For slow networking issues with FTP and applications such as those based on FoxPro - I have found they always come back to the same thing over and over:
Here's my fix for anybody else that comes along with this very vexing issue.
disable NetDMA (TCPA)
HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Services\Tcpip\Parameters
?EnableTCPA=0"
disable TCP CHIMNEY
HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Services\Tcpip\Parameters
"EnableTCPChimney=0"
Reboot server.
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/951037
Here is an overview of this trouble package and how GREAT it is SUPPOSED to be. Just disable all OFFLOAD / DMA settings:
http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=define%3A%20netdma&source=web&cd=3&ved=0CC4QFjAC&url=http%3A%2F%2Fdownload.microsoft.com%2Fdownload%2F5%2Fb%2F9%2F5b97017b-e28a-4bae-ba48-174cf47d23cd%2Fnet088_wh06.ppt&ei=U8rlTrTTLcaa8QP6-aiDBA&usg=AFQjCNE67JyfxGbFAVOnkj3_wcISH9jgQg&sig2=dHn4xy8rlF9VA_EDHHJaEg&cad=rja
Here's my fix for anybody else that comes along with this very vexing issue.
disable NetDMA (TCPA)
HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Services\Tcpip\Parameters
?EnableTCPA=0"
disable TCP CHIMNEY
HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Services\Tcpip\Parameters
"EnableTCPChimney=0"
Reboot server.
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/951037
Here is an overview of this trouble package and how GREAT it is SUPPOSED to be. Just disable all OFFLOAD / DMA settings:
http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=define%3A%20netdma&source=web&cd=3&ved=0CC4QFjAC&url=http%3A%2F%2Fdownload.microsoft.com%2Fdownload%2F5%2Fb%2F9%2F5b97017b-e28a-4bae-ba48-174cf47d23cd%2Fnet088_wh06.ppt&ei=U8rlTrTTLcaa8QP6-aiDBA&usg=AFQjCNE67JyfxGbFAVOnkj3_wcISH9jgQg&sig2=dHn4xy8rlF9VA_EDHHJaEg&cad=rja
> On Thursday, February 04, 2010 8:16 AM OneginNH wrote:
> Two months ago I completed an uneventful install of SBS 2008 for a company of
> about 25 users on brand-new hardware. The only significance issues since the
> install have been performance-related, specifically that browsing shared
> folders on the server is very slow (displaying the contents of folders, for
> example). Opening large documents and media files is also very slow, and at
> least one server-based Visual Foxpro program which ran very fast under the
> old Server 2003 server slows to a crawl with the new server. However, all
> these woes disappear if the client is Windows 7 - the speed difference is
> night and day! Is there something that can be done to tweak Windows XP to
> perform better with SBS 2008? The client does not have the budget to
> undertake a migration to Windows 7 at this time.
> about 25 users on brand-new hardware. The only significance issues since the
> install have been performance-related, specifically that browsing shared
> folders on the server is very slow (displaying the contents of folders, for
> example). Opening large documents and media files is also very slow, and at
> least one server-based Visual Foxpro program which ran very fast under the
> old Server 2003 server slows to a crawl with the new server. However, all
> these woes disappear if the client is Windows 7 - the speed difference is
> night and day! Is there something that can be done to tweak Windows XP to
> perform better with SBS 2008? The client does not have the budget to
> undertake a migration to Windows 7 at this time.
>> On Thursday, February 04, 2010 12:14 PM Larry Struckmeyer[SBS-MVP] wrote:
>> Should not be such (any) differences. Something else is going on. Is the
>> SBS the DHCP server for the LAN? Were all the computers joined to the domain
>> with the wizards.? Are all updates current? Do all devices use the same
>> switch?
>>
>> Please post the results of the command:
>>
>> ipconfig /all > c:\iptest.txt
>>
>> from the server, and one each XP and 7 stations.
>>
>> Please do not change anything, and please tell us which is which.
>>
>> -
>> Larry
>> Please post the resolution to your
>> issue so others may benefit
>> -
>> Get Your SBS Health Check at
>> www.sbsbpa.com
>> SBS the DHCP server for the LAN? Were all the computers joined to the domain
>> with the wizards.? Are all updates current? Do all devices use the same
>> switch?
>>
>> Please post the results of the command:
>>
>> ipconfig /all > c:\iptest.txt
>>
>> from the server, and one each XP and 7 stations.
>>
>> Please do not change anything, and please tell us which is which.
>>
>> -
>> Larry
>> Please post the resolution to your
>> issue so others may benefit
>> -
>> Get Your SBS Health Check at
>> www.sbsbpa.com
>>> On Thursday, February 04, 2010 1:44 PM OneginNH wrote:
>>> Hi Larry, thanks for your response. I apologize in advance for the length of
>>> this reply.
>>>
>>> To answer your questions:
>>>
>>> Yes, the SBS server is the DHCP server for the LAN
>>>
>>> Yes, all the computers were joined to the network with the SBS wizard (as a
>>> side note, it came as a big surprise that I had to install .NET on all the XP
>>> workstations in order to use the wizard. The .NET version install was
>>> version 3, then it was patched to the latest 3.5 -- latest as of late
>>> November 2009 anyway. The process was incredibly time-consuming but yes, it
>>> was done for every XP machine and the wizard was used in all cases).
>>>
>>> Yes, I am fanatical about Windows updates on all machines.
>>>
>>> No, not all devices use the same switch. There are four switches and there
>>> is no correlation between which switch the user is tied to.
>>>
>>> Below are the ipconfig results for the server (first) and an XP workstation
>>> (second). Unfortunately I do not have a Windows 7 machine on the network and
>>> I am not able to give you the ipconfig for that box. I do, however, have
>>> that box here in my office and although I would not be able to connect to the
>>> network we are talking about, I could certainly post the ipconfig for however
>>> it comes up when not attached to the network - if you think that would be
>>> helpful).
>>>
>>> BTW I realize that having the second ethernet connection on the server
>>> (listed first in the ipconfig.txt) enabled is not recommended, and in fact I
>>> will be disabling it in the near future. It was only enabled as an
>>> experiment in light of this network slowness problem. I can assure you that
>>> the speed issue existed before that NIC was enabled, whcih was only recently.
>>>
>>> One other note, early on I contacted Intel about this becuase of a hotfix
>>> that Microsoft has concerning a problem with the I/O Acceleration technology
>>> in some of their network adapters. They seemed to know nothing about it (and
>>> this was the file server group at Intel) and pointed me back to Microsoft. I
>>> never installed the hotfix in question becuase it did not specifically match
>>> the set up the customer has nor the exact circumstances, although it does
>>> sound very close. The issue is discussed on kb 968991. But perhaps this is
>>> the area I need to revisit. I just got cold feet when Intel did not even know
>>> about something that seemed to me like it would be such a big issue out there
>>> in the world.
>>>
>>> Thank you again for your help.
>>>
>>> Server ipconfig:
>>>
>>> Windows IP Configuration
>>>
>>> Host Name . . . . . . . . . . . . : RIVERSERV
>>> Primary Dns Suffix . . . . . . . : rivernet.local
>>> Node Type . . . . . . . . . . . . : Broadcast
>>> IP Routing Enabled. . . . . . . . : No
>>> WINS Proxy Enabled. . . . . . . . : No
>>> DNS Suffix Search List. . . . . . : rivernet.local
>>>
>>> Ethernet adapter Local Area Connection 2:
>>>
>>> Connection-specific DNS Suffix . : rivernet.local
>>> Description . . . . . . . . . . . : Intel(R) PRO/1000 EB Network
>>> Connection with I/O Acceleration #2
>>> Physical Address. . . . . . . . . : 00-15-17-89-B6-31
>>> DHCP Enabled. . . . . . . . . . . : Yes
>>> Autoconfiguration Enabled . . . . : Yes
>>> Link-local IPv6 Address . . . . . :
>>> fe80::417f:5349:45e0:36ff%11(Preferred)
>>> IPv4 Address. . . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.1.14(Preferred)
>>> Subnet Mask . . . . . . . . . . . : 255.255.255.0
>>> Lease Obtained. . . . . . . . . . : Monday, February 01, 2010 1:56:47 PM
>>> Lease Expires . . . . . . . . . . : Tuesday, February 09, 2010 1:57:03 PM
>>> Default Gateway . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.1.1
>>> DHCP Server . . . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.1.10
>>> DNS Servers . . . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.1.10
>>> NetBIOS over Tcpip. . . . . . . . : Enabled
>>>
>>> Ethernet adapter Local Area Connection:
>>>
>>> Connection-specific DNS Suffix . :
>>> Description . . . . . . . . . . . : Intel(R) PRO/1000 EB Network
>>> Connection with I/O Acceleration
>>> Physical Address. . . . . . . . . : 00-15-17-89-B6-30
>>> DHCP Enabled. . . . . . . . . . . : No
>>> Autoconfiguration Enabled . . . . : Yes
>>> Link-local IPv6 Address . . . . . :
>>> fe80::597a:87bb:43e9:5b20%10(Preferred)
>>> Link-local IPv6 Address . . . . . :
>>> fe80::69f1:45cd:1c59:bf30%10(Preferred)
>>> IPv4 Address. . . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.1.10(Preferred)
>>> Subnet Mask . . . . . . . . . . . : 255.255.255.0
>>> Default Gateway . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.1.1
>>> DNS Servers . . . . . . . . . . . : fe80::69f1:45cd:1c59:bf30%10
>>> 192.168.1.10
>>> NetBIOS over Tcpip. . . . . . . . : Enabled
>>>
>>> Tunnel adapter Local Area Connection* 8:
>>>
>>> Media State . . . . . . . . . . . : Media disconnected
>>> Connection-specific DNS Suffix . :
>>> Description . . . . . . . . . . . :
>>> this reply.
>>>
>>> To answer your questions:
>>>
>>> Yes, the SBS server is the DHCP server for the LAN
>>>
>>> Yes, all the computers were joined to the network with the SBS wizard (as a
>>> side note, it came as a big surprise that I had to install .NET on all the XP
>>> workstations in order to use the wizard. The .NET version install was
>>> version 3, then it was patched to the latest 3.5 -- latest as of late
>>> November 2009 anyway. The process was incredibly time-consuming but yes, it
>>> was done for every XP machine and the wizard was used in all cases).
>>>
>>> Yes, I am fanatical about Windows updates on all machines.
>>>
>>> No, not all devices use the same switch. There are four switches and there
>>> is no correlation between which switch the user is tied to.
>>>
>>> Below are the ipconfig results for the server (first) and an XP workstation
>>> (second). Unfortunately I do not have a Windows 7 machine on the network and
>>> I am not able to give you the ipconfig for that box. I do, however, have
>>> that box here in my office and although I would not be able to connect to the
>>> network we are talking about, I could certainly post the ipconfig for however
>>> it comes up when not attached to the network - if you think that would be
>>> helpful).
>>>
>>> BTW I realize that having the second ethernet connection on the server
>>> (listed first in the ipconfig.txt) enabled is not recommended, and in fact I
>>> will be disabling it in the near future. It was only enabled as an
>>> experiment in light of this network slowness problem. I can assure you that
>>> the speed issue existed before that NIC was enabled, whcih was only recently.
>>>
>>> One other note, early on I contacted Intel about this becuase of a hotfix
>>> that Microsoft has concerning a problem with the I/O Acceleration technology
>>> in some of their network adapters. They seemed to know nothing about it (and
>>> this was the file server group at Intel) and pointed me back to Microsoft. I
>>> never installed the hotfix in question becuase it did not specifically match
>>> the set up the customer has nor the exact circumstances, although it does
>>> sound very close. The issue is discussed on kb 968991. But perhaps this is
>>> the area I need to revisit. I just got cold feet when Intel did not even know
>>> about something that seemed to me like it would be such a big issue out there
>>> in the world.
>>>
>>> Thank you again for your help.
>>>
>>> Server ipconfig:
>>>
>>> Windows IP Configuration
>>>
>>> Host Name . . . . . . . . . . . . : RIVERSERV
>>> Primary Dns Suffix . . . . . . . : rivernet.local
>>> Node Type . . . . . . . . . . . . : Broadcast
>>> IP Routing Enabled. . . . . . . . : No
>>> WINS Proxy Enabled. . . . . . . . : No
>>> DNS Suffix Search List. . . . . . : rivernet.local
>>>
>>> Ethernet adapter Local Area Connection 2:
>>>
>>> Connection-specific DNS Suffix . : rivernet.local
>>> Description . . . . . . . . . . . : Intel(R) PRO/1000 EB Network
>>> Connection with I/O Acceleration #2
>>> Physical Address. . . . . . . . . : 00-15-17-89-B6-31
>>> DHCP Enabled. . . . . . . . . . . : Yes
>>> Autoconfiguration Enabled . . . . : Yes
>>> Link-local IPv6 Address . . . . . :
>>> fe80::417f:5349:45e0:36ff%11(Preferred)
>>> IPv4 Address. . . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.1.14(Preferred)
>>> Subnet Mask . . . . . . . . . . . : 255.255.255.0
>>> Lease Obtained. . . . . . . . . . : Monday, February 01, 2010 1:56:47 PM
>>> Lease Expires . . . . . . . . . . : Tuesday, February 09, 2010 1:57:03 PM
>>> Default Gateway . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.1.1
>>> DHCP Server . . . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.1.10
>>> DNS Servers . . . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.1.10
>>> NetBIOS over Tcpip. . . . . . . . : Enabled
>>>
>>> Ethernet adapter Local Area Connection:
>>>
>>> Connection-specific DNS Suffix . :
>>> Description . . . . . . . . . . . : Intel(R) PRO/1000 EB Network
>>> Connection with I/O Acceleration
>>> Physical Address. . . . . . . . . : 00-15-17-89-B6-30
>>> DHCP Enabled. . . . . . . . . . . : No
>>> Autoconfiguration Enabled . . . . : Yes
>>> Link-local IPv6 Address . . . . . :
>>> fe80::597a:87bb:43e9:5b20%10(Preferred)
>>> Link-local IPv6 Address . . . . . :
>>> fe80::69f1:45cd:1c59:bf30%10(Preferred)
>>> IPv4 Address. . . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.1.10(Preferred)
>>> Subnet Mask . . . . . . . . . . . : 255.255.255.0
>>> Default Gateway . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.1.1
>>> DNS Servers . . . . . . . . . . . : fe80::69f1:45cd:1c59:bf30%10
>>> 192.168.1.10
>>> NetBIOS over Tcpip. . . . . . . . : Enabled
>>>
>>> Tunnel adapter Local Area Connection* 8:
>>>
>>> Media State . . . . . . . . . . . : Media disconnected
>>> Connection-specific DNS Suffix . :
>>> Description . . . . . . . . . . . :
>>>> On Thursday, February 04, 2010 5:49 PM Al Williams wrote:
>>>> I'd verify that none of advanced networking stuff (TCP Chimney Offload,
>>>> etc.) is enabled on the server first, it tends to cause issues with older
>>>> PC's. Have you run the SBS BPA? Anything in the logs of the server or
>>>> clients?
>>>>
>>>> http://support.microsoft.com/kb/951037
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Allan Williams
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> OneginNH wrote:
>>>> etc.) is enabled on the server first, it tends to cause issues with older
>>>> PC's. Have you run the SBS BPA? Anything in the logs of the server or
>>>> clients?
>>>>
>>>> http://support.microsoft.com/kb/951037
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Allan Williams
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> OneginNH wrote:
>>>>> On Friday, February 05, 2010 9:01 AM OneginNH wrote:
>>>>> Hi Al and thank you for your response. To answer your questions:
>>>>>
>>>>> 1) In regard to "advanced networking stuff" I am not sure where/how to find
>>>>> that kind of thing. I guess I can poke around. In calling Intel about this
>>>>> I woudl have thought they could/woudl point me in this direction (if needed)
>>>>> since both the server NIC and the workstation NICs are Intel (actually that is
>>>>> not strictly true, one of the worst performers under Windows XP has a Realtek
>>>>> NIC). But, yes, what you are suggesting has been on my mind ever since I ran
>>>>> across that KB 968991 article that I mention elsewhere in this (rather long)
>>>>> posting - problem with that 968991 article is that it does not strictly apply
>>>>> to my circumstances. But it talks about Intel Advanced I/O stuff which is
>>>>> what you are pointing me to. Why Intel would not have known about such an
>>>>> issue is a mystery to me and for these various reasons I have therefore held
>>>>> off on applying the 968991 hotfix - do you think I shoudl do it?
>>>>>
>>>>> 2) In regard to the SBS BPA I am a bit embarrassed to say that I had not run
>>>>> it. Why? Because with the BPA for the Exchange piece built right in to the
>>>>> O/S, I guess I assumed that the BPA tool for SBS would be built right into
>>>>> the SBS console alongside all the other error checking that tool constantly
>>>>> does. Anyway once I saw your note I immediately downloaded the SBS 2008 BPA.
>>>>> Right off the bat I did show the only critical error (expected), which was
>>>>> that the DNS A resource record was pointing to both NIC's on the server. As
>>>>> mentioned elsehwere in this mammoth post, the second serve NIC got turned on
>>>>> recently only as an experiemnt and it did not change things at all. Anyway
>>>>> this mornign I shut off that second NIC again and ran BPA again and the
>>>>> critical error is gone for DNS. There are no critical errors. The remaining
>>>>> non-critical issues are, of course, of concern but I have no idea where to
>>>>> focus/get started -- I need to solve the slow network problem before I do any
>>>>> of the more refined fine-tuning stuff - as I am sure you can appreciate. But
>>>>> perhaps the key to my performance issus is in these issues, and I have posted
>>>>> them below (below my next and last answer to your questions) -- if there is
>>>>> any feedback you can provide I would most appreciate it.
>>>>>
>>>>> 3) You ask about logs on the server and the workstations. Yes I have
>>>>> checked and not seen anything obvious but I agree, I need to do some careful
>>>>> analysis there, which I will proceed to do. If you have any suggestions as
>>>>> to what to focus on in the logs that would be appreciated.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thank you and here are the issues shown by BPA at this time:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> All Issues
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Exchange Server 2007 with Service Pack 1 :
>>>>> The server RIVERSERV is running Exchange Server 2007 with Service Pack 1;
>>>>> however, Service Pack 2 for Exchange Server 2007 is available. For more
>>>>> information, see "You cannot install Exchange Server 2007 Service Pack 2 on a
>>>>> Windows Small Business Server 2008-based computer" in the Microsoft Knowledge
>>>>> Base at http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=163940.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Add-On Congestion Control Provider :
>>>>> Add-On Congestion Control Provider is set to ctcp. To disable Add-On
>>>>> Congestion Control Provider, click Start, and in the Search box type
>>>>> "command." in the results, right-click Command Prompt, and then click Run as
>>>>> administrator. At the command prompt, run the following command: netsh int
>>>>> tcp set global congestion=none
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Firewall is disabled :
>>>>> The Firewall has been disabled and by default is enabled on Windows Small
>>>>> Business Server
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> IE Enhanced Security disabled :
>>>>> IE Enhanced Security is currently disabled for Administrators. To enable IE
>>>>> Enhanced Security go to Start/Server Manager and click on the Configure IE
>>>>> ESC link on the right.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Local activation permission to the IIS WAMREG Admin Service required :
>>>>> The Network Service is missing local activation permissions to the IIS
>>>>> WAMREG admin Service in accordance with the event ID 10016 in the system
>>>>> event log. For more information, see KB "Event ID error messages 10016 and
>>>>> 10017 are logged in the System log after you install Windows SharePoint
>>>>> Services 3.0" at http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=128063. Note: This
>>>>> warning will continue to appear until at least 24 hours have passed since the
>>>>> most recent occurrence of event 10016.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Receive Window Auto-Tuning Level :
>>>>> Receive Window Auto-Tuning Level is set to normal. To disable Receive
>>>>> Window Auto-Tuning Level, click Start, and in the Search box type "command."
>>>>> in the results, right-click Command Prompt, and then click Run as
>>>>> administrator. At the command prompt, run the following command: netsh int
>>>>> tcp set global autotuning=disabled
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Receive-Side Scaling State :
>>>>> Receive-Side Scaling State is set to enabled. To disable Receive-Side
>>>>> Scaling, click Start, and in the Search box type "command." in the results,
>>>>> right-click Command Prompt, and then click Run as administrator. At the
>>>>> command prompt, run the following command: netsh int tcp set global
>>>>> rss=disabled
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> remote.riverwebnh.com does not exist in the BackConnectionHostNames registry
>>>>> key :
>>>>> The BackConnectionHostNames key should include the value
>>>>>
>>>>> 1) In regard to "advanced networking stuff" I am not sure where/how to find
>>>>> that kind of thing. I guess I can poke around. In calling Intel about this
>>>>> I woudl have thought they could/woudl point me in this direction (if needed)
>>>>> since both the server NIC and the workstation NICs are Intel (actually that is
>>>>> not strictly true, one of the worst performers under Windows XP has a Realtek
>>>>> NIC). But, yes, what you are suggesting has been on my mind ever since I ran
>>>>> across that KB 968991 article that I mention elsewhere in this (rather long)
>>>>> posting - problem with that 968991 article is that it does not strictly apply
>>>>> to my circumstances. But it talks about Intel Advanced I/O stuff which is
>>>>> what you are pointing me to. Why Intel would not have known about such an
>>>>> issue is a mystery to me and for these various reasons I have therefore held
>>>>> off on applying the 968991 hotfix - do you think I shoudl do it?
>>>>>
>>>>> 2) In regard to the SBS BPA I am a bit embarrassed to say that I had not run
>>>>> it. Why? Because with the BPA for the Exchange piece built right in to the
>>>>> O/S, I guess I assumed that the BPA tool for SBS would be built right into
>>>>> the SBS console alongside all the other error checking that tool constantly
>>>>> does. Anyway once I saw your note I immediately downloaded the SBS 2008 BPA.
>>>>> Right off the bat I did show the only critical error (expected), which was
>>>>> that the DNS A resource record was pointing to both NIC's on the server. As
>>>>> mentioned elsehwere in this mammoth post, the second serve NIC got turned on
>>>>> recently only as an experiemnt and it did not change things at all. Anyway
>>>>> this mornign I shut off that second NIC again and ran BPA again and the
>>>>> critical error is gone for DNS. There are no critical errors. The remaining
>>>>> non-critical issues are, of course, of concern but I have no idea where to
>>>>> focus/get started -- I need to solve the slow network problem before I do any
>>>>> of the more refined fine-tuning stuff - as I am sure you can appreciate. But
>>>>> perhaps the key to my performance issus is in these issues, and I have posted
>>>>> them below (below my next and last answer to your questions) -- if there is
>>>>> any feedback you can provide I would most appreciate it.
>>>>>
>>>>> 3) You ask about logs on the server and the workstations. Yes I have
>>>>> checked and not seen anything obvious but I agree, I need to do some careful
>>>>> analysis there, which I will proceed to do. If you have any suggestions as
>>>>> to what to focus on in the logs that would be appreciated.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thank you and here are the issues shown by BPA at this time:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> All Issues
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Exchange Server 2007 with Service Pack 1 :
>>>>> The server RIVERSERV is running Exchange Server 2007 with Service Pack 1;
>>>>> however, Service Pack 2 for Exchange Server 2007 is available. For more
>>>>> information, see "You cannot install Exchange Server 2007 Service Pack 2 on a
>>>>> Windows Small Business Server 2008-based computer" in the Microsoft Knowledge
>>>>> Base at http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=163940.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Add-On Congestion Control Provider :
>>>>> Add-On Congestion Control Provider is set to ctcp. To disable Add-On
>>>>> Congestion Control Provider, click Start, and in the Search box type
>>>>> "command." in the results, right-click Command Prompt, and then click Run as
>>>>> administrator. At the command prompt, run the following command: netsh int
>>>>> tcp set global congestion=none
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Firewall is disabled :
>>>>> The Firewall has been disabled and by default is enabled on Windows Small
>>>>> Business Server
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> IE Enhanced Security disabled :
>>>>> IE Enhanced Security is currently disabled for Administrators. To enable IE
>>>>> Enhanced Security go to Start/Server Manager and click on the Configure IE
>>>>> ESC link on the right.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Local activation permission to the IIS WAMREG Admin Service required :
>>>>> The Network Service is missing local activation permissions to the IIS
>>>>> WAMREG admin Service in accordance with the event ID 10016 in the system
>>>>> event log. For more information, see KB "Event ID error messages 10016 and
>>>>> 10017 are logged in the System log after you install Windows SharePoint
>>>>> Services 3.0" at http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=128063. Note: This
>>>>> warning will continue to appear until at least 24 hours have passed since the
>>>>> most recent occurrence of event 10016.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Receive Window Auto-Tuning Level :
>>>>> Receive Window Auto-Tuning Level is set to normal. To disable Receive
>>>>> Window Auto-Tuning Level, click Start, and in the Search box type "command."
>>>>> in the results, right-click Command Prompt, and then click Run as
>>>>> administrator. At the command prompt, run the following command: netsh int
>>>>> tcp set global autotuning=disabled
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Receive-Side Scaling State :
>>>>> Receive-Side Scaling State is set to enabled. To disable Receive-Side
>>>>> Scaling, click Start, and in the Search box type "command." in the results,
>>>>> right-click Command Prompt, and then click Run as administrator. At the
>>>>> command prompt, run the following command: netsh int tcp set global
>>>>> rss=disabled
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> remote.riverwebnh.com does not exist in the BackConnectionHostNames registry
>>>>> key :
>>>>> The BackConnectionHostNames key should include the value
>>>>>> On Friday, February 05, 2010 9:21 AM OneginNH wrote:
>>>>>> To ask an obvious question, could my issue be as simple as not having IP6 on
>>>>>> the XP workstations? Could that be why Windows 7 has no problems and XP
>>>>>> does?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "OneginNH" wrote:
>>>>>> the XP workstations? Could that be why Windows 7 has no problems and XP
>>>>>> does?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "OneginNH" wrote:
>>>>>>> On Friday, February 05, 2010 12:13 PM Al Williams wrote:
>>>>>>> The BPA pointed to several "advanced" networking settings that were enabled
>>>>>>> and should be disabled:
>>>>>>> Add-On Congestion Control Provider
>>>>>>> Receive Window Auto-Tuning Level
>>>>>>> Receive-Side Scaling State
>>>>>>> Task Offload
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Fix those first using the instructions given and see if it helps. Also look
>>>>>>> into the other settings (Firewall is disabled?).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Allan Williams
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> OneginNH wrote:
>>>>>>> and should be disabled:
>>>>>>> Add-On Congestion Control Provider
>>>>>>> Receive Window Auto-Tuning Level
>>>>>>> Receive-Side Scaling State
>>>>>>> Task Offload
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Fix those first using the instructions given and see if it helps. Also look
>>>>>>> into the other settings (Firewall is disabled?).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Allan Williams
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> OneginNH wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Friday, February 05, 2010 12:13 PM Al Williams wrote:
>>>>>>>> No, I do not think so. BTW - Do not disable IP6 on SBS, that *will* cause
>>>>>>>> issues.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> Allan Williams
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> OneginNH wrote:
>>>>>>>> issues.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> Allan Williams
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> OneginNH wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Monday, February 08, 2010 1:28 PM OneginNH wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Hi - I made those four changes to the "advanced" settings and there was no
>>>>>>>>> difference in the performance. Do you have any other suggestions at this
>>>>>>>>> time? If not then I guess my next steps need to be to install the various
>>>>>>>>> service packs mentioned inthe BPA, including SP2 for Sharepoint 3.0 and SP2
>>>>>>>>> for Server 2008.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> "Al Williams" wrote:
>>>>>>>>> difference in the performance. Do you have any other suggestions at this
>>>>>>>>> time? If not then I guess my next steps need to be to install the various
>>>>>>>>> service packs mentioned inthe BPA, including SP2 for Sharepoint 3.0 and SP2
>>>>>>>>> for Server 2008.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> "Al Williams" wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On Monday, February 08, 2010 1:40 PM Al Williams wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Look into the device manager at the advanced properties of your SBS's NIC
>>>>>>>>>> and ensure none of the advanced offloading is enabled in there. I am not
>>>>>>>>>> sure it matters if disabled in the registry but it could not hurt (ensure you
>>>>>>>>>> reboot). I'd also check the slow PC's NIC settings.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Have you verified it is not a network switch issue? Any "pattern" to the
>>>>>>>>>> slowness w.r.t. how the PC's are connected to the server?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Not sure what else to suggest. You may want to post to the SBS08 specific
>>>>>>>>>> group, you need to join first:
>>>>>>>>>> https://connect.microsoft.com/
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Good luck.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>> Allan Williams
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> OneginNH wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> and ensure none of the advanced offloading is enabled in there. I am not
>>>>>>>>>> sure it matters if disabled in the registry but it could not hurt (ensure you
>>>>>>>>>> reboot). I'd also check the slow PC's NIC settings.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Have you verified it is not a network switch issue? Any "pattern" to the
>>>>>>>>>> slowness w.r.t. how the PC's are connected to the server?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Not sure what else to suggest. You may want to post to the SBS08 specific
>>>>>>>>>> group, you need to join first:
>>>>>>>>>> https://connect.microsoft.com/
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Good luck.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>> Allan Williams
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> OneginNH wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, March 03, 2010 4:04 PM Brad wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> Was there found a solution to this issue? I am having exactly the same
>>>>>>>>>>> problem, although its more around copying files up the server. It takes
>>>>>>>>>>> 30mins for a 50M file! Its a Gigabit network, all offloading is turned off
>>>>>>>>>>> on the NIC and the registry, servers brand new, and the previous server with
>>>>>>>>>>> Windows 2000 was fine. It doesnt seem to have any issues with Windows 7
>>>>>>>>>>> clients, and IP6 is turned on (its SBS2008 and so cant turn it off without
>>>>>>>>>>> effecting other things).
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Any help here would be really appreciated - Im a bit stuck.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Brad
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> "Al Williams" wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> problem, although its more around copying files up the server. It takes
>>>>>>>>>>> 30mins for a 50M file! Its a Gigabit network, all offloading is turned off
>>>>>>>>>>> on the NIC and the registry, servers brand new, and the previous server with
>>>>>>>>>>> Windows 2000 was fine. It doesnt seem to have any issues with Windows 7
>>>>>>>>>>> clients, and IP6 is turned on (its SBS2008 and so cant turn it off without
>>>>>>>>>>> effecting other things).
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Any help here would be really appreciated - Im a bit stuck.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Brad
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> "Al Williams" wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Friday, June 04, 2010 1:41 PM sspence wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> i am having Identical problems on my new SBS 2008 server. extrememly
>>>>>>>>>>>> slow browsing to server shares. plus i also get "the local device is
>>>>>>>>>>>> already in use" error... I have done all the same steps listed in this
>>>>>>>>>>>> topic. I am desperate for a solution. Did you find one. This is
>>>>>>>>>>>> killing productivity of my CAD users...
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>> sspencer@inframap.ne
>>>>>>>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>>>>>> sspencer@inframap.ne's Profile: http://forums.techarena.in/members/228505.htm
>>>>>>>>>>>> View this thread: http://forums.techarena.in/small-business-server/1299892.htm
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> http://forums.techarena.in
>>>>>>>>>>>> slow browsing to server shares. plus i also get "the local device is
>>>>>>>>>>>> already in use" error... I have done all the same steps listed in this
>>>>>>>>>>>> topic. I am desperate for a solution. Did you find one. This is
>>>>>>>>>>>> killing productivity of my CAD users...
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>> sspencer@inframap.ne
>>>>>>>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>>>>>> sspencer@inframap.ne's Profile: http://forums.techarena.in/members/228505.htm
>>>>>>>>>>>> View this thread: http://forums.techarena.in/small-business-server/1299892.htm
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> http://forums.techarena.in
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Friday, June 04, 2010 3:10 PM Russ SBITS.Biz [SBS-MVP] wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Spencer,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> You have posted this question to techarena.in
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Which attempts to copy posts from Microsoft's Public Newsgroup
>>>>>>>>>>>>> This Breaks Threads from the source and we can not see what you are
>>>>>>>>>>>>> referring to.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please post a new question to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> For SBS related questions we recommend that you start with Public Forum
>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://social.technet.microsoft.com/Forums/en-US/smallbusinessserver/threads
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Should you want to visit the other Microsoft Public Forums, please go to
>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.microsoft.com/communities/forums/default.mspx
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> As the NNTP newsgroups will be retiring soon.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Russ
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Full Details here!
>>>>>>>>>>>>> *This is a edited repost of an earlier Microsoft message.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> (No this is not a joke) - Russ Grover MVP
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> What is Happening?
>>>>>>>>>>>>> This message is to inform you that Microsoft will soon begin discontinuing
>>>>>>>>>>>>> newsgroups and transitioning users to Microsoft forums.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Why?
>>>>>>>>>>>>> As you may know, newsgroups have existed for many years now; however, the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> traffic in the Microsoft newsgroups has been steadily decreasing for the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> past several years while customers and participants are increasingly finding
>>>>>>>>>>>>> solutions in the forums on Microsoft properties and third party sites. This
>>>>>>>>>>>>> move will unify the customer experience, centralize content, make it easier
>>>>>>>>>>>>> for active contributors to retain their influence, mitigate redundancies and
>>>>>>>>>>>>> make the content easier to find by customers and search engines through
>>>>>>>>>>>>> improved indexing. Additionally, forums offer a better user and spam
>>>>>>>>>>>>> management platform that will improve customer satisfaction by encouraging a
>>>>>>>>>>>>> healthy discussion in a clean community space. To this end, Microsoft will
>>>>>>>>>>>>> begin to progressively shift available resources to the forums technology
>>>>>>>>>>>>> and discontinue support for newsgroups.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> In addition to offering a compelling online browser experience, for those
>>>>>>>>>>>>> users who prefer to use an NNTP (newsgroup) reader to participate in the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> newsgroups community, we have developed a solution called the NNTP Bridge
>>>>>>>>>>>>> which allows a user to connect a variety of supported NNTP readers to the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> forums they would like to participate in and continue having the NTTP reader
>>>>>>>>>>>>> functionality. You can find instructions on how to download and set up the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Microsoft NNTP Bridge
>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://connect.microsoft.com/MicrosoftForums/
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Which Newsgroups Are Affected by this Shutdown?
>>>>>>>>>>>>> All public newsgroups will eventually be closed between June 1, 2010 and
>>>>>>>>>>>>> October 1, 2010. Microsoft will be closing newsgroups in a phased approach,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> starting with the least active newsgroups and moving eventually to more
>>>>>>>>>>>>> active ones throughout the course of the next six months.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where Should I go with the Closure of this Newsgroup?
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Microsoft has a large selection of forums, many of which cover either the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> same or closely related technologies to the ones found in the newsgroups.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> The forums have seen amazing growth and are an excellent place to continue
>>>>>>>>>>>>> the discussion.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> For SBS related questions we recommend that you start with Public Forum
>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://social.technet.microsoft.com/Forums/en-US/smallbusinessserver/threads
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Should you want to visit the other Microsoft Public Forums, please go to
>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.microsoft.com/communities/forums/default.mspx
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Who Should I Contact with any Questions?
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Send any questions about the process, recommended forums and timing to
>>>>>>>>>>>>> NNTP@microsoft.com
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> ------------------------------
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Russ Grover
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Russell Grover - SBITS.Biz [SBS-MVP]
>>>>>>>>>>>>> MCP, MCPS, MCNPS, SBSC
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Small Business Server/Computer Support - www.SBITS.Biz
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Question or Second Opinion - www.PersonalITConsultant.com
>>>>>>>>>>>>> BPOS - Microsoft Online Services - www.BPOSMadeEasy.com
>>>>>>>>>>>>> You have posted this question to techarena.in
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Which attempts to copy posts from Microsoft's Public Newsgroup
>>>>>>>>>>>>> This Breaks Threads from the source and we can not see what you are
>>>>>>>>>>>>> referring to.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please post a new question to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> For SBS related questions we recommend that you start with Public Forum
>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://social.technet.microsoft.com/Forums/en-US/smallbusinessserver/threads
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Should you want to visit the other Microsoft Public Forums, please go to
>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.microsoft.com/communities/forums/default.mspx
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> As the NNTP newsgroups will be retiring soon.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Russ
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Full Details here!
>>>>>>>>>>>>> *This is a edited repost of an earlier Microsoft message.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> (No this is not a joke) - Russ Grover MVP
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> What is Happening?
>>>>>>>>>>>>> This message is to inform you that Microsoft will soon begin discontinuing
>>>>>>>>>>>>> newsgroups and transitioning users to Microsoft forums.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Why?
>>>>>>>>>>>>> As you may know, newsgroups have existed for many years now; however, the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> traffic in the Microsoft newsgroups has been steadily decreasing for the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> past several years while customers and participants are increasingly finding
>>>>>>>>>>>>> solutions in the forums on Microsoft properties and third party sites. This
>>>>>>>>>>>>> move will unify the customer experience, centralize content, make it easier
>>>>>>>>>>>>> for active contributors to retain their influence, mitigate redundancies and
>>>>>>>>>>>>> make the content easier to find by customers and search engines through
>>>>>>>>>>>>> improved indexing. Additionally, forums offer a better user and spam
>>>>>>>>>>>>> management platform that will improve customer satisfaction by encouraging a
>>>>>>>>>>>>> healthy discussion in a clean community space. To this end, Microsoft will
>>>>>>>>>>>>> begin to progressively shift available resources to the forums technology
>>>>>>>>>>>>> and discontinue support for newsgroups.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> In addition to offering a compelling online browser experience, for those
>>>>>>>>>>>>> users who prefer to use an NNTP (newsgroup) reader to participate in the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> newsgroups community, we have developed a solution called the NNTP Bridge
>>>>>>>>>>>>> which allows a user to connect a variety of supported NNTP readers to the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> forums they would like to participate in and continue having the NTTP reader
>>>>>>>>>>>>> functionality. You can find instructions on how to download and set up the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Microsoft NNTP Bridge
>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://connect.microsoft.com/MicrosoftForums/
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Which Newsgroups Are Affected by this Shutdown?
>>>>>>>>>>>>> All public newsgroups will eventually be closed between June 1, 2010 and
>>>>>>>>>>>>> October 1, 2010. Microsoft will be closing newsgroups in a phased approach,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> starting with the least active newsgroups and moving eventually to more
>>>>>>>>>>>>> active ones throughout the course of the next six months.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where Should I go with the Closure of this Newsgroup?
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Microsoft has a large selection of forums, many of which cover either the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> same or closely related technologies to the ones found in the newsgroups.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> The forums have seen amazing growth and are an excellent place to continue
>>>>>>>>>>>>> the discussion.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> For SBS related questions we recommend that you start with Public Forum
>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://social.technet.microsoft.com/Forums/en-US/smallbusinessserver/threads
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Should you want to visit the other Microsoft Public Forums, please go to
>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.microsoft.com/communities/forums/default.mspx
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Who Should I Contact with any Questions?
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Send any questions about the process, recommended forums and timing to
>>>>>>>>>>>>> NNTP@microsoft.com
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> ------------------------------
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Russ Grover
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Russell Grover - SBITS.Biz [SBS-MVP]
>>>>>>>>>>>>> MCP, MCPS, MCNPS, SBSC
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Small Business Server/Computer Support - www.SBITS.Biz
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Question or Second Opinion - www.PersonalITConsultant.com
>>>>>>>>>>>>> BPOS - Microsoft Online Services - www.BPOSMadeEasy.com
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Friday, June 04, 2010 11:01 PM Leythos wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> sspencer@inframap.ne says...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Since you do not properly quote the thread you are asking about, since
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this is Usenet and not a web based forum, we can only guess about your
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> issue:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1) What antivirus software are you running on the workstations?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2) What antivirus software are you running on the server
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 3) Is your DHCP properly setup using the 2008 Wizards?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 4) Is your DNS properly setup using the 2008 Wizards?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 5) Did you setup the drive shares using the Wizards?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Post an IPCONFIG /ALL from the server (do not edit it)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Post an IPCONFIG /ALL from a workstation having problems
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You cannot trust your best friends, your five senses, only the little
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> voice inside you that most civilians do not even hear -- Listen to that.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trust yourself.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> spam999free@rrohio.com (remove 999 for proper email address)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Since you do not properly quote the thread you are asking about, since
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this is Usenet and not a web based forum, we can only guess about your
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> issue:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1) What antivirus software are you running on the workstations?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2) What antivirus software are you running on the server
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 3) Is your DHCP properly setup using the 2008 Wizards?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 4) Is your DNS properly setup using the 2008 Wizards?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 5) Did you setup the drive shares using the Wizards?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Post an IPCONFIG /ALL from the server (do not edit it)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Post an IPCONFIG /ALL from a workstation having problems
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You cannot trust your best friends, your five senses, only the little
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> voice inside you that most civilians do not even hear -- Listen to that.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trust yourself.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> spam999free@rrohio.com (remove 999 for proper email address)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Saturday, June 12, 2010 11:48 AM jmurdoch wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Put in a low end realtek gigabit nic and the xp machines went from
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1megabit to 300megabit file copies from the sbs2008 server. It appears
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> either Intel or MS have something to answer for. I tried all of the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> patches to fix the issues and none of them worked. I found that after
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> rebooting the speed on the intel nic may be fast for a little while but
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> eventually slows down (almost as if some service kicks in later that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> causes the slowness issues).
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> jmurdoch
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> jmurdoch's Profile: http://forums.techarena.in/members/231527.htm
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> View this thread: http://forums.techarena.in/small-business-server/1299892.htm
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://forums.techarena.in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1megabit to 300megabit file copies from the sbs2008 server. It appears
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> either Intel or MS have something to answer for. I tried all of the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> patches to fix the issues and none of them worked. I found that after
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> rebooting the speed on the intel nic may be fast for a little while but
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> eventually slows down (almost as if some service kicks in later that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> causes the slowness issues).
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> jmurdoch
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> jmurdoch's Profile: http://forums.techarena.in/members/231527.htm
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> View this thread: http://forums.techarena.in/small-business-server/1299892.htm
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://forums.techarena.in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thursday, July 01, 2010 11:07 AM Dustin Loftis wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Generally, problems encountered with XP clients versus 2008 servers are caused by SMB2. A workaround for this problem is to turn SMB2 off on the server.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.Run "regedit" on Windows Server 2008 based computer.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2.Expand and locate the sub tree as follows.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> HKLM\System\CurrentControlSet\Services\LanmanServer\Parameters
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 3.Add a new REG_DWORD key with the name of "Smb2" (without quotation mark)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Value name: Smb2
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Value type: REG_DWORD
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 0 = disabled
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1 = enabled
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 4.Set the value to 0 to disable SMB 2.0, or set it to 1 to re-enable SMB 2.0.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 5.Reboot the server.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Full link here:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.petri.co.il/how-to-disable-smb-2-on-windows-vista-or-server-2008.htm
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.Run "regedit" on Windows Server 2008 based computer.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2.Expand and locate the sub tree as follows.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> HKLM\System\CurrentControlSet\Services\LanmanServer\Parameters
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 3.Add a new REG_DWORD key with the name of "Smb2" (without quotation mark)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Value name: Smb2
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Value type: REG_DWORD
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 0 = disabled
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1 = enabled
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 4.Set the value to 0 to disable SMB 2.0, or set it to 1 to re-enable SMB 2.0.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 5.Reboot the server.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Full link here:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.petri.co.il/how-to-disable-smb-2-on-windows-vista-or-server-2008.htm
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, August 25, 2010 11:48 AM Mike Y wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I have pretty much the exact same issue with our server 2008 R2. Some XP workstations are slower than others. Ive switched out network cards (dlink/Intel) but network lag still occurs. The lag is not that bad but it should be faster than it is.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, August 25, 2010 12:03 PM Mike Y wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> i have added the smb2 registry entry and will report if the issues continue or not.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sunday, September 05, 2010 4:54 AM Tane wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Did it work?
| 25 Aug 2010 | same issue | Mike Y |
| 25 Aug 2010 |  registry | Mike Y |
| 05 Sep 2010 |   Re: SBS 2008 Slow Network Performance with Windows XP Clients | pullmyleg |
| 05 Sep 2010 | RE: registry | Tane |
| 12 Dec 2011 | Re: Did it work? | Aaron Gibson |
