win2k peer to peer networking problem....

[Me]

Hello all,


I have the following setup:

two win2k machines and one win98SE machine in a peer to peer network.
they all have 10/100 NICS and connected with a 10/100 hub, so the
network
is at 100 MBPS.
used the NETBEUI protocol, plus microsoft networking, MS File/print
sharing and TCP/IP protocols (seemed simplest to implement, and I
wanted to enable the users to browse all resources without mapped
drives). There is no router involved or necessary (only one machine
has cable modem internet access and that is enough).
One win2k machine has a shared officejet printer connected to it via
USB.

This configuration worked fine for two years until last week, I
installed SP4
on the two win2k machines, and after that one of them started slowing
the Win98se machine's network access to a crawl whenever the win2k
machine it is turned on - file browsing is slow, as is opening files
that are on the win2k machine from the win98 machine (sometimes the
file open hangs, even). The other win2k machine works ok as before.
I tried uninstalling sp4 but that didn't improve anything.

I realize this must be some sort of network browse master conflict, or
network transmission packet size that's too small, but I have no idea
how to tinker with these settings.

It seems absurd if to improve network performance I would have to
downgrade and install win98 on the problematic machine...

all of the machines are on the same workgroup and have the same (above
listed) protocols.


Would be greatful for any suggestions or shared experiences.


h.

 

[Brian Oakes [MSFT]]

A few things, what are you using to gauge network performance? Browsing
won't have anything to do with Raw Network performance, but if you want to
disable the browser election abilities from the W2K systems, just stop the
Computer Browser Service.

MTU and speed really should have that much to do with it since you are on a
local segment, but let us know what you are doing to test slowness etc...
--

Brian Oakes

This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties and confers no rights.
Please reply to the newsgroup so that others may benefit.

 

[Me]

A few things, what are you using to gauge network performance? Browsing
won't have anything to do with Raw Network performance, but if you want to
disable the browser election abilities from the W2K systems, just stop the
Computer Browser Service.

MTU and speed really should have that much to do with it since you are on a
local segment, but let us know what you are doing to test slowness etc...

A few things, what are you using to gauge network performance? Browsing
won't have anything to do with Raw Network performance, but if you want to
disable the browser election abilities from the W2K systems, just stop the
Computer Browser Service.

thanks for your reply.
what am I using for network performance? well,
after measuring the time to copy a 21 megabyte file, the speed is 811
kilobytes per second. That's closer to 10 mbits speed, I think.
even though I should be getting 100 mbits speed, that doesn't worry me
as much, its probably due to one of the computers in the network using
an older 10/100
card which may be causing the entire network to run at 10 mbits. But
that has been this way for the last 2 years without the previously
described (new) problems.

on the main win2k computer everything still seems ok, with reasonable
speed,
including browsing and file saving.

as for the problematic win2k machine's browser service, I disabled it
and
it didn't help any.
The problem stays the same- when you open any network file on the
win98se
machine- say a 45kb excel file, if you save it with the aformentioned
win2k
pc on, it takes about 30 seconds. If you shut this pc off, it takes
under a second.
Seems to me like a browsing conflict.
I'm starting to think the best way would be to simply downgrade the
vindictive win2k machine to win98se to improve the situation (and
leave only one win2k pc in the network, perhaps win2k is a bit
territorial and doesn't like to smell other dogs of the same creed on
its lamp posts...)

Thanks for your help.