS-MVP (Windows Networking) Please post any reply as a follow-up message in the news group for everyone to see. I'm sorry, but I don't answer questions addressed directly to me in E-mail or news groups. Microsoft Most Valuable Professional - Windows Networking http://mvp.support.microsoft.com Steve Winograd's Networking FAQ http://www.bcmaven.com/networking/faq.htm |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
How to tell which protocol (NetBUI or TCP/IP) each Network Neighborhood connection is using
On Thu, 29 Jul 2004 13:13:04 -0600, "Steve Winograd [MVP]"
wrote: If I wanted multiple levels of security, Forget the ifs, you don't do it yourself because it's not necessary so why advise others to waste their resources with an unused personal firewall? I'd use both a broadband router and a software firewall, but I wouldn't add another protocol. NetBEUI might be okay with legacy windows machines but the future is connecting *everyone* together. Macs have their own version of samba along with linux, *bsd and others and they all connect together via tcp/ip. Not much use for netbeui in the overall scheme. Jim. |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
How to tell which protocol (NetBUI or TCP/IP) each Network Neighborhood connection is using
James Egan wrote:
On Thu, 29 Jul 2004 13:13:04 -0600, "Steve Winograd [MVP]" wrote: If I wanted multiple levels of security, Forget the ifs, you don't do it yourself because it's not necessary so why advise others to waste their resources with an unused personal firewall? I'd use both a broadband router and a software firewall, but I wouldn't add another protocol. NetBEUI might be okay with legacy windows machines but the future is connecting *everyone* together. Macs have their own version of samba along with linux, *bsd and others and they all connect together via tcp/ip. Not much use for netbeui in the overall scheme. Jim. Nah, there is a place for a non-routable protocol in instances where internet access is not wanted or needed. For instance, in a network that is dedicated to a particular job, and where internet connectivity is not wanted. TCP/IP would work, but a simpler protocol would be easier to maintain. The main thing going for TCP/IP is the fact that you can use it for internet access and everything else. If you don't need to connect to the internet, you don't need TCP/IP. NetBEUI would be a good option for small networks. The enire world is *not* connecting everyone together. Just as the entire world is *not* Windows. There are many legacy systems that are still running because they work(and businesses can't upgrade because of the cost). The entire world is *not* stuck on the continuous upgrade policy that computer companies are stuck on. You see, this is just the kind of thing I was talking about in the other post. It almost seems as though religion is involved. No technical argument at all. Dick |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
How to tell which protocol (NetBUI or TCP/IP) each Network Neighborhood connection is using
In my experience, it's easy to network all versions of Windows (even Windows for Workgroups 3.11) with TCP/IP. If TCP/IP doesn't work, the most likely problem is that a misconfigured firewall is blocking access. The Windows 95 system doesn't have a software firewall and the XP system had the firewall disabled. On an internet search, others have had this problem. Also other workers I know. If I wanted multiple levels of security, I'd use both a broadband router and a software firewall, but I wouldn't add another protocol. I understand this, and use both the router's firewall and a software firewall in my network. My interest in a second protocol came from an incident in which an internet site was able to learn the network ip address of one of my computers. This should be impossible as I understand how NAT routers work. I could not find anything wrong with the configuration of the router. It's possible that there is something wrong with the router, of course, but since it otherwise works ok, I think that is unlikely. Luckily, the software firewall I run logged and stopped the attack. This is interesting. What was the attack? What address was being attacked? I'm not totally sure that it was an attack, but at least 3 times, I have blocked packets from an IP assigned to a black hole server(10-12 packets at a time) aimed at port 139 on that particular computer. Even if a web site finds out the private IP address (e.g. 10.x.x.x, 192.168.x.x) that a router gives to your computer, the web site can't attack that address. Internet routers don't have routes to private IP addresses, so they drop all packets addressed to them. After all, there are probably thousands of different computers with IP address 192.168.0.1 at any moment. A web site can only attack the router's public IP address I understand that if NAT is working, that there is no way for the local IP address to get outside the router. Or, even if the outside site has the local IP address for it to get back inside the router. IP address 192.168.2.x port 139. Clearly I ran E-Trust, F-Prot. Adaware, Spybot as soon as this happened. They didn't find anything. I recently went to an Internet site that displayed my computer's private IP address after running a "firewall" test. However, the information from the web site is misleading. My firewall didn't reveal the address -- it was Java running in my web browser that did. When I turned off Java, the web site couldn't see the private IP address. To try it, go to www.auditmypc.com and run Firewall Test 1. It works by causing the browser to create and execute a reference to this URL: http://www.auditmypc.com/freescan/ui...ww.xxx.yyy.zzz where "www.xxx.yyy.zzz" is your private IP address. For example, if you click this link, it will tell you that your IP address is 192.168.0.1: http://www.auditmypc.com/freescan/ui...?a=192.168.0.1 I'll try it. Maybe that's how it happened. Clearly a program running on my computer could send that info out. But it doesn't explain how it got back in. Cases in point: 1. Dropping support for NetBEUI 2. Short end of life for Win 95, 98, 98SE also MSDOS 3. Dropping the ball on potential uses of Windows PE 4. Overly integrating Internet Explorer with the OS 5. Dropping support for distinctive ring from Window XP Not meant to be comprehensive, just the things I personally have run across in my work. #5 really annoys me, too. You didn't mention what I consider to be the worst flaw in Windows XP: the use of "simple file sharing", which offers no access control, in Windows XP Home Edition networking. Yes, I've had problems with this. XP Home needs better network access control and better control of file permissions. Again, however, if XP Home had these features, it would be suitable for some small business applications, and I don't think Microsoft wants that. Dick |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
How to tell which protocol (NetBUI or TCP/IP) each Network Neighborhood connection is using
"Dick Kistler" wrote in message
... Nah, there is a place for a non-routable protocol in instances where internet access is not wanted or needed. For instance, in a network that is dedicated to a particular job, and where internet connectivity is not wanted. I agree. There are situations such as what you describe where NetBEUI is "handy". But to be honest, it doesn't matter much to me what they do with it. I can take it or leave it. Believe it or not I liked DOS, I thought it was just fine for what it was designed to do, and even today it works just fine on older equipment that only requires a simple OS like that. MS dropped support for DOS a long time ago yet there is no shortage of it if someone wants a copy of it for something. Remember that NetBEUI and the whole "NetBios thing" is an MS creation and was never an industry standard, so they "own" the whole thing and can pretty much do what they want with it. The only protocol that could be considered an industry standard would be TCP/IP,...all the others are tied to a particular OS and Manufacturer. I don't think TCP/IP is very complicated as long as you keep the implementation simple,... The RFC Private addresses create a similar effect as NetBEUI since they are not compatible with the Internet without some sort of NAT to bridge the gap,...and just as they needed NAT,..NetBEUI needed something to behave as a Protocol Gateway. So in the end the same "effect" and "concepts" can be created without NetBEUI. (BTW - with the way my luck has gone in NGs the last few days, I just want to make it clear,....this is just a conversation guys,...I'm not arguing with anybody! g) -- Phillip Windell [MCP, MVP, CCNA] www.wandtv.com |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
How to tell which protocol (NetBUI or TCP/IP) each Network Neighborhood connection is using | Dave Burton | Networking | 26 | August 8th 04 07:22 AM |
networking | Sam Gilmore | Networking | 2 | July 5th 04 09:59 AM |
Intermittent Network Neighborhood problems | Pete K | Networking | 2 | July 3rd 04 08:57 AM |
home networking - ICS problem | Bruce | Networking | 7 | July 1st 04 09:38 PM |
BLA indicates 23 second delay for TCP/IP network | BoB | General | 11 | June 28th 04 09:47 PM |