RE: Stubbornly Invisible Client!

[Chris]

Just curious...can you ping the client from the backup server?  If NetBEUI
or another protocol is installed on both machines, it is possible to
communicate via the Network Neighborhood but not with Retrospect since it
only uses TCP/IP.  If pinging fails, I would think that either TCP/IP is
corrupted or not configured properly on one/both of the machines.

Chris

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf
Of PVI mailbox on Wopper
Sent: Thursday, July 27, 2000 1:40 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Stubbornly Invisible Client!


This is driving me crazy!

In a nutshell, I have a Retrospect 5.1 Client that refuses to be seen by the
backup server. Here are the details of the setup:

Server is Win2K Server running Retrospect Server 5.1. 256Mb RAM, VXA-1 tape.
Works fine with 5 other NT and 98 Clients.

Bad Client is also Win2K Server with 5.1 Client. Status window shows
"waiting for activation". Client has two NICs one on backup server subnet,
another with only printers. Matt at Dantz suggested a registry hack to bind
Client explicitly to correct NIC - didn't work. Both backup client and
backup server communicate fine via Windows - even Retrospect can see shared
volumes on bad client via Win, but not via Retrospect Client. Direct connect
thru switch between machines - no router or firewall. Attempts to connect
manually via Advanced dialog on server results in -541 error (client not
found).

What the devil is going on here? Anyone have any ideas?

Thanks!

-gf

Gowan Fenley
PVI Productions
[EMAIL PROTECTED]



--
--
To subscribe:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Archives:
Problems?:   [EMAIL PROTECTED]



--
--
To subscribe:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Archives:
Problems?:   [EMAIL PROTECTED]

RE: Stubbornly Invisible Client!

[Gowan Fenley]

Nope. TCP/IP is the only protocol on the LAN. (NetBEUI=slow painful death)
8)

Any other ideas?

-Gowan

Chris said:

Just curious...can you ping the client from the backup server?  If NetBEUI
or another protocol is installed on both machines, it is possible to
communicate via the Network Neighborhood but not with Retrospect since it
only uses TCP/IP.  If pinging fails, I would think that either TCP/IP is
corrupted or not configured properly on one/both of the machines.





--
--
To subscribe:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Archives:
Problems?:   [EMAIL PROTECTED]

RE: Stubbornly Invisible Client!

[Julia Frizzell]

At 10:49 AM -0400 7/28/00, Gowan Fenley wrote:
>Nope. TCP/IP is the only protocol on the LAN. (NetBEUI=slow painful death)
>8)
>
>Any other ideas?
>
>-Gowan
>
>Chris said:
>
>Just curious...can you ping the client from the backup server?  If NetBEUI
>or another protocol is installed on both machines, it is possible to
>communicate via the Network Neighborhood but not with Retrospect since it
>only uses TCP/IP.  If pinging fails, I would think that either TCP/IP is
>corrupted or not configured properly on one/both of the machines.

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.

-- 
--
Julia Frizzellhttp://www.netspace.org/~glyneth
[EMAIL PROTECTED]   http://www.theblackroad.org
[EMAIL PROTECTED]  ICQ: 8458071
"How you behave toward cats here below determines your status in Heaven."
Robert A. Heinlein


--
--
To subscribe:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Archives:
Problems?:   [EMAIL PROTECTED]

RE: Stubbornly Invisible Client!

[Gowan Fenley]

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:
Problems?:   [EMAIL PROTECTED]

RE: Stubbornly Invisible Client!

[Craig Isaacs]

> 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.

Did you try to simply ping the client computer?

Start>Run>command.com
use "ipconfig" to determine what the actual IP address is on the client
then, on the server, ping xxx.xx.xx.x

I'd be surprised if this worked and Retrospect didn't.

Craig


--
--
To subscribe:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Archives:
Problems?:   [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Stubbornly Invisible Client!

[Glenn L. Austin]

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]>




--
--
To subscribe:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Archives:
Problems?:   [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Stubbornly Invisible Client!

[Eric Ullman]

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:
Problems?:   [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Stubbornly Invisible Client!

[Matthew Tevenan]

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]

RE: Stubbornly Invisible Client!

[Gowan Fenley]

In the spirit of avoiding misconceptions or (horrors) platform flame wars,
perhaps I should back up a little and introduce myself.

I am a principal and primary IS resource in a Web development company that
hosts over 100 domains for B2B clients primarily in service industries.
While I do not hold any certifications (not only are they not necessary,
since I have no one to impress, but I believe these certificates are grossly
overpriced), I do have 15 years experience in technical support with minis,
mainframes, PCs and Macs.

I regularly work with a variety of O/S, with a current focus on NT/Win2K and
some Linux. All this is to say that I have no particular loyalty to any
software publisher, preferring to select the best product currently
available to meet the demands of the application at hand. Retrospect is
being evaluated under exactly these guidelines, and it makes no difference
to me whether it was originally developed for the Palm Pilot or TRS-80 as
long as the product does what I need it to do and is backed by sufficient
support.

So back to the task at hand: Yes, I have verified that all TCP/IP services
are running on the offending client. I know of no way to check the
Retrospect client software other than to check the client status panel
itself, which says it is awaiting the Server's first access. If any one has
any ideas here short of dropping a scanner in the line and examining packets
I'd like to hear it. Given the limits of my small test LAN, here are some
pointed questions for the group:

1. Does anyone have the Retrospect CLIENT running successfully on a Win2k
SERVER?
2. Does anyone have the Retrospect Client working on a dual-homed machine?
3. Are there any known cases of Retrospect Client having port conflicts with
other TCP/IP services?

Thanks everybody for your help! Next time you are configuring a secondary
DNS server on the other side of NAT firewall maybe I can return the favor...

-Gowan

Glenn said:
-Original Message-
...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





--
--
To subscribe:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Archives:
Problems?:   [EMAIL PROTECTED]

RE: Stubbornly Invisible Client!

[Paul Mackinney]

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 Configure>Clients>Add 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:
Problems?:   [EMAIL PROTECTED]

RE: Stubbornly Invisible Client!

[John Gee]

>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...

Dantz may not have had a Windows server until recently, but they have 
had a Windows Retrospect client for a long time. Years ago I had 
terrible problems backing up a Windows NT 3.5.1 server, and Dantz 
technical support were very helpful. Despite Retrospect being the 
only application affected, I eventually identified a hardware 
problem. Windows NT 3.5 experience suggests a reasonable Wintel 
heritage. :-)

So a personal vote of confidence from years of backing up Windows and 
Macintosh clients: I have complete confidence in the Retrospect 
software and in Dantz technical support, for both Windows and 
Macintosh.

>1. Does anyone have the Retrospect CLIENT running successfully on a
>Win2k SERVER?

Yes.

My only problem was that when the Windows 2000 server was first set 
up, the TCP/IP protocol was binding to a second ethernet card with no 
ethernet attached. Walking through a Dantz trouble-shooting guide 
helped me to resolve the problem.

>2. Does anyone have the Retrospect Client working on a dual-homed machine?

Not at the moment, but our previous Windows NT 3.5.1 server acted as 
a gateway between two ethernet segments and was backed up using 
Retrospect client. (Which might or might not be dual-homed, excuse my 
ignorance.)
-- 
John Gee[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Dunedin, New ZealandProgrammers live in interesting times...



--
--
To subscribe:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Archives:
Problems?:   [EMAIL PROTECTED]