Should I enable "48-bit LBA" in this case?

G

Guest

Hello, hope any of you guys can help me with this because I can’t figure it
out on my own.

My Hard Drive has a total capacity of 189.91GB or 200GB but I’ve divided it
into two partitions:
The Primary partition is the smallest and has 76GB.
The Secondary partition is the biggest and has 113GB.

This Hard Drive is connected to the motherboard using an IDE cable (P-ATA
interface) and is set as Master.

So the question is:
Do I still need to enable "48-bit LBA" when none of my partitions exceed the
old "28-bit LBA" limitation of 128/137GB?
And If I do need to enable it, how do I enable it?

I’m using Windows XP Professional with SP2 and the latest security patches.
I’ve successfully flashed my BIOS so it can now support drives larger than
128/137GB.

Please help!
 
A

Anna

Ray said:
Hello, hope any of you guys can help me with this because I can't figure
it
out on my own.

My Hard Drive has a total capacity of 189.91GB or 200GB but I've divided
it
into two partitions:
The Primary partition is the smallest and has 76GB.
The Secondary partition is the biggest and has 113GB.

This Hard Drive is connected to the motherboard using an IDE cable (P-ATA
interface) and is set as Master.

So the question is:
Do I still need to enable "48-bit LBA" when none of my partitions exceed
the
old "28-bit LBA" limitation of 128/137GB?
And If I do need to enable it, how do I enable it?

I'm using Windows XP Professional with SP2 and the latest security
patches.
I've successfully flashed my BIOS so it can now support drives larger than
128/137GB.

Please help!


Ray:
You're fine. The system recognizes the full-capacity of your HD. You do not
have to do any "48-bit LBA enabling". This would be so even if you (using a
third-party program such as Partition Magic) ever decided to merge your two
current partitions into one partition of 189 GB.
Anna
 
K

Ken Blake, MVP

Ray said:
Hello, hope any of you guys can help me with this because I can't
figure it out on my own.

My Hard Drive has a total capacity of 189.91GB or 200GB but I've
divided it into two partitions:
The Primary partition is the smallest and has 76GB.
The Secondary partition is the biggest and has 113GB.

This Hard Drive is connected to the motherboard using an IDE cable
(P-ATA interface) and is set as Master.

So the question is:
Do I still need to enable "48-bit LBA" when none of my partitions
exceed the old "28-bit LBA" limitation of 128/137GB?
And If I do need to enable it, how do I enable it?


No, it's already enabled. If it weren't, you wouldn't have been able to see
more than 137GB and wouldn't have been able to create partitions totalling
more than that.
 
G

Guest

Ken. If yiur O/S is WinXP Home or Pro, with sp1 or sp2, You're Bios will
reconize the 48 bit LBA. No need to be concerned with the Rule of 138.
Respectfully: Woz
 
K

Ken Blake, MVP

Woz said:
Ken. If yiur O/S is WinXP Home or Pro, with sp1 or sp2, You're Bios
will reconize the 48 bit LBA. No need to be concerned with the Rule
of 138. Respectfully: Woz


Well first, I didn't say anything about what was required for 48-bit LBA. I
just pointed out that if he was already seeing the full size of the drive,
all was well, and there was nothing more that needed to be done.

But nevertheless, what you say above is *not* correct. You need *two* things
to support a drive that large--just SP1 or SP2 is not sufficient:

1. A motherboard with a BIOS and controller that supports 48-bit LBA (or
alternatively, an add-in controller card that does).

2. At least SP1 of Windows XP.
 
G

Guest

Ken, If you cannot give the requirement's and only re-direct. how did you
become MVP? I am also a Microsoft Partner.Don't need it affixed to my name. I
try to teach; and teacher's explain the situations at hand. Could care less
about opinion's [Only Facts.] Respectfully: Woz P.S. Ray's Bios didn't need
to be re-flashed. This a Myth. and a (30%-90%), crash on older Systems.
 
G

Guest

Woz Office:SDK_BETA O/S said:
Ken, If you cannot give the requirement's and only re-direct. how did you
become MVP? I am also a Microsoft Partner.Don't need it affixed to my name. I
try to teach; and teacher's explain the situations at hand. Could care less
about opinion's [Only Facts.] Respectfully: Woz P.S. Ray's Bios didn't need
to be re-flashed. This a Myth. and a (30%-60%), crash on older Systems.

Ken Blake said:
Well first, I didn't say anything about what was required for 48-bit LBA. I
just pointed out that if he was already seeing the full size of the drive,
all was well, and there was nothing more that needed to be done.

But nevertheless, what you say above is *not* correct. You need *two* things
to support a drive that large--just SP1 or SP2 is not sufficient:

1. A motherboard with a BIOS and controller that supports 48-bit LBA (or
alternatively, an add-in controller card that does).

2. At least SP1 of Windows XP.
 
N

Newt Ownsquare

Your answer WAS misleading and Blake never mentioned anything about flashing the
BIOS.

Blake was correct in his statement. See this article for more clarification:

How to enable 48-bit Logical Block Addressing support for ATAPI disk drives in
Windows XP
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;303013

Pay attention to the section that reads:

Your computer must meet the following requirements to use 48-bit LBA ATAPI
support: - 48-bit LBA-compatible BIOS.
- 137-GB hard disk or larger.
- You must have Windows XP SP1 installed.


And where to you ever get the "Rule of 138" phrase from? Google only finds
legal/tax citations for this phrase.

You're also in need of a good spellchecker.

--
Hope this helps,
Newt
Lat: 39° 59' 12" N, Long: 75° 24' 2" W


in message | Ken, If you cannot give the requirement's and only re-direct. how did you
| become MVP? I am also a Microsoft Partner.Don't need it affixed to my name. I
| try to teach; and teacher's explain the situations at hand. Could care less
| about opinion's [Only Facts.] Respectfully: Woz P.S. Ray's Bios didn't need
| to be re-flashed. This a Myth. and a (30%-90%), crash on older Systems.
|
| "Ken Blake, MVP" wrote:
|
| > Woz Office:SDK_BETA O/S wrote:
| >
| > > Ken. If your O/S is WinXP Home or Pro, with sp1 or sp2, You're Bios
| > > will reconize the 48 bit LBA. No need to be concerned with the Rule
| > > of 138. Respectfully: Woz
| >
| >
| > Well first, I didn't say anything about what was required for 48-bit LBA. I
| > just pointed out that if he was already seeing the full size of the drive,
| > all was well, and there was nothing more that needed to be done.
| >
| > But nevertheless, what you say above is *not* correct. You need *two* things
| > to support a drive that large--just SP1 or SP2 is not sufficient:
| >
| > 1. A motherboard with a BIOS and controller that supports 48-bit LBA (or
| > alternatively, an add-in controller card that does).
| >
| > 2. At least SP1 of Windows XP.
| >
| > --
| > Ken Blake - Microsoft MVP Windows: Shell/User
| > Please reply to the newsgroup
| >
| >
| >
| >
| > > "Ken Blake, MVP" wrote:
| > >
| > >> Ray wrote:
| > >>
| > >>> Hello, hope any of you guys can help me with this because I can't
| > >>> figure it out on my own.
| > >>>
| > >>> My Hard Drive has a total capacity of 189.91GB or 200GB but I've
| > >>> divided it into two partitions:
| > >>> The Primary partition is the smallest and has 76GB.
| > >>> The Secondary partition is the biggest and has 113GB.
| > >>>
| > >>> This Hard Drive is connected to the motherboard using an IDE cable
| > >>> (P-ATA interface) and is set as Master.
| > >>>
| > >>> So the question is:
| > >>> Do I still need to enable "48-bit LBA" when none of my partitions
| > >>> exceed the old "28-bit LBA" limitation of 128/137GB?
| > >>> And If I do need to enable it, how do I enable it?
| > >>
| > >>
| > >> No, it's already enabled. If it weren't, you wouldn't have been able
| > >> to see more than 137GB and wouldn't have been able to create
| > >> partitions totalling more than that.
| > >>
| > >> --
| > >> Ken Blake - Microsoft MVP Windows: Shell/User
| > >> Please reply to the newsgroup
| > >>
| > >>
| > >>> I'm using Windows XP Professional with SP2 and the latest security
| > >>> patches. I've successfully flashed my BIOS so it can now support
| > >>> drives larger than 128/137GB.
| > >>>
| > >>> Please help!
| >
| >
| >
 
G

Guest

Newt, Your response is exactually what I stated in my first comment, and I
was replying to the person in need, that flashed his Bios. "Ray", not Blake.
I was Stating that as common ground. Did you read the whole post. The Rule Of
138 is on Maxtor's and Seagates Installation Disk, "help". I don't just
Operate WinXP; I'm Booting and Operating 8 Systems's on 3 Hard Drives. Once
again "OPIONS NOT FACTS". As a Numeroligist, I retired at the age of 42 YRS.
You will not find that in Google either. Try a Library. Ray replied thank's a
long time ago. This is a dead is a dead Issue. I'd like to meet you guy's in
SUSE 10.0 Portal... Respectfully, Woz

Newt Ownsquare said:
Your answer WAS misleading and Blake never mentioned anything about flashing the
BIOS.

Blake was correct in his statement. See this article for more clarification:

How to enable 48-bit Logical Block Addressing support for ATAPI disk drives in
Windows XP
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;303013

Pay attention to the section that reads:

Your computer must meet the following requirements to use 48-bit LBA ATAPI
support: - 48-bit LBA-compatible BIOS.
- 137-GB hard disk or larger.
- You must have Windows XP SP1 installed.


And where to you ever get the "Rule of 138" phrase from? Google only finds
legal/tax citations for this phrase.

You're also in need of a good spellchecker.

--
Hope this helps,
Newt
Lat: 39° 59' 12" N, Long: 75° 24' 2" W


in message | Ken, If you cannot give the requirement's and only re-direct. how did you
| become MVP? I am also a Microsoft Partner.Don't need it affixed to my name. I
| try to teach; and teacher's explain the situations at hand. Could care less
| about opinion's [Only Facts.] Respectfully: Woz P.S. Ray's Bios didn't need
| to be re-flashed. This a Myth. and a (30%-90%), crash on older Systems.
|
| "Ken Blake, MVP" wrote:
|
| > Woz Office:SDK_BETA O/S wrote:
| >
| > > Ken. If your O/S is WinXP Home or Pro, with sp1 or sp2, You're Bios
| > > will reconize the 48 bit LBA. No need to be concerned with the Rule
| > > of 138. Respectfully: Woz
| >
| >
| > Well first, I didn't say anything about what was required for 48-bit LBA. I
| > just pointed out that if he was already seeing the full size of the drive,
| > all was well, and there was nothing more that needed to be done.
| >
| > But nevertheless, what you say above is *not* correct. You need *two* things
| > to support a drive that large--just SP1 or SP2 is not sufficient:
| >
| > 1. A motherboard with a BIOS and controller that supports 48-bit LBA (or
| > alternatively, an add-in controller card that does).
| >
| > 2. At least SP1 of Windows XP.
| >
| > --
| > Ken Blake - Microsoft MVP Windows: Shell/User
| > Please reply to the newsgroup
| >
| >
| >
| >
| > > "Ken Blake, MVP" wrote:
| > >
| > >> Ray wrote:
| > >>
| > >>> Hello, hope any of you guys can help me with this because I can't
| > >>> figure it out on my own.
| > >>>
| > >>> My Hard Drive has a total capacity of 189.91GB or 200GB but I've
| > >>> divided it into two partitions:
| > >>> The Primary partition is the smallest and has 76GB.
| > >>> The Secondary partition is the biggest and has 113GB.
| > >>>
| > >>> This Hard Drive is connected to the motherboard using an IDE cable
| > >>> (P-ATA interface) and is set as Master.
| > >>>
| > >>> So the question is:
| > >>> Do I still need to enable "48-bit LBA" when none of my partitions
| > >>> exceed the old "28-bit LBA" limitation of 128/137GB?
| > >>> And If I do need to enable it, how do I enable it?
| > >>
| > >>
| > >> No, it's already enabled. If it weren't, you wouldn't have been able
| > >> to see more than 137GB and wouldn't have been able to create
| > >> partitions totalling more than that.
| > >>
| > >> --
| > >> Ken Blake - Microsoft MVP Windows: Shell/User
| > >> Please reply to the newsgroup
| > >>
| > >>
| > >>> I'm using Windows XP Professional with SP2 and the latest security
| > >>> patches. I've successfully flashed my BIOS so it can now support
| > >>> drives larger than 128/137GB.
| > >>>
| > >>> Please help!
| >
| >
| >
 
G

Guest

To Ken Blake and Newt, This is a retraction, no accuses. I apologize for the
non - addressing of the Bios issue. And I'll use the term 137Gig.
limitation. Respectfully,
Woz

Newt Ownsquare said:
Your answer WAS misleading and Blake never mentioned anything about flashing the
BIOS.

Blake was correct in his statement. See this article for more clarification:

How to enable 48-bit Logical Block Addressing support for ATAPI disk drives in
Windows XP
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;303013

Pay attention to the section that reads:

Your computer must meet the following requirements to use 48-bit LBA ATAPI
support: - 48-bit LBA-compatible BIOS.
- 137-GB hard disk or larger.
- You must have Windows XP SP1 installed.


And where to you ever get the "Rule of 138" phrase from? Google only finds
legal/tax citations for this phrase.

You're also in need of a good spellchecker.

--
Hope this helps,
Newt
Lat: 39° 59' 12" N, Long: 75° 24' 2" W


in message | Ken, If you cannot give the requirement's and only re-direct. how did you
| become MVP? I am also a Microsoft Partner.Don't need it affixed to my name. I
| try to teach; and teacher's explain the situations at hand. Could care less
| about opinion's [Only Facts.] Respectfully: Woz P.S. Ray's Bios didn't need
| to be re-flashed. This a Myth. and a (30%-90%), crash on older Systems.
|
| "Ken Blake, MVP" wrote:
|
| > Woz Office:SDK_BETA O/S wrote:
| >
| > > Ken. If your O/S is WinXP Home or Pro, with sp1 or sp2, You're Bios
| > > will reconize the 48 bit LBA. No need to be concerned with the Rule
| > > of 138. Respectfully: Woz
| >
| >
| > Well first, I didn't say anything about what was required for 48-bit LBA. I
| > just pointed out that if he was already seeing the full size of the drive,
| > all was well, and there was nothing more that needed to be done.
| >
| > But nevertheless, what you say above is *not* correct. You need *two* things
| > to support a drive that large--just SP1 or SP2 is not sufficient:
| >
| > 1. A motherboard with a BIOS and controller that supports 48-bit LBA (or
| > alternatively, an add-in controller card that does).
| >
| > 2. At least SP1 of Windows XP.
| >
| > --
| > Ken Blake - Microsoft MVP Windows: Shell/User
| > Please reply to the newsgroup
| >
| >
| >
| >
| > > "Ken Blake, MVP" wrote:
| > >
| > >> Ray wrote:
| > >>
| > >>> Hello, hope any of you guys can help me with this because I can't
| > >>> figure it out on my own.
| > >>>
| > >>> My Hard Drive has a total capacity of 189.91GB or 200GB but I've
| > >>> divided it into two partitions:
| > >>> The Primary partition is the smallest and has 76GB.
| > >>> The Secondary partition is the biggest and has 113GB.
| > >>>
| > >>> This Hard Drive is connected to the motherboard using an IDE cable
| > >>> (P-ATA interface) and is set as Master.
| > >>>
| > >>> So the question is:
| > >>> Do I still need to enable "48-bit LBA" when none of my partitions
| > >>> exceed the old "28-bit LBA" limitation of 128/137GB?
| > >>> And If I do need to enable it, how do I enable it?
| > >>
| > >>
| > >> No, it's already enabled. If it weren't, you wouldn't have been able
| > >> to see more than 137GB and wouldn't have been able to create
| > >> partitions totalling more than that.
| > >>
| > >> --
| > >> Ken Blake - Microsoft MVP Windows: Shell/User
| > >> Please reply to the newsgroup
| > >>
| > >>
| > >>> I'm using Windows XP Professional with SP2 and the latest security
| > >>> patches. I've successfully flashed my BIOS so it can now support
| > >>> drives larger than 128/137GB.
| > >>>
| > >>> Please help!
| >
| >
| >
 
N

Newt Ownsquare

Apology accepted, but you still need a good spellchecker! ;-)

--
Hope this helps,
Newt

in message | To Ken Blake and Newt, This is a retraction, no accuses. I apologize for the
| non - addressing of the Bios issue. And I'll use the term 137Gig.
| limitation. Respectfully,
| Woz
|
| "Newt Ownsquare" wrote:
|
| > Your answer WAS misleading and Blake never mentioned anything about flashing
the
| > BIOS.
| >
| > Blake was correct in his statement. See this article for more clarification:
| >
| > How to enable 48-bit Logical Block Addressing support for ATAPI disk drives
in
| > Windows XP
| > http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;303013
| >
| > Pay attention to the section that reads:
| >
| > Your computer must meet the following requirements to use 48-bit LBA ATAPI
| > support: - 48-bit LBA-compatible BIOS.
| > - 137-GB hard disk or larger.
| > - You must have Windows XP SP1 installed.
| >
| >
| > And where to you ever get the "Rule of 138" phrase from? Google only finds
| > legal/tax citations for this phrase.
| >
| > You're also in need of a good spellchecker.
| >
| > --
| > Hope this helps,
| > Newt
| > Lat: 39° 59' 12" N, Long: 75° 24' 2" W
| >
| >
| > "Woz Office:SDK_BETA O/S" <[email protected]>
wrote
| > in message | > | Ken, If you cannot give the requirement's and only re-direct. how did you
| > | become MVP? I am also a Microsoft Partner.Don't need it affixed to my
name. I
| > | try to teach; and teacher's explain the situations at hand. Could care
less
| > | about opinion's [Only Facts.] Respectfully: Woz P.S. Ray's Bios didn't
need
| > | to be re-flashed. This a Myth. and a (30%-90%), crash on older Systems.
| > |
| > | "Ken Blake, MVP" wrote:
| > |
| > | > Woz Office:SDK_BETA O/S wrote:
| > | >
| > | > > Ken. If your O/S is WinXP Home or Pro, with sp1 or sp2, You're Bios
| > | > > will reconize the 48 bit LBA. No need to be concerned with the Rule
| > | > > of 138. Respectfully: Woz
| > | >
| > | >
| > | > Well first, I didn't say anything about what was required for 48-bit
LBA. I
| > | > just pointed out that if he was already seeing the full size of the
drive,
| > | > all was well, and there was nothing more that needed to be done.
| > | >
| > | > But nevertheless, what you say above is *not* correct. You need *two*
things
| > | > to support a drive that large--just SP1 or SP2 is not sufficient:
| > | >
| > | > 1. A motherboard with a BIOS and controller that supports 48-bit LBA (or
| > | > alternatively, an add-in controller card that does).
| > | >
| > | > 2. At least SP1 of Windows XP.
| > | >
| > | > --
| > | > Ken Blake - Microsoft MVP Windows: Shell/User
| > | > Please reply to the newsgroup
| > | >
| > | >
| > | >
| > | >
| > | > > "Ken Blake, MVP" wrote:
| > | > >
| > | > >> Ray wrote:
| > | > >>
| > | > >>> Hello, hope any of you guys can help me with this because I can't
| > | > >>> figure it out on my own.
| > | > >>>
| > | > >>> My Hard Drive has a total capacity of 189.91GB or 200GB but I've
| > | > >>> divided it into two partitions:
| > | > >>> The Primary partition is the smallest and has 76GB.
| > | > >>> The Secondary partition is the biggest and has 113GB.
| > | > >>>
| > | > >>> This Hard Drive is connected to the motherboard using an IDE cable
| > | > >>> (P-ATA interface) and is set as Master.
| > | > >>>
| > | > >>> So the question is:
| > | > >>> Do I still need to enable "48-bit LBA" when none of my partitions
| > | > >>> exceed the old "28-bit LBA" limitation of 128/137GB?
| > | > >>> And If I do need to enable it, how do I enable it?
| > | > >>
| > | > >>
| > | > >> No, it's already enabled. If it weren't, you wouldn't have been able
| > | > >> to see more than 137GB and wouldn't have been able to create
| > | > >> partitions totalling more than that.
| > | > >>
| > | > >> --
| > | > >> Ken Blake - Microsoft MVP Windows: Shell/User
| > | > >> Please reply to the newsgroup
| > | > >>
| > | > >>
| > | > >>> I'm using Windows XP Professional with SP2 and the latest security
| > | > >>> patches. I've successfully flashed my BIOS so it can now support
| > | > >>> drives larger than 128/137GB.
| > | > >>>
| > | > >>> Please help!
| > | >
| > | >
| > | >
| >
| >
| >
 
K

Ken Blake, MVP

Woz said:
To Ken Blake and Newt, This is a retraction, no accuses. I apologize
for the non - addressing of the Bios issue. And I'll use the term
137Gig. limitation. Respectfully,


Apology accepted. Thank you.

--
Ken Blake - Microsoft MVP Windows: Shell/User
Please reply to the newsgroup


Newt Ownsquare said:
Your answer WAS misleading and Blake never mentioned anything about
flashing the BIOS.

Blake was correct in his statement. See this article for more
clarification:

How to enable 48-bit Logical Block Addressing support for ATAPI disk
drives in Windows XP
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;303013

Pay attention to the section that reads:

Your computer must meet the following requirements to use 48-bit LBA
ATAPI support: - 48-bit LBA-compatible BIOS.
- 137-GB hard disk or larger.
- You must have Windows XP SP1 installed.


And where to you ever get the "Rule of 138" phrase from? Google only
finds legal/tax citations for this phrase.

You're also in need of a good spellchecker.

--
Hope this helps,
Newt
Lat: 39° 59' 12" N, Long: 75° 24' 2" W


"Woz Office:SDK_BETA O/S"
Ken, If you cannot give the requirement's and only re-direct. how
did you become MVP? I am also a Microsoft Partner.Don't need it
affixed to my name. I try to teach; and teacher's explain the
situations at hand. Could care less about opinion's [Only Facts.]
Respectfully: Woz P.S. Ray's Bios didn't need to be re-flashed.
This a Myth. and a (30%-90%), crash on older Systems.

:

Woz Office:SDK_BETA O/S wrote:

Ken. If your O/S is WinXP Home or Pro, with sp1 or sp2, You're
Bios will reconize the 48 bit LBA. No need to be concerned with
the Rule of 138. Respectfully: Woz


Well first, I didn't say anything about what was required for
48-bit LBA. I just pointed out that if he was already seeing the
full size of the drive, all was well, and there was nothing more
that needed to be done.

But nevertheless, what you say above is *not* correct. You need
*two* things to support a drive that large--just SP1 or SP2 is not
sufficient:

1. A motherboard with a BIOS and controller that supports 48-bit
LBA (or alternatively, an add-in controller card that does).

2. At least SP1 of Windows XP.

--
Ken Blake - Microsoft MVP Windows: Shell/User
Please reply to the newsgroup




:

Ray wrote:

Hello, hope any of you guys can help me with this because I
can't figure it out on my own.

My Hard Drive has a total capacity of 189.91GB or 200GB but I've
divided it into two partitions:
The Primary partition is the smallest and has 76GB.
The Secondary partition is the biggest and has 113GB.

This Hard Drive is connected to the motherboard using an IDE
cable (P-ATA interface) and is set as Master.

So the question is:
Do I still need to enable "48-bit LBA" when none of my
partitions exceed the old "28-bit LBA" limitation of 128/137GB?
And If I do need to enable it, how do I enable it?


No, it's already enabled. If it weren't, you wouldn't have been
able to see more than 137GB and wouldn't have been able to create
partitions totalling more than that.

--
Ken Blake - Microsoft MVP Windows: Shell/User
Please reply to the newsgroup


I'm using Windows XP Professional with SP2 and the latest
security patches. I've successfully flashed my BIOS so it can
now support drives larger than 128/137GB.

Please help!
 
G

Guest

One more question on this if you don't mind.
I installed a 200GB disk, ran into the 137GB limitation.
My setup bios tells me there is a 200GB disk out there as the primary so I
believe my ASUS motherboard supports large disks. The setup also has a
parameter for large disk support, this is enabled.
I read article Q303013 and will give it a try.
Also running XP SP2 with last update about a month ago.
In the microsoft article (at the To enable 48-bit LBA support part), step 3
states to create a $OEM$ subfolder in this folder.

The question is is the folder actually called $OEM$ or is that a mnemonic
for someother name. If the latter, what should I call the new folder?
 

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.

Ask a Question

Top