[ previous ] [ next ] [ threads ]
 From:  Chris Olive <chris at technologEase dot com>
 To:  Claude Morin <klodefactor at gmail dot com>
 Cc:  Adrian Padilla <selage at sbcglobal dot net>, m0n0wall at lists dot m0n0 dot ch
 Subject:  Re: [m0n0wall] Can not see network any more
 Date:  Sat, 19 Mar 2005 00:55:04 -0500
Claude Morin wrote:

>[It's late, so I may be forgetting something.  Can anyone confirm or
>refute this response?]
I would refute it in approach (not necessarily that any of your SMB 
based detail is off)...  And that is that I would never "confirm" that a 
network or node is "up" or "down" or that I did or did not have a route 
to a node on the basis of SMB, WINS, LMHOSTS or any other Window's 
NetBEUI-based protocol (even if it is supposedly over IP) when trying to 
solve lower layer IP problems.  Go straight IP to the lowest layer 
possible and work your way up/out.

>I imagine you don't have an active directory server, a domain
>controller, or a WINS server, correct?
>If that's your setup, the network neighbourhood and SMB file sharing
>functionality you're looking for requires an MS "browse master" for
>name lookup functionality.
>The problem is that -- as far as I know -- the browse master
>functionality requires IP broadcasts, which are *not* passed between
>m0n0wall interfaces (for good reason; see the m0n0wall mailing list).
>Your options:
>        - Running an active directory server or domain controller is
>probably ridiculous in your setup (though you could do it cheaply with
>Samba if you have a UNIX box handy).
>        - Assuming you have an MS Windows server on one of the
>internal networks, you could spin up a WINS server on that server, and
>point all clients to it via the LMHOSTS file.  WINS...ugh.
>        - simplest, but not sure it'll work: populate the LMHOSTS or
>HOSTS file on all machines, with the IPs and names of all machines.
'ping' would be a much simpler starting place and would better confirm 
why NONE of this other stuff is working if you can't even ping a desired 
node.  (Notwithstanding any ICMP traffic that may or may not getting 
blocked/rejected.)  I believe this is more along the lines of the "see" 
CB was probably looking for...