I currently have windows 2000 pro with SP4 installed on my PIII 1GHZ Gateway Intel 440BX with 512MB of ram, 3GB drive for the OS and 200GB for the file serving. I've been trying to set permissions in windows 2000 pro so that on my Windows XP machines have to see a prompt for a password to access the shares. I also experimented with having it so that The admin account could access the share, "steveo" the account can access it, and guest account. But when trying to access it through windows XP it simply says I can't access it. I have windows 2000 server lying around and I could install it but I'm not sure if it would be worth it for what I'm doing.
Is 2000 server required for a file server?
- Thread starter Mildlyamused
- Start date
Nothinman
Elite Member
- Sep 14, 2001
- 30,672
- 0
- 0
No, you don't need Win2K Server, but Pro has limitations like only 10 concurrent connections.
For what you're doing all you should need to do is setup the same account and passwords on both machines, since you can't setup Pro to be an AD DC to centralize accounts.
For what you're doing all you should need to do is setup the same account and passwords on both machines, since you can't setup Pro to be an AD DC to centralize accounts.
Well I've got a fairly large network 10+ computers and I plan to put in another switch for the 7+ computers near me, preferrably gigabit. I want to do encoding onto this server and or be able to save files onto the file server fairly quickly after encoding video on my main machine. Would having active directory solve my issue with this file server? It's not like having a domain correct? Because I don't plan to fool around with that until I get all of my systems up and running.
BTW What is DC?
BTW What is DC?
Nothinman
Elite Member
- Sep 14, 2001
- 30,672
- 0
- 0
DC is a Domain Controller and AD is the 2000+ version of a domain. It requires proper DNS and preferably DHCP. I doubt it would fix your current issue, but it would make things easier as you would be able to have centrally managed accounts, profiles, etc. Then again if you're hitting the 10 concurrent connection limit it could fix your issue, but I would assume that you would get a license error on the box, did you even check the eventlogs?
but....
Somehow, I suspect licensing may be the least of this poster's worries...
Anyhoo, try creating some local users on the 2k box, and when xp connects and ask for a user/pass, try entering SERVERNAME\accountname and password.
Problem is windows xp is NOT giving me a prompt for the windows 2000 file server so that I put in a password. I either can access it or not and yes I have simple file sharing in windows XP disabled.
What is THAT suppose to mean? What do you guys mean by "licensing issues"? If you don't think I legally obtained this copy then thats your business but I did. This copy of windows 2000 server that I have lying around was used in my dad's office before he retired...
What is THAT suppose to mean? What do you guys mean by "licensing issues"? If you don't think I legally obtained this copy then thats your business but I did. This copy of windows 2000 server that I have lying around was used in my dad's office before he retired...
No you can use many programs to set up an FTP. Also windows has its own FTP program. I recommend Serv-U
I'm not sure but I dont think he meant anything by it, just that the problem you are having by not being able to connect at all is more of a problem than with the liscensing problems with 10 concurrent connections. The way I understand it W2k Pro must only be liscenced for 10 concurrent connections, and errors in your event log would say something about licesncing errors. While 2k Server doesnt have this licesncing restriction. Good luck in getting your problem fixed.
You could load a Linux distro on that box and run Samba. It supposedly has PDC functionality (same as Windows NT 4) and might solve some problems.
In the mean time, I would learn a little about NT domains and Active Directory. A general overview would be enough for you to figure out what you need for your application.
2000 server would work, but it sounds like you have a ton of machines. Licenses are expensive.
It would be nice if there was just another way... I don't want to have to log onto a domain just to access some files. I want this to be a relatively secure file server but not to be so complicated. Yes I've heard of Serv-U (first got it in back in 1999) and it's a great program. A domain server is not my exact intent because that is what a school would have and essentially makes the computer more like a drone. I saw on a website a wizard for windows 2000 server with selections like file server, web server, domain controller, etc..
Update:
http://www.microsoft.com/windows2000/techinfo/planning/server/serversteps.asp
Here is the website, it's got some images of what the wizard looks like.
Update:
http://www.microsoft.com/windows2000/techinfo/planning/server/serversteps.asp
Here is the website, it's got some images of what the wizard looks like.
Also from the looks of things, I'm not required to make this into a domain controller with active directory. Why has everybody been pushing for active directory if all I'm going to do is make this into a fileserver?
Nothinman
Elite Member
- Sep 14, 2001
- 30,672
- 0
- 0
I said you don't need to do it, but since you have a dozen machines it'll make account management simpler on you. All you need to do is make sure there are matching accounts on each machine. Since your XP client isn't letting you login the problem is most likely there and not on the server.
Windows XP includes a client access license for 2000 - as long as it's the pro version. IIRC.
What I suggested earlier should work. As previous poster suggests however, linux even with simple user/password sharing ("share level = user" in your smb.conf) will do, no need to fart around with the whole domain setup.
i used to have the problem where xp wouldnt prompt for a username and password it would just tell me that access was denied.
i've run into 3 causes for this
First make sure theres a user account setup on the server that has the same username and password as the account on your xp machine
Next, check the user properties for the your accountn the xp machine. if you use the User Accounts Wizard in the XP control panel to change your account name, it will not change the account name that appears in the Computer Management portion of Administrative tools. The username that appears in the User Accounts screen and the username thats stored in your Local Users and Groups menu should be the same.
Finally, one time i had a bad mapped network drive (the mapped location was no longer available) that my xp machine would try to connect to at boot up. when i deleted the drive the network browsing issue on that particular occasion went away.
i've run into 3 causes for this
First make sure theres a user account setup on the server that has the same username and password as the account on your xp machine
Next, check the user properties for the your accountn the xp machine. if you use the User Accounts Wizard in the XP control panel to change your account name, it will not change the account name that appears in the Computer Management portion of Administrative tools. The username that appears in the User Accounts screen and the username thats stored in your Local Users and Groups menu should be the same.
Finally, one time i had a bad mapped network drive (the mapped location was no longer available) that my xp machine would try to connect to at boot up. when i deleted the drive the network browsing issue on that particular occasion went away.
Yes thats what everyone has been suggesting here but the thing with that is the fact that it lets me access the file server with out a passsword prompt and I REALLY don't like that!
its not asking you for a password cause its using your logon password whats wrong with that? it doesn't mean its not secured.
Try this it should work by default ne 2000 or xp box uses the user name U are logged on as locally so crate an acc. on the file server with same name but give it a different PW then it wont like the one Ur logged on with locally so it should prompt for the one U assigned to the file server to access it.
Originally posted by: warmachine
Try this it should work by default ne 2000 or xp box uses the user name U are logged on as locally so crate an acc. on the file server with same name but give it a different PW then it wont like the one Ur logged on with locally so it should prompt for the one U assigned to the file server to access it.
Speak english PLEASE, I can barely understand you! But for example I'm on my sisters or mother's or fathers computer (if I lived at home) and we were all on a network with all of our own accounts and passwords and didn't want to have to create a similar account on all of the computers, then what would I do?
Does linux suffer this problem when networked? Why is it that you have to have an account with the same name on both machines in order to access the other machine?
Ironically the Windows 9x implementation of usernames and passwords seems to be more secure...
Nothinman
Elite Member
- Sep 14, 2001
- 30,672
- 0
- 0
Just create whatever accounts you want on the server, when you try to access the box Windows will popup the login dialog and you can put in whatever username/password you want.
Yes and no, because it's not a problem, it's security. You can setup Samba to use share level security (ala Win9x) but it's generally better to use user level security and just create whatever accounts you want on the server.
You don't.
No, it's not. The Win9x implementation barely worked and was enforced even less, all it was really meant to do was allow the creation of profiles, it's not a real security feature at all.
Thats what I'm trying to do but unfortunately it's not working and I don't want to setup a domain situation. Some people are telling me AND BOOKS that I need to have the same account name and password on both computers.
Yes and no, because it's not a problem, it's security. You can setup Samba to use share level security (ala Win9x) but it's generally better to use user level security and just create whatever accounts you want on the server.
[/quote]
Only reason why I like the 9x implementation is because of the fact it works unlike the windows XP implementation. I notice actually that I have an easier time with 2000 accessing windows XP machines than vise versa... Possibly you can guide me to a site which will show me what exactally I should do so that I can set it up how I want it or tell me?
How about using FTP service on Windows 2000? Unluckily, if it is 2000 Prof, you are limited to 4/5 simultaneous connection. There is added nuisance of course but it is clearly accessible even from Windows Explorer if you type ftp://username@serverIP in the address bar (or you may use Internet Explorer for the same purpose). The fact that it supports drag and drop should solve your problem.
The added nuisance would be creating login credentials on the Server, remove IUSR permissions of ftp folders and et al.
you dont need to have the login info on the server match the logins on your PC, that just makes things easier because you wont be prompted for a username or password when you connect over the network. like someone else said, thats not because theres no security, its just because the server recognizes that youre an authorized user.
have you checked the user permissions in BOTH the sharing and security tabs?
have you checked the user permissions in BOTH the sharing and security tabs?
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 21K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter