Client performance problem windows 2003 server...

Discussion in 'Server Networking' started by fc9a9f82-2129692850, May 26, 2005.

  1. Hi

    I have a problem with the clients at site B, first I will shortly describe
    the situation.

    Setup:
    A Windows 2000 server was at first installed in site A (both geographically
    and in the site configuration) this is acting as the "primary"
    domaincontroller.
    This server is GC, DDNS, DHCP, WINS, Print and file server.

    Then at site B there is a windows 2003 server. This is acting as a GC, DDNS,
    WINS, file and print server.

    The sites are connected through a VPN tunnel with cisco pix firewalls. The
    internetconnection is at site A a dedicated connection and at site B a ADSL
    1Mbit connection.

    The problem:
    When the connection between the two sites is terminated the clients at site
    B becomes extreamly slow to logon and even to access the local server at site
    B. The clients only have mappings to shares on the server at site B. When I
    check the clients uses site Bs server as logonserver. But the group policy
    seems to be picked up from site A:s server, So I dont know if that could slow
    down the file access to the local server at site B...

    Help would grately be appreciated.

    Best Regards
    Perra
     
    fc9a9f82-2129692850, May 26, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Hello,

    Thanks for your post.

    I understand you encountered that following issue:
    When the connection between the two sites is terminated, the clients at
    site B becomes extremely slow to logon and even to access the local server
    at site B. If I have misunderstood your concern, please feel free to let
    me know.

    Based on my experience, this issue may be caused by the DNS. However, the
    troubleshooting steps may be complex and time-consuming. Therefore, please
    take your time and patience in confirming and trying the following things
    so that we can isolate the issue:

    1. Does this issue happen on every client in Site B?
    2. Have you replicated and synchronized the DNS between Site A and Site B?
    3. Verify DNS settings of the clients and Win2k3 Server in Site B. Try to
    point the clients' DNS server to the Win2k3 server in Site B. For example,
    site A DC's IP is 192.168.0.1, Site B DC's IP is 192.168.1.1, point the
    clients' DNS in Site B to 192.168.1.1.

    From this step, we can make sure client will contact the local DC for the
    logon authentication. Restart the client, does this issue disappear?

    4. If the issue persists, I would appreciate you collecting the following
    information and send to me at so that we can perform
    further research on this issue:

    A. Collect the Userenv log on one of the problematic client machines
    --------------------------------------
    Use Registry Editor to add the following registry value (or modify it, if
    the value already exists):
    Key: HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Software\Microsoft\Windows
    NT\CurrentVersion\Winlogon

    Value: UserEnvDebugLevel
    Value Type: REG_DWORD
    Value Data: 10002 (Hexadecimal)

    UserEnvDebugLevel can have the following values:

    NONE 0x00000000
    NORMAL 0x00000001
    VERBOSE 0x00000002
    LOGFILE 0x00010000
    DEBUGGER 0x00020000
    The default value is NORMAL|LOGFILE (0x00010001).

    Note: To disable logging, select NONE (where the value is 0X00000000).

    You can also combine the values. For example, you can combine VERBOSE
    0x00000002 and LOGFILE 0x00010000 to get 0x00010002. So if
    UserEnvDebugLevel is set with a value of 0x00010002, this turns on both
    LOGFILE and VERBOSE. Combining these values is the same as using an OR
    statement:

    0x00010000 OR 0x00000002 = 0x00010002

    The log file is written to the %Systemroot%\Debug\UserMode\Userenv.log
    file. If the Userenv.log exists and is greater than 300 KB, the existing
    file will be renamed to Userenv.bak, and a new log file created.

    For more information please refer to the following Microsoft Knowledge Base
    article.

    Q221833: How to Enable User Environment Event Logging
    http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=KB;EN-US;221833

    B. Collect Network MPS Report on both Win2k3 Server in Site B and one of
    the problematic client machines.
    ------------------------------------
    a. Visit
    http://download.microsoft.com/download/b/b/1/bb139fcb-4aac-4fe5-a579-30b0bd9
    15706/MPSRPT_NETWORK.EXE. to download the file.
    b. Run the MPSRPT_NETWORK.EXE
    c. Wait for 10~15 minutes.
    d. Open Windows explorer, navigate to
    %SYSTEMROOT%\MPSReports\Network\Reports\cab\
    e. Send the .cab file directly to me.

    HTH! Any update, please keep in touch!

    Thanks & Regards

    Amanda Wang [MSFT]

    Microsoft Online Partner Support

    Get Secure! - www.microsoft.com/security

    ====================================================================

    When responding to posts, please "Reply to Group" via your newsreader so
    that others may learn and benefit from your issue.

    =====================================================================

    --------------------
     
    Amanda Wang [MSFT], May 27, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Hello,

    I am just writing in to see if you have had an opportunity to try the
    troubleshooting steps or collect the information. If you have anything
    unclear with the previous information I've provide to you, please don't
    hesitate to let me know.

    I appreciate your time and I look forward to hearing from you.

    Thanks & Regards

    Amanda Wang [MSFT]

    Microsoft Online Partner Support

    Get Secure! - www.microsoft.com/security

    ====================================================================

    When responding to posts, please "Reply to Group" via your newsreader so
    that others may learn and benefit from your issue.

    =====================================================================

    --------------------
     
    Amanda Wang [MSFT], May 31, 2005
    #3
  4. fc9a9f82-2129692850

    Guest Guest

    Hi Amanda

    Sorry for the late answer, I am going to the customer tomorrow June 1st.
    What I have for you now is the following answers:
    1. Yes every client is suffering from this
    2. The DNS is replicated throught sites and services
    3. The DNS settings on site B is distributed the following way to the
    clients: (the DHCP scope settings)
    Primary dns: site Bs win2k3 server
    secondary dns: site As win2k server
    same setup for wins...

    It shouldnt matter if i have the server at site A as a secondary DNS server
    for the clients as long as the site B (primary DNS server) is available
    right?
    I will collect and mail u step 4. tomorrow at the site, hopefully you if you
    are online you could have a peak to my posting there and give me an aswer as
    I will be at the site during the day. That post should be here around 1200
    hours swedish time if you have that possibility....

    Kind Regards
    Perra

     
    Guest, May 31, 2005
    #4
  5. fc9a9f82-2129692850

    Guest Guest

    Hi

    I have now collected the information you wanted and they are sent to you by
    mail now.
    The client machine didnt write anything today in the userenv file, the last
    time was 24/5 2005.

    Best regards
    Per-Olof Olsson

     
    Guest, Jun 1, 2005
    #5
  6. fc9a9f82-2129692850

    Guest Guest

    Hi again

    Some more info...

    The mappings on the clients is mapped like this:
    NET USE G: \\smedjan.local\DFSroot\Verktyg_Gemensam /PERSISTENT:NO

    If I change it to NET USE G: \\verktyg\Verktyg_Gemensam$ /PERSISTENT:NO

    then the problem with slow connections disappears... It seems like the
    dfsroot could be some sort of a problem here?!

    If I change the group policy setting on the w2k3 server at site B the policy
    wont be applied to the clients until the w2k server at site A has that group
    policy information. Even if I run GPUPDATE on the clients and server. If I
    make a change in the policys on w2k server at site a the clients gets that
    policy applied directly with gpupdate...

    Kind Regards
    Per-Olof Olsson
     
    Guest, Jun 1, 2005
    #6
  7. Hi Perra,

    Glad to hear from you.

    I noticed that you mentioned that when the connection between the two sites
    is terminated, the clients at site B becomes extremely slow to logon and
    even to access the local server at site B.

    Do you mean only when the connection between two sites is terminated, the
    clients in Site B log on very slow?

    Meanwhile according to the clients¡¯ DNS and WINS settings in Site B, I
    suggest you only set the Primary DNS and WINS to point to Win2k3 server to
    see if it works.

    Please try it and collect the information I requested in my previous reply
    and send to me at . Anything update, please keep in
    touch.

    Thanks & Regards

    Amanda Wang [MSFT]

    Microsoft Online Partner Support

    Get Secure! - www.microsoft.com/security

    ====================================================================

    When responding to posts, please "Reply to Group" via your newsreader so
    that others may learn and benefit from your issue.

    =====================================================================

    --------------------
    <>
     
    Amanda Wang [MSFT], Jun 1, 2005
    #7
  8. Hello,

    Please ignore my previous post because I haven't refreshed it and seen your
    last two replies.

    However, I haven't received your E-mail which has the information I
    requested till now.

    Based on your description and for the current situation, I found that the
    issue is complex because it maybe is also related DFS and AD. Therefore,
    please take your time and patience in performing the steps and suggestions
    to isolate this issue.

    According to your last reply, it seems site B's clients have not contacted
    site B DC and it contact site A DC instead. I think that is why group
    policy cannot be applied and why slow logon if disconnect to site A. When
    site B's clients logon, it first contact site A's DC and try many times,
    and then the clients use cached logon to logon to the domain.

    To confirm my suspicion, please help me check the following things:
    1. If the site B has been created and put DC B into site B in "Active
    Directory Sites and Services" on site A's DC. Then replicated these two
    sites, the following article for your references:

    Active Directory Replication
    http://www.microsoft.com/resources/documentation/Windows/2000/server/reskit/
    en-us/Default.asp?url=/resources/documentation/windows/2000/server/reskit/en
    -us/distrib/dsbh_rep_eprf.asp

    What Is Active Directory Replication Topology?
    http://www.microsoft.com/technet/prodtechnol/windowsserver2003/library/TechR
    ef/0ac09f72-a790-48a9-a72f-d7328f9d937f.mspx

    2. I noticed that you mentioned the following two mapped links:

    NET USE G: \\smedjan.local\DFSroot\Verktyg_Gemensam /PERSISTENT:NO
    NET USE G: \\verktyg\Verktyg_Gemensam$ /PERSISTENT:NO

    I want to know if \\smedjan.local is a domain name and verktyg is file
    server's name. Based on this, I have two questions:

    a. Where is the file server? In site A or site B?
    b. If do not use map drive, does this issue occur?

    3. If the issue still persists, please disconnect from site A, reproduce
    this issue and get userenv log and MPSReport and send to me at
    and these information is very helpful for our
    further research.

    HTH and thanks for your patience. Anything update, please keep in touch!

    Thanks & Regards

    Amanda Wang [MSFT]

    Microsoft Online Partner Support

    Get Secure! - www.microsoft.com/security

    ====================================================================

    When responding to posts, please "Reply to Group" via your newsreader so
    that others may learn and benefit from your issue.

    =====================================================================

    --------------------
    <>
    <>
     
    Amanda Wang [MSFT], Jun 1, 2005
    #8
  9. fc9a9f82-2129692850

    Guest Guest

    Hi,

    I will try to mail you the previously discussed files again.

    1. The Site B has server B in that site and Site A has server A in its site.
    Do you want me to pu both of the servers in site A?

    2. \\smedjan.local is the domain name and verktyg is the file servers name.
    a, the file server is Server B in site B
    b, If I dont map the shares theere is no problem, so the mapping is a
    problem, or to find the right way to map drives seems to be a problem...

    3. I will get you a report next time I go to my customer wich I hope can be
    this week.

    Best Regards
    Perra
     
    Guest, Jun 13, 2005
    #9
  10. Hello,

    Thanks for your response.

    First, I would like give a summary of this issue including setup
    environment, main issue you encountered and the actions we have performed.

    Setup environment:
    ============
    A Windows 2000 server was at first installed in site A (both geographically
    and in the site configuration) this is acting as the "primary" domain
    controller.
    This server is GC, DDNS, DHCP, WINS, Print and file server.

    Then at site B there is a windows 2003 server. This is acting as a GC,
    DDNS,
    WINS, file and print server.

    The sites are connected through a VPN tunnel with cisco pix firewalls. The
    internet connection is at site A a dedicated connection and at site B a
    ADSL 1Mbit connection.

    Issue:
    ==============
    When the connection between the two sites is terminated, the clients at
    site B becomes extremely slow to logon and even to access the local server
    at site B.

    Actions:
    ====================
    1. Yes every client in Site B is suffering from this
    2. The DNS is replicated through sites and services
    3. The DNS settings on site B is distributed the following way to the
    clients: (the DHCP scope settings)
    Primary dns: site Bs win2k3 server
    Secondary dns: site As win2k server
    Same setup for wins...
    4. The mappings on the clients are mapped like this:
    NET USE G: \\smedjan.local\DFSroot\Verktyg_Gemensam /PERSISTENT:NO
    If change it to NET USE G: \\verktyg\Verktyg_Gemensam$ /PERSISTENT:NO
    then the problem with slow connections disappears.
    \\smedjan.local is the domain name and verktyg is the file server's name.
    a, the file server is Server B in site B
    b, If don't map the shares there is no problem

    5. If change the group policy setting on the w2k3 server at site B the
    policy won't be applied to the clients until the w2k server at site A has
    that group policy information. Even if run GPUPDATE on the clients and
    server.
    If make a change in the policies on w2k server at site A the clients gets
    that policy applied directly with GPUPDATE.

    Now from the above conclusion, we can find the issue should have two
    aspects:

    1. It seems that Site B's clients cannot authenticate by Win2k3 server. It
    may be caused by DNS replication.
    2. It may be caused by the mappings and it looks like a DFSroot issue

    Therefore, we can perform the following steps to isolate the issue:
    1. Terminate the connection between site A and B
    2. Boot one client computer by using safe mode with network
    3. Don't map the shares and check if the slow logon issue still persists on
    this client.
    4. How long will it take in logging on?
    This test will help us isolate if the issue is caused by replication
    between A and B or by DFSroot.

    The issue is complex and Network MPSReport and Userenv log on files are
    very important for us to perform further research on it.

    I don't know why I haven't received your E-mail last time. Would you
    please use two different E-mail accounts to send the information I
    requested to me at ? You effort on this issue would
    be appreciated and I'm looking forward to hearing from you.

    Thanks & Regards

    Amanda Wang [MSFT]

    Microsoft Online Partner Support

    Get Secure! - www.microsoft.com/security

    ====================================================================

    When responding to posts, please "Reply to Group" via your newsreader so
    that others may learn and benefit from your issue.

    =====================================================================

    --------------------
    <>
    <>
    <>
    <>
     
    Amanda Wang [MSFT], Jun 15, 2005
    #10
  11. Hello,

    Thanks for your effort on this issue.

    I have checked the MPSReports and userenv.log file. Then I would provide
    the results I have found separately as following:

    I. In userenv.log file, I found the error as following:

    USERENV(1d0.1d4) 10:43:29:812 MyRegUnLoadKey: Failed to unmount hive
    00000005
    USERENV(1d0.1d4) 10:43:29:822 DumpOpenRegistryHandle: 2 user registry
    Handles leaked from
    \Registry\User\S-1-5-21-923867646-1928005521-2076119496-1018
    USERENV(1d0.1d4) 10:43:29:832 UnloadUserProfileP: Didn't unload user
    profile <err = 5>
    USERENV(1d0.1d4) 10:43:30:422 UnloadUserProfile: UnloadUserProfileP failed
    with 0
    USERENV(22c.230) 10:44:09:412 CUserProfile::CleanupUserProfile: Ref Count
    is not 0
    USERENV(22c.230) 10:44:09:412 CUserProfile::CleanupUserProfile: Ref Count
    is not 0
    USERENV(22c.230) 10:44:09:412 CUserProfile::CleanupUserProfile: Ref Count
    is not 0
    USERENV(22c.230) 10:46:44:876 GetUserDNSDomainName: MyGetUserNameEx failed
    for NameDnsDomain style name with 1332
    USERENV(26c.2d0) 10:46:44:996 GetUserDNSDomainName: MyGetUserNameEx failed
    for NameDnsDomain style name with 1332
    USERENV(26c.2d0) 10:46:45:006 GetUserDNSDomainName: MyGetUserNameEx failed
    for NameDnsDomain style name with 1332
    USERENV(22c.230) 10:46:46:348 GetUserDNSDomainName: MyGetUserNameEx failed
    for NameDnsDomain style name with 1332

    ***According to these errors, it appears that the client cannot get the DNS.


    II. In Win2k3's Network MPSReport, found the errors as following:

    Doing initial required tests

    Testing server: Verkstadsgatan\VERKTYG
    Starting test: Connectivity
    * Active Directory LDAP Services Check
    * Active Directory RPC Services Check
    [VERKTYG] DsBindWithSpnEx() failed with error 1753,
    Win32 Error 1753.
    Printing RPC Extended Error Info:
    Error Record 1, ProcessID is 9788 (DcDiag)
    System Time is: 6/1/2005 9:12:11:65
    Generating component is 2 (RPC runtime)
    Status is 1753: There are no more endpoints available from the
    endpoint mapper.
    Detection location is 500
    NumberOfParameters is 4
    Unicode string: ncacn_ip_tcp
    Unicode string:
    ee5d8aed-846c-43c6-984c-9051a63a0fc9._msdcs.smedjan.local
    Long val: -481213899
    Long val: 65537
    Error Record 2, ProcessID is 9788 (DcDiag)
    System Time is: 6/1/2005 9:12:11:65
    Generating component is 2 (RPC runtime)
    Status is 1722: The RPC server is unavailable.
    Detection location is 761
    NumberOfParameters is 1
    Unicode string: 1025
    Error Record 3, ProcessID is 9788 (DcDiag)
    System Time is: 6/1/2005 9:12:11:65
    Generating component is 8 (winsock)
    Status is 1722: The RPC server is unavailable.
    Detection location is 313
    Error Record 4, ProcessID is 9788 (DcDiag)
    System Time is: 6/1/2005 9:12:11:65
    Generating component is 8 (winsock)
    Status is 10048: Only one usage of each socket address
    (protocol/network address/port) is normally permitted.
    Detection location is 311
    NumberOfParameters is 3
    Long val: 1025
    Pointer val: 0
    Pointer val: 0
    Error Record 5, ProcessID is 9788 (DcDiag)
    System Time is: 6/1/2005 9:12:11:65
    Generating component is 8 (winsock)
    Status is 10048: Only one usage of each socket address
    (protocol/network address/port) is normally permitted.
    Detection location is 318
    ......................... VERKTYG failed test Connectivity

    ***The error point to the RPC server is unavailable and there are no more
    endpoints available from the endpoint mapper.


    Therefore, according to the above errors, we can confirm the issue should
    be a DNS replication issue. There are many reasons can cause the issue:

    1. Please refer to the following articles to configure an Authoritative
    Time Server first:

    216734 How to Configure an Authoritative Time Server in Windows 2000
    http://support.microsoft.com/?id=216734

    314054 How to Configure an Authoritative Time Server in Windows XP
    http://support.microsoft.com/?id=314054

    816042 How to configure the Windows Time service on a Windows Server
    2003-based http://support.microsoft.com/?id=816042

    2. Please check the configuration of two sites and refer to the following
    articles:

    Windows Server 2003 Active Directory Branch Office Guide

    http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyID=9353a4f6-a8a8-40bb-
    9fa7-3a95c9540112&displaylang=en

    Deploying Active Directory for Branch Office Environments

    http://www.microsoft.com/technet/archive/windows2000serv/technologies/active
    directory/deploy/adguide/addeploy/default.mspx

    Active Directory Branch Office Planning Guide

    http://www.microsoft.com/windows2000/techinfo/planning/activedirectory/branc
    hoffice/default.asp

    Please pay more attention to the following contents in these articles:

    Configuring Automated Site Coverage
    Another situation that requires configuration of SRV resource records
    results from not having a domain controller in a particular site. This
    might happen because there are no users who require constant logon access,
    or because replication to the site might be too expensive or too slow. To
    ensure that a domain controller is located in the site closest to a client
    computer, if not the same site, Windows Server?2003 automatically attempts
    to register a domain controller in every site by using an automated site
    coverage algorithm. The algorithm determines how one site can "cover" a
    second site when no domain controller exists in the second site. By
    default, the process uses the replication topology.
    The algorithm works as follows: each domain controller checks all sites in
    the forest and then checks the replication cost matrix. A domain controller
    advertises itself (registers a site-related SRV record in DNS) in any site
    that does not have a domain controller for that domain and for which its
    site has the lowest-cost connections. This process ensures that every site
    has a domain controller even though its domain controller might not be
    physically located in that site. The domain controllers that are published
    in DNS are those from the closest site (as defined by the replication
    topology).
    In a branch office environment, automated site coverage should be disabled.
    Figure 4.9 shows where this process fits into the overall DNS planning
    process.
    Figure 4.9 Configuring Automated Site Coverage

    In the branch office scenario, computers should not locate domain
    controllers in any other branch office. A client should always communicate
    with a local domain controller, and if that is not available, use a domain
    controller in the data center site. Automated site coverage makes it
    possible for a situation to occur where a client might be able to locate a
    domain controller in another branch office. For this reason, automated site
    coverage should be disabled in a branch office environment. Use the Group
    Policy snap-in to achieve this:
    1. Disable the "Automated Site Coverage by DC Locator DNS SRV Records"
    Group Policy on all domain controllers, not only in the branches but also
    in the data center. You can do this by modifying the Default Domain
    Controllers Group Policy.
    2. Do not register generic records, as described in "Finding a Domain
    Controller in the Data Center" earlier in this chapter.
    If both of these configurations are performed, then all clients within a
    branch office site will discover the local domain controller if it is
    available or the data center domain controller if no local domain
    controller is available.
    When a site with a domain controller for some domain is closer to another
    site than to the data center site, the administrator has the ability to
    configure that domain controller with the specific ("close") sites to be
    covered using the following Group Policy settings:
    " Sites Covered by the DC Locator DNS SRV Records
    " Sites Covered by the GC Locator DNS SRV Records
    " Sites Covered by the Application Directory Partition Locator DNS SRV
    Records
    However, physical proximity or network performance are not the only
    criteria. If firewalls or dial-on-demand lines do not allow traffic in this
    direction, incorrectly applied site coverage will be bad for clients
    because they will fall back to an unreachable domain controller and not to
    the data center.

    HTH! And I will continue checking the MPSReports to see if there are any
    other clues I can found. If you have anything update, please feel free to
    let me know. I'm looking forward to your reply.

    Thanks & Regards

    Amanda Wang [MSFT]

    Microsoft Online Partner Support

    Get Secure! - www.microsoft.com/security

    ====================================================================

    When responding to posts, please "Reply to Group" via your newsreader so
    that others may learn and benefit from your issue.

    =====================================================================

    --------------------
    <>
    <>
    <>
    <>
    <R#>
     
    Amanda Wang [MSFT], Jun 16, 2005
    #11
  12. Hi,

    How are things going on your side after trying my previous suggestions?

    I have performed further research on your issue and found the following
    things we need to confirm:

    1. Make sure that all systems are up to the latest service packs because
    there was a DFS performance issue in your previous post which had been
    resolved by hotfix in SP2 for Windows 2000.

    2. In my last reply I have checked userenv.log file and Win2k3's Network
    MPSReport and given the related suggestions on them. However, after I
    checked the Win2k's MPSReport today, I found it is a non-ENG version, we
    will provide a best effort on this issue and you may need to seek
    assistance from local product support team so that you can get the most
    efficient support on it.

    I suggest you contact the local PSS or newsgroup. Currently we offer
    Partner newsgroups in the following languages:

    English - http://members.microsoft.com/partner/newsgroups/default.aspx
    Simplified Chinese - : http://www.mspartnersupport.com Traditional Chinese
    - http://www.microsoft.com/taiwan/community
    Japanese
    -http://communities.microsoft.com/newsgroups/default.asp?ICP=JPN_DA&sLCID=jp
    German
    -http://communities.microsoft.com/newsgroups/default.asp?icp=Germany_PSS_VAP
    &slcid=de
    Spanish - visit
    http://www.microsoft.com/spain/partner/soporte/gruposnoticias/default.asp
    for instructions to access Spanish partner newsgroups Portuguese -
    http://www.microsoft.com/brasil/parceiros/sup/for/default.aspx for
    instructions to access Portuguese partner newsgroups Greek -
    http://www.microsoft.com/hellas/partner/default.asp for instructions to
    access Greek partner newsgroups.

    If you are posting in a language that is not listed here, please visit
    www.microsoft.com/partner and click on the Worldwide Sites link to find the
    appropriate resources for your language.

    Thanks for your understanding.

    Thanks & Regards

    Amanda Wang [MSFT]

    Microsoft Online Partner Support

    Get Secure! - www.microsoft.com/security

    ====================================================================

    When responding to posts, please "Reply to Group" via your newsreader so
    that others may learn and benefit from your issue.

    =====================================================================

    --------------------
    <>
    <>
    <>
    <>
    <R#>
    <>
     
    Amanda Wang [MSFT], Jun 17, 2005
    #12
  13. fc9a9f82-2129692850

    Guest Guest

    Hi

    I havent been givnen the time to try out your suggestions yet. I hope to do
    that next week.
    The machines that is having problems are both w2k pro and wxp pro and the
    client machines log we sent was from a wxp pro and I think that was a
    swedish operation system. So I will have to continue this with you as there
    is no Swedish Microsoft support forum. If this will be a issue i will get
    there and install an english client to be doing the errorsearching on.
    You said that the Win2Ks log is a non english version, if you are reffering
    to the Windows 2000 server in site A (Server A) that is a English
    installation, the w2k3 server is an English version too, the wxp pro client
    is the only non-english system that we are involving in this problemsolving
    situation...

    I will get back to you as soon as possible with more answeres.
    Best Regards
    Perra

     
    Guest, Jun 17, 2005
    #13
  14. Hi Perra,

    Glad to hear from you and let me know your action plan.

    Yes. You are right that I have reconfirmed: the problematic client machine
    which is installed Windows XP Pro uses the non-English system. You
    mentioned that it should be Swedish operation system. I found the Swedish
    Microsoft support forum is as following and you can contact there:

    http://www.microsoft.com/sverige/partner/

    In addition, if you have the same problem with non-English client, please
    send one of them to me at and I'm very glad to
    perform further research on this issue.

    HTH!

    Thanks & Regards

    Amanda Wang [MSFT]

    Microsoft Online Partner Support

    Get Secure! - www.microsoft.com/security

    ====================================================================

    When responding to posts, please "Reply to Group" via your newsreader so
    that others may learn and benefit from your issue.

    =====================================================================

    --------------------
    <>
    <>
    <>
    <>
    <R#>
    <>
    <#>
    <>
     
    Amanda Wang [MSFT], Jun 20, 2005
    #14
  15. fc9a9f82-2129692850

    Guest Guest

    Hi

    I have mailed you a MPSreport from a english computer that is suffering from
    the same problem. I dont think there is a Swedish technet forum right?

    I have furthermote changed the group policy for "Automated Site Coverage by
    DC Locator DNS SRV Records" to disable.

    The second thing you wrote "Do not register generic records, as described in
    "Finding a Domain Controller in the Data Center" " , this i didnt manage to
    find out how to do so that is not tested. Is it a DNS setting or where do I
    find it?

    Another thing I noticed when we were there was this:
    As you know from my previous post I can map a share on Server B with
    NET USE G: \\verktyg\Verktyg_Gemensam$ /PERSISTENT:NO
    but not with
    NET USE G: \\smedjan.local\DFSroot\Verktyg_Gemensam /PERSISTENT:NO
    BUT if I gave the client a static IP without a gateway, just a IP, Submask
    and Server B as DNS I could without problem use the DFSroot mapping scenario
    IF the link to server A was up and running. The diffrence was from before
    that if I terminated the connection between the sites for Servers A and B I
    could still work with the shares as if nothing was wrong. If I put a gateway
    in the computer gets al sluggish and nearly impossible to work with, "as
    normal".

    So I will get back to you when I get back from my vacation.

    Best Regards
    Perra
     
    Guest, Jun 27, 2005
    #15
  16. fc9a9f82-2129692850

    Guest Guest

    Hi Amanda

    I have been checking newgroups and the posting seems to have been taken
    away, only some of the postings are still there?!

    Have you answered the question or has it been removed? This was a pretty
    long thread before...
    Hope you are there to answer this!
    Best Regards

    Perra
     
    Guest, Aug 3, 2005
    #16
  17. Hi Perra,

    Thank you for your reply.

    For some reasons, Amanda can no longer work with you at this post. From now
    I will try to perform research on your issue. Now, I need some time to
    review this post. I'll be back as soon as possible. Thank you for your
    patience.

    Best regards,

    Vincent Xu
    Microsoft Online Partner Support

    Get Secure! - www.microsoft.com/security


    --------------------
    | From: <>
    | References: <>
    <>
    <>
    <>
    <>
    <R#>
    <>
    <#>
    <>
    <>
    <>
    <>
    <>
    | Subject: Re: Client performance problem windows 2003 server...
    | Date: Wed, 3 Aug 2005 14:12:40 +0200
    | Lines: 13
    | X-Priority: 3
    | X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
    | X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2180
    | X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Original
    | X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
    | Message-ID: <>
    | Newsgroups: microsoft.public.windows.server.networking
    | NNTP-Posting-Host: mail.wermtec.se 194.132.162.3
    | Path: TK2MSFTNGXA01.phx.gbl!TK2MSFTNGP08.phx.gbl!TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl
    | Xref: TK2MSFTNGXA01.phx.gbl
    microsoft.public.windows.server.networking:18255
    | X-Tomcat-NG: microsoft.public.windows.server.networking
    |
    | Hi Amanda
    |
    | I have been checking newgroups and the posting seems to have been taken
    | away, only some of the postings are still there?!
    |
    | Have you answered the question or has it been removed? This was a pretty
    | long thread before...
    | Hope you are there to answer this!
    | Best Regards
    |
    | Perra
    |
    |
    |
     
    Vincent Xu [MSFT], Aug 4, 2005
    #17
  18. Hi Perra,

    Please let me know your valid mail address and we will provide another
    process to resolve your issue.

    You may send your mail address to my mail box:


    Best regards,

    Vincent Xu
    Microsoft Online Partner Support

    Get Secure! - www.microsoft.com/security


    --------------------
    | X-Tomcat-ID: 107779646
    | References: <>
    <>
    <>
    <>
    <>
    <R#>
    <>
    <#>
    <>
    <>
    <>
    <>
    <>
    <>
    | MIME-Version: 1.0
    | Content-Type: text/plain
    | Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
    | From: (Vincent Xu [MSFT])
    | Organization: Microsoft
    | Date: Thu, 04 Aug 2005 05:49:41 GMT
    | Subject: Re: Client performance problem windows 2003 server...
    | X-Tomcat-NG: microsoft.public.windows.server.networking
    | Message-ID: <>
    | Newsgroups: microsoft.public.windows.server.networking
    | Lines: 52
    | Path: TK2MSFTNGXA01.phx.gbl
    | Xref: TK2MSFTNGXA01.phx.gbl
    microsoft.public.windows.server.networking:18288
    | NNTP-Posting-Host: tomcatimport2.phx.gbl 10.201.218.182
    |
    | Hi Perra,
    |
    | Thank you for your reply.
    |
    | For some reasons, Amanda can no longer work with you at this post. From
    now
    | I will try to perform research on your issue. Now, I need some time to
    | review this post. I'll be back as soon as possible. Thank you for your
    | patience.
    |
    | Best regards,
    |
    | Vincent Xu
    | Microsoft Online Partner Support
    |
    | Get Secure! - www.microsoft.com/security
    |
    |
    | --------------------
    | | From: <>
    | | References: <>
    | <>
    | <>
    | <>
    | <>
    | <R#>
    | <>
    | <#>
    | <>
    | <>
    | <>
    | <>
    | <>
    | | Subject: Re: Client performance problem windows 2003 server...
    | | Date: Wed, 3 Aug 2005 14:12:40 +0200
    | | Lines: 13
    | | X-Priority: 3
    | | X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
    | | X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2180
    | | X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Original
    | | X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
    | | Message-ID: <>
    | | Newsgroups: microsoft.public.windows.server.networking
    | | NNTP-Posting-Host: mail.wermtec.se 194.132.162.3
    | | Path: TK2MSFTNGXA01.phx.gbl!TK2MSFTNGP08.phx.gbl!TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl
    | | Xref: TK2MSFTNGXA01.phx.gbl
    | microsoft.public.windows.server.networking:18255
    | | X-Tomcat-NG: microsoft.public.windows.server.networking
    | |
    | | Hi Amanda
    | |
    | | I have been checking newgroups and the posting seems to have been
    taken
    | | away, only some of the postings are still there?!
    | |
    | | Have you answered the question or has it been removed? This was a
    pretty
    | | long thread before...
    | | Hope you are there to answer this!
    | | Best Regards
    | |
    | | Perra
    | |
    | |
    | |
    |
    |
     
    Vincent Xu [MSFT], Aug 4, 2005
    #18
    1. Advertisements

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 (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.