thanks for taking the time to read through this, Cil. The problem continues to be a source of frustration for my client and for me.
some comments / responses below: ""Priscilla Oppenheimer"" wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > What version of NetWare are the clients using? Some of this may only apply > to older versions..... CL: the server is a 4.x box, the PC clients use the Novell Client32. > > Encapsulation issues are definitely a good place to start. You say that the > router is using sap (802.2) but the client is using Windows 95, which > probably did not default to 802.2. It probably defaulted to novell-ether. CL: I have worked with the client to try to determine this. I will revisit the issue. This is one of the things that I am not confident about. > > Where is the login server? Local or remote? Who answers the client's Get > Nearest Server (GNS) request? Could it be the router? Could the router be > telling the client about some server that can't actually provide login > services? > CL: All client PC's in the network log on to a central server. This is the first location where there is a problem. I dislike introducing wildcards into the discussion, but this is also the only location where there is an 827 router and a VPN involved. I am looking away from the router if only because the router is seeing all network devices - central server and print servers. So far as I can tell, the router in question is configured no differently than any other router in the WAN. CL: There is no internal network number configurered on any router in the network. CL: this would be a great place for sniffer capability, to really decode what is hapening. unfortunately, that is not an option. > Routers have also been known to answer the GNS with the address of a server > that the client can't actually reach, due to IPX access lists on the router. CL: no ipx access-lists on any router anywhere in the LAN CL: other folks have offered that ther might be a type-20 propogation issue. I re-read the Cisco documentation on this, and also checked back to my reference configurations from the IPX network I used to manage at the brokerage firm. I don't see type-20 as an issue, really. Perhaps I am misunderstanding, but type-20 is relevant only when using Micorsoft netowrking over IPX. None of my routers at the brokerage firm ever had type-20 propogation enabled. It was a strictly Novell / IPX network, and there were never any reachability issues. > > Check network numbers, both internal numbers (on the servers) and "actual" > numbers on WANs and LANs. Make sure there are no duplicates. The symptoms > sound mildly similar to a situation I ran into where the internal network > number on a server was the same as a number used on the new WAN. CL: good idea, and one that normally would not occur to me. A colleague of mine also sugessted sending a print job to the local office printer from some other office, the theory being that if the WAN print job went through, we could eliminate the WAN as a problem. > > I assume you have checked this Cisco document on troubleshooting NetWare: > > http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/cisintwk/itg_v1/tr1908.htm > > Good luck. Let us know what you discover! Thanks. > > Priscilla > > At 01:32 AM 1/23/02, Chuck Larrieu wrote: > >I'm resurrecting this one because I have a client..... > > > >In fact, I was thinking about posing this as a Friday Folly of sorts. The > >situation is this: > > > >We install a VPN from one client location to another. We have done frame > >relay for this client, but frame was way too expensive for the particular > >new office location, and VPN is so generic these days... > > > >Customer is an IPX shop. 827 routers at both ends of the internet > >connection. GRE tunnel for the IPX. Al routers see all IPX devices on the > >network. However, the new workstation not only refuses to see the login > >server, but most of the time plain old crashes / locks up when booting. > > > >Remove the router from the hub, and the PC comes up just fine. During this > >period, the PC can also print to an IPX printer connected to the local hub. > > > >My employer's policy is that we have no responsibility for anything beyond > >the router, but I happen to like this client, and I happen to have a sense > >of responsibility in terms of recommending workable solutions to clients. So > >I continue to help. > > > >Suffice it to say that the client is clueless in anything beyond simple PC > >and server configuration. No troubleshooting skills. No sniffers, no > >advanced education in networking. So it can be painful trying to > >troubleshoot by telephone. > > > >So now I have the mystery of the week in front of me. The ethernet > >encapsulation is SAP ( Novell 802.2 ) The PC client is Windoze 95. Client > >tells me he has "ghosted" a Windows 98 image to the PC and experienced the > >same problem. Client also tells me he is seeing 802.2 and 802.3 frames on > >the local LAN, but I believe what he is "seeing" is a printout from the > >print server ( HP Jet Direct ) indicating that both frame types are > >configured on the print server. > > > >Quick looks on TAC reveal nothing about PC issues ( not surprising, if only > >because the router is working the way I would expect, the proof being all > >IPX devices are visible to the router ) > > > >In any case, I have re-read all the posts in this thread, and I will go back > >to the client with some things to look at, including updating the NIC > >drivers ( and not just relying on what's in the "ghost" reference image ) > >and removing the 802.3 frame type from the print server configuration. If > >this doesn't work, I will recommend that we dispatch our installation people > >to load a newer image onto the 827. > > > >I guess I am posting this situation just because I continue to be humbled by > >the kinds of problems that can occur, with no reasonable explanation. > > > >Chuck > > > > > >""John Neiberger"" wrote in message > >[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > > > We're having an interesting issue that just appeared recently. We have > > > some Dell PCs running Netware 6 and new client software. We're not sure > > > why, but if one of these machines is connected to a 2924XL switch, it > > > regularly experiences a blue screen of death either at login or within 5 > > > minutes of login. > > > > > > We have identical machines that operate fine if they're connected to > > > our Bay switches or Cisco 1900 switches. > > > > > > Have any of you seen anything like this?? That makes no sense to me. > > > The only difference I've been able to determine is that Spanning Tree is > > > turned off on those particular Bay switches and 1900 switches, yet it is > > > turned on on the 2924XL switches. So, perhaps these PCs are reacting > > > badly to STP BPDU. > > > > > > Any thoughts? Our LAN people are doing some testing with different NIC > > > software and Novell client software and I'll post back to the list if we > > > determine the actual cause of the issue. But can you think of why it > > > would only happen if they're connect to a 2924? > > > > > > Thanks, > > > John > ________________________ > > Priscilla Oppenheimer > http://www.priscilla.com Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=33099&t=32536 -------------------------------------------------- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
