Problems with mapped drive dissappearing

Dell SERVER
June 18, 2010 at 12:57:05
Specs: Windows Server 2003, Dell
Hi, I am running a dell server with ms server
2003. I have a total of 4 computers connected
to the network. Heartlandserver, backoffice-
pc, frontoffice-pc and frontofficemain. the
problem i am having is that i cannot map the
network drives to the backoffice-pc or
frontoffice-pc. they are both running windows
vista. frontofficemain is running windows xp. i
brought in another computer with win7 and ran
a ping on all 4 computers and this is what i
got.

Microsoft Windows [Version 6.1.7600]
Copyright (c) 2009 Microsoft Corporation. All
rights reserved.

C:\Users\Jeremy Landers>ping backoffice-pc

Pinging BACKOFFICE-PC
[fe80::31be:29ff:9289:69fe%14] with 32 bytes
of data:
Reply from fe80::31be:29ff:9289:69fe%14:
time=6ms
Reply from fe80::31be:29ff:9289:69fe%14:
time=2ms
Reply from fe80::31be:29ff:9289:69fe%14:
time=3ms
Reply from fe80::31be:29ff:9289:69fe%14:
time=2ms

Ping statistics for
fe80::31be:29ff:9289:69fe%14:
Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0
(0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 2ms, Maximum = 6ms, Average
= 3ms

C:\Users\Jeremy Landers>ping heartlandserver

Pinging heartlandserver [192.168.0.107] with
32 bytes of data:
Reply from 192.168.0.107: bytes=32
time=2ms TTL=128
Reply from 192.168.0.107: bytes=32
time=2ms TTL=128
Reply from 192.168.0.107: bytes=32
time=1ms TTL=128
Reply from 192.168.0.107: bytes=32
time=1ms TTL=128

Ping statistics for 192.168.0.107:
Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0
(0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 1ms, Maximum = 2ms, Average
= 1ms

C:\Users\Jeremy Landers>ping frontoffice-pc

Pinging FrontOffice-PC
[fe80::f9f1:1329:5683:8ecf%14] with 32 bytes
of data:
Reply from fe80::f9f1:1329:5683:8ecf%14:
time=2ms
Reply from fe80::f9f1:1329:5683:8ecf%14:
time=2ms
Reply from fe80::f9f1:1329:5683:8ecf%14:
time=2ms
Reply from fe80::f9f1:1329:5683:8ecf%14:
time=2ms

Ping statistics for
fe80::f9f1:1329:5683:8ecf%14:
Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0
(0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 2ms, Maximum = 2ms, Average
= 2ms

C:\Users\Jeremy Landers>ping frontofficemain

Pinging frontofficemain [192.168.0.7] with 32
bytes of data:
Reply from 192.168.0.7: bytes=32 time=4ms
TTL=128
Reply from 192.168.0.7: bytes=32 time=1ms
TTL=128
Reply from 192.168.0.7: bytes=32 time=1ms
TTL=128
Reply from 192.168.0.7: bytes=32 time=3ms
TTL=128

Ping statistics for 192.168.0.7:
Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0
(0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 1ms, Maximum = 4ms, Average
= 2ms


I can tell from looking at the above that the
heartlandserver and frontofficemain are using
their correct ip addresses. but the frontoffice-
pc and backoffice-pc are using something
else. Because it returns some odd string of
numbers and letters.

When I try to ping the frontoffice-pc and
backoffice-pc from the server i always get a
timeout error. but when i replace the computer
name with the ip address it pings
successfully.

Can someone please tell me how i can get the
frontoffice-pc and backoffice-pc on the same
page as the other 2 computers in the network?
Thank you so much any help would be
appreciated.


See More: Problems with mapped drive dissappearing

Report •


#1
June 18, 2010 at 13:50:29
in tcp/ip properties uncheck ipv6 which is what is giving you this fe80::f9f1:1329:5683:8ecf%14:
That is a ipv6 ip not a ipv4 ip which is in this format xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx

Report •

#2
June 18, 2010 at 14:12:40
Hey thanks i appreciate the help. and that did allow me to map
the drive to backoffice-pc. but when i logged on the the server
and tried to ping backoffice-pc with the actual computer name it
came back with a timeout error again. it was trying to access
backoffice-pc on 192.168.0.4 but the static ip in the backoffice-
pc is 192.168.0.3 where on the server would i go to change the
backoffice-pc to the correct static ip?

Report •

#3
June 18, 2010 at 14:25:08
You need to correct the MS DNS server entries. You apparently have changed ip/names but did not update the 2003 dns server entries.

Report •

Related Solutions

#4
June 18, 2010 at 14:40:55
Okay i'm not sure how to do that. i dont think ms dns is even
set up yet.

Report •

#5
June 18, 2010 at 15:27:03
Where is your DNS server if it is not running on one of your servers? Is it on a hardware box like an All-In-One Router? If so then go there and update your DNS entries. If you have never messed with DNS I would suggest you get the person who setup your network to assist.

Ok, that being said have you tried updating the local DNS cashe yet. It could be a simple as that.

IPCONFIG /FLUSHDNS
IPCONFIG /REGISTERDNS

This will go and pull the DNS entries from your DNS to the local Cache. Also, could you post an

IPCONFIG /ALL

So we can see what IP you have as your DNS server? This will help to know where it is installed. Don't forget to XX out the first two Octets of any IP address for your security.


Report •

#6
June 18, 2010 at 15:59:22
There is NEVER a reason to obsure any octets in private ip which is what we are talking about here.

A router is not a dns server since no router I have ever worked with keeps a table of names to ip addresses. Don't confuse pointing dns to a gateway as the gateway being a dns server. It is not.

A post of an ipconfig /all from the server would be informative.


Report •

#7
June 18, 2010 at 16:30:53
True, I have never seen one and yes router was the wrong word but I have heard of DNS "boxes" (insert name here) which could be what he is using like...

http://www.appliansys.com/products/...

I highly doubt that he has one of these and has DNS running on his server and just does not realize it. That is why I wanted the IPCONFIG/ALL so he could see the DNS address was his server.

As for hiding the private IPs just call me paranoid. He may have public IPs for his DNS and not good to show them if he did.

But thanks for the correction.


Report •

#8
June 18, 2010 at 17:44:28
You're a good guy Ace and nothing wrong with being security minded if applied correctly.

Report •


Ask Question