os2-netware_users@2rosenthals.com ?????????????? ????? #35

???: Lewis G Rosenthal <os2-netware_users@2rosenthals.com> ?? ????
?????????
???: os2-netware_users-owner <os2-netware_users-owner@2rosenthals.com>
??: [OS2NetWare] Re: Two NICs w/IPX bound; second doesn't work
??: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 09:59:25 -0500
??: os2-netware_users@2rosenthals.com

Thanks, Michael. Yes, I should have thought of this. It's actually in the inf:

    NetWare Client for OS/2 sends out a destination query only on the
   primary network board. It never queries the secondary (or other)
   board for a route. If NetWare Client for OS/2 doesn't find the
   destination using the primary network board, you see a connection
   error, even if the destination could be found using the second
   network board. (However, the network on the second network board can
   be queried using IPX calls from a custom program).

   Once NetWare Client for OS/2 finds a destination using the primary
   network board, it stores the route to that destination in a router
   table and makes a connection.

   After a connection is made, NetWare Client for OS/2 checks all
   networks connected to that destination for other possible routes
   from your OS/2 workstation to the destination.

   If it finds a secondary route, NetWare Client for OS/2 rebuilds the
   router tables and stores that route. If the primary connection
   fails, NetWare Client for OS/2 will use the secondary route to
   continue transmissions to that destination.

   If NetWare Client for OS/2 is using a route through the second
   network board, the primary connection can be broken without causing
   the secondary connection to fail.

   However, the secondary network board never becomes the primary
   board, even if the primary board fails. This means that if NetWare
   Client for OS/2 needs to find a new destination while the primary
   connection is down, it can't query for the destination, since
   queries are only sent on the primary.

And there I have it. I suppose I could make the Wi-Fi the primary board by loading it first, but of course, this means that it must always be on (and physically inserted in the machine). Other than that, I may just go back to my dual CONFIG setup.

Thanks again for the reminder of what is obviously the problem. To prove it, I should log in via the cable, and then disconnect. If everything works as we expect, I should maintain my connection via the Wi-Fi when the primary goes down.

On 11/21/2004 05:54 am, Michael Warmuth thus wrote :

Lewis G Rosenthal wrote:
[...]

However, only LAN0 seems to be binding IPX (i.e., I can't find the LAN from the Wi-Fi interface, LAN1). Is there something else I should be doing to bind both NICs to IPX? I've had systems with two NICs bound to IPX before, but don't remember anything special. There are no board-specific entries in NET.CFG.


There is a restriction in the Netware client for OS/2 (documented in some readme): It can bind to more than one interface, but it does only use the first one for searches. So if only the second interface is connected the netware stack cannot find the server / tree.

Greetings
Michael


--
Lewis
------------------------------------------------------------
Lewis G Rosenthal, CNA Rosenthal & Rosenthal Accountants / Network Consultants  New York / Northern Virginia           www.2rosenthals.com
eComStation Consultants                  www.ecomstation.com
Novell Users International        www.novell.com/linux/truth
------------------------------------------------------------ =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

To unsubscribe from this list, send a message to
steward@2rosenthals.com with the command
"unsubscribe os2-netware_users" in the body
(omit the quotes).

For help with other commands, send a message
to steward@2rosenthals.com with the command
"help" in the body (omit the quotes).

This list is hosted by Rosenthal & Rosenthal
P.O. Box 281, Deer Park, NY 11729-0281. Non-
electronic communications related to content
contained in these messages should be directed
to the above address. (CAN-SPAM Act of 2003)

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=




???????: ????, ??????, ??????.
?????????
??? ????????