Re: Stubbornly Invisible Client!
on 7/28/00 8:15 AM, Gowan Fenley at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Actually, this is the latest route suggested by Matt. I am reluctant to take such extreme measures as blowing away an entire subnet so far. That sort of work would have to be after hours, and this, after all an evaluation of Retrospect to see if it warrants purchase. The "Macintosh centric" feel of the product has begun to concern me. While I certainly have no bias against Apple (we were once an Apple shop before moving to NT), I hope Dantz is not struggling with a lack of depth of experience with NT/Win2K as compared to other vendors with a more well defined Wintel heritage... Microsoft's response would probably be, "reinstall the operating system," and they have the most NT/Win2K experience out there -- they designed that POS system (and I'm *not* talking about "Point of Sale"). Given the ease that Microsoft leads people down the primrose path to destruction, by allowing configurations that "work" (kind of) has led to a very large consultant base supporting Microsoft products. Given all that, and my previous experience supporting multiple network devices on a single machine, the result that I found was to remove all traces of the NIC (not physically, just in the "Network Protocols" panel), get everything working, then *just* add the protocol(s) that you need for the second NIC. If you don't need TCP/IP on the second NIC, then *don't enable it*. If you do, and everything is working, then it's possible that things will continue to work. Take this advice for what you paid for it -- but that is how I was able to help a friend in a similar situation (only in his case, he had *3* NICs and wondered why things weren't working -- I had to explain the benefits of hubs to him). -- Glenn L. Austin Computer Wizard and Race Car Driver [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.austin-home.com/glenn/ -- -- To subscribe:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Archives:http://list.working-dogs.com/lists/retro-talk/ Problems?: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Scripting within Retrospect.
The AppleShare lockout feature only works when Retrospect is running on the AppleShare server. It will not lock out users when backing up AppleShare servers remotely. Regards, Matthew Tevenan Technical Support Specialist Dantz Development Corporation 925.253.3050 [EMAIL PROTECTED] From: casper [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: "retro-talk" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 17:02:43 -0400 To: retro-talk [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Scripting within Retrospect. Thank you for the advice. I have another question however. I assume that Appleshare lockout works with the appleshare clients. Is this functionality still realized using Mac Manager? We have another small site that is interested in automating their backup procedure. Thanks again. The "if it ain't broke don't fix it" saying definitely applies in this case. Retrospect is completely compatible with AppleShare. It's just when you have a server that's being slammed and a Retrospect backup happening at the same time that things can get dicey. If this is working for you, don't change it. Also, one more thing. The AppleShare lockout feature is NOT the same thing as shutting down AppleShare. The AppleShare lockout feature (accessible in the Options of your backup script) automatically logs out users before local server volume backups. AppleShare is still running. Something extremely important to note is that to get a good backup of your AppleShare server, AppleShare MUST be running. Otherwise you will not be backing up the access privileges. Feel free to call us should you have any other questions. Regards, Matthew Tevenan Technical Support Specialist Dantz Development Corporation 925.253.3050 [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- -- To subscribe:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Archives:http://list.working-dogs.com/lists/retro-talk/ Problems?: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- -- To subscribe:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Archives:http://list.working-dogs.com/lists/retro-talk/ Problems?: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Stubbornly Invisible Client!
Gowan Fenley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The "Macintosh centric" feel of the product has begun to concern me. While I certainly have no bias against Apple (we were once an Apple shop before moving to NT), I hope Dantz is not struggling with a lack of depth of experience with NT/Win2K as compared to other vendors with a more well defined Wintel heritage... Gowan, your concern is understood and perhaps not uncommon. Let me see if I can help to alleviate it. Retrospect for Windows was created by Windows engineers. While the interface mirrors (mostly) our Mac product, that interface evolved over several years, driven by customer feedback, so it's not purely a Mac interface either. There are some areas of the interface we may be able to make more Windows-like, and we're looking at that closely. The architecture of Retrospect for Windows is NOT a port of the Mac product; it has been completely redesigned from the ground up, and it is more advanced. It just happens to look like the Mac version on the surface. What would a "defined Wintel heritage" have given us? Legacy archive bit-based backup technology that doesn't work. Incremental backups that don't restore. Full backups that waste time and media, not leaving you enough of either to back up the desktops and notebooks on the network. Reliance on puzzling media rotation schemes, like Tower of Hanoi, which may or may not deliver when the time comes. We believe there's a better way to do backups--one that maximizes your backups resources and, most importantly, will always restore. If you like, take a look at http://www.betterbackup.com. It talks about the problems that we see with most backup software today and how Retrospect addresses those problems. I hope this information is helpful to you, Gowan. It matters a lot to us that it is, so please let us know if you have additional concerns. Best regards, Eric Ullman Dantz Development -- -- To subscribe:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Archives:http://list.working-dogs.com/lists/retro-talk/ Problems?: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Stubbornly Invisible Client!
Gowan, You might want to go over the "bindlistener" registry edit again to make sure you've done it correctly: Stop the Client service from the Services control panel. From the Start menu, choose Run and type "Regedit" (no quotes). Open the path HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Dantz\Retrospect Client\5.0, and highlight the 5.0 folder. You should see a "BindListener" value set to 0.0.0.0. If the TCP/IP interface you want has a static address, change the BindListener value to that address. If the TCP/IP interface you want to use has a dynamic address, set the BindListener value to the network portion of your IP address. For example, if the current IP address is 192.168.6.241 with subnet mask 255.255.255.0, use 192.168.6.0. Start the Client service from the Services control panel. If you're running 2000, this should work. Have you tried uninstalling the Retrospect Client, then reinstalling it? What version are you running? Ensure you're running the 5.1 client, as we made significant changes to bindlistener with that version. Beyond that, there are several things you can try, one of which is what Julia has suggested. There's currently not a better way to force the client to bind to a particular address. We hope to make significant changes to the Windows client to make this much easier in the future. The following suggestions are for Windows NT, but obviously apply to 2000 as well: 1.Open the Network control panel and click Bindings. Then set the pull-down menu to display bindings for all protocols and double-click the TCP/IP Protocol to see the bindings listed below it. Highlight the desired binding and click the move up/move down buttons to set the desired order. Your desired Ethernet card should be at the top of the list. 2.Uninstall the Ethernet card you do not want the client to use. Restart. Check that the client is binding to the right adapter. Reinstall the removed card. Make sure the Retrospect client is still binding to the correct card. 3.Try putting the desired Ethernet card into a different slot in the computer. Regards, Matthew Tevenan Technical Support Specialist Dantz Development Corporation 925.253.3050 [EMAIL PROTECTED] From: "Gowan Fenley" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: "retro-talk" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 11:15:15 -0400 To: "retro-talk" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Stubbornly Invisible Client! Actually, this is the latest route suggested by Matt. I am reluctant to take such extreme measures as blowing away an entire subnet so far. That sort of work would have to be after hours, and this, after all an evaluation of Retrospect to see if it warrants purchase. The "Macintosh centric" feel of the product has begun to concern me. While I certainly have no bias against Apple (we were once an Apple shop before moving to NT), I hope Dantz is not struggling with a lack of depth of experience with NT/Win2K as compared to other vendors with a more well defined Wintel heritage... -Gowan Julia said: I know this is kinda odd, but have you tried taking out the network card with the printers on it, and seeing if you can get Retrospect to work then? Once it's done, reinstall the second card, and see if it still works. Last resort thing, I know, but it might be a good final attempt. -- -- To subscribe:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Archives:http://list.working-dogs.com/lists/retro-talk/ Problems?: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- -- To subscribe:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Archives:http://list.working-dogs.com/lists/retro-talk/ Problems?: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Stubbornly Invisible Client REVEALED!!!
BINGO! Matt had the answer - change the binding order of the NICs and *poof* the misbehaving client is now visible to the backup server! I overlooked checking that setting simply because Microsoft moved the binding tab to such a screwy place in Win2K (you really have to root for it, unlike in NT). Good job Matt! Looks like the Retrospect/VXA combination may replace our old BackExec/DAT solution after all... Thanks to everyone on the list who put their mind to solving my little problem. -Gowan -- -- To subscribe:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Archives:http://list.working-dogs.com/lists/retro-talk/ Problems?: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Is Dantz Wintel competent?
In response to my rhetorical query, Eric said: ...The architecture of Retrospect for Windows is NOT a port of the Mac product; it has been completely redesigned from the ground up...What would a "defined Wintel heritage" have given us?... Point taken. I definitely agree that Incremental-Plus is an improvement over legacy-think approaches to network backup. My concern had to do with tech support, given the majority of posts to this list seem to relate to the Apple platform. Obviously Dantz's ability to suggest a solution to my problem (thanks Matt!), demonstrates positive proof in your potential to support NT/2K customers. However, I do believe we would be better served to make either a newsgroup or support Web board to make this sort of information more accessible. My problem is solved, but it took several days, and what about the next new customer who has the same situation? A digest version of the listserve is available, but it is not easily searchable and plagued with HTML codes. Just my $.02 Kudos on Eric's responsiveness and candor in addressing (not flaming) my posting. -Gowan -- -- To subscribe:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Archives:http://list.working-dogs.com/lists/retro-talk/ Problems?: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Stubbornly Invisible Client!
Hi, As one of the senior QA people here at Dantz, I've been asked to reply to this post. Hopefully I can cover most of the issues involved. First, I have to thank Gowan for that last post. I appreciate its pragmatic approach. My intention with this post is to address Gowan's questions, and to provide an overview of troubleshooting an NT/2000 system with multiple NICs. Gowan's questions: 1. Does anyone have the Retrospect CLIENT running successfully on a Win2k SERVER? YES. Absolutely. Here at Dantz we back up Windows 2000 servers via the client every night. 2. Does anyone have the Retrospect Client working on a dual-homed machine? YES. I personally have backed up a client with 2 NICs every night for over a year, using Win NT 4.0 and then Windows 2000 as soon as the first stable beta was available. 3. Are there any known cases of Retrospect Client having port conflicts with other TCP/IP services? Not with other services per se. The client issues we see are almost always to to configuration issues. Each TCP/IP host has an internal routing table. This has to be set up properly. Each network router needs to properly support multicasting and subnet broadcasting. Of course, you could force our software to conflict by setting http (or some other service) to step on our well-known port, but that's an unlikely scenario. Troubleshooting a multiple NIC system: I'm going to cover the simplest case, where your system has 2 NICs and each NIC has one address. 1. The first thing to do is install the client and restart, then open the client control panel. The status should be "Waiting for first access", or "Ready" if the client has ever been logged in. If this fails (for example, the client status might be "(network shut down)") then you need to troubleshoot basic TCP/IP network connectivity on the client. 2. The next thing to do is to try and access the client from Retrospect. If you're using Retrospect for Windows, go to ConfigureClientsAdd and use the Test button. You can enter the client name as displayed in the control panel, the WINS name, or the TCP/IP address. Possible responses are: error -530 - This means that the host wasn't there (eg, ping failed). error -541 - This means that the host is there (eg, ping succeeded) but it's not a Retrospect Client. Found client... with address, name version displayed. If your client has 2 NICS and each NIC has a single address, simply try each TCP/IP address. One should work, and the other should get an error -541. 3. Now it gets complicated. If step 2 succeeded and the client is at the right address, you're done. If step 2 succeeded and the client is at the wrong address, you should be able to edit the BindListener registry entry (see below) to set the address PROVIDED THAT a) The client is running Windows NT or 2000, and b) The address you want to set it to is a fixed (not DHCP) address. 4. If steps 2 and 3 don't resolve your problem, it's time to talk to Dantz Technical support. BindListener Instructions: You must be using NT/2000 and want to force the client to bind to a FIXED address. 1. Use the services control panel to halt the Retrospect Client service. 2. In Regedit, go to HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Dantz\Client\5.0 3. Change the BindListener value from "0.0.0.0" to the desired address. 4. Start the client service, open the control panel verify the status is Ready or Waiting for first access. Hope this helps everyone, Paul Mackinney Dantz Development Corporation -- -- To subscribe:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Archives:http://list.working-dogs.com/lists/retro-talk/ Problems?: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: G3/Sony DAT
Ken, I believe that our G3 Server(MT) has a Sony DAT drive, with Apple supplied bezel. Jim System Administrator Illini Media Company Student Media at the University of Illinois [EMAIL PROTECTED] Ken Gillett said, in a previous message: I'd like to put a Sony ???9000 (DDS3) DAT in a beige G3. Anyone know if Apple ever did a bezel for that model that would work over the Sony drive? Other Mac servers have utilised the HP DAT, but the lights etc are different on the Sony and I just don't know if Apple ever even fitted a DAT to the G3 server and if so was it a Sony. I know they have used Sonys. Thanks -- Ken G i l l e t t --- -- -- To subscribe:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Archives:http://list.working-dogs.com/lists/retro-talk/ Problems?: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- -- To subscribe:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Archives:http://list.working-dogs.com/lists/retro-talk/ Problems?: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
