10-15-13 02:47 PM
29 12
tools
  1. Billaboard's Avatar
    I raised this ages ago, but didn't get anywhere.

    Does anyone else here have a small (about 10 machines) home network running Windows/Linux? If so, does your PB seem to screw up the name resolution on the local network?

    Here my network is rock solid and all machines can see each other, transfer files and so on, but when I enable wifi on the Playbook, it all starts to fail. What seems to happen is that it's OK for a short time but then some sort of time-out happens on the PB and the name resolution breaks.

    When this happens, none of my machines can see each other on the local network, but they all still work fine as internet machines and will resolve the names of sites etc.

    It's a real pain, as I have to keep switching the PB's wifi off to do any work.
    10-05-13 01:48 PM
  2. DrBoomBotz's Avatar
    My wag(wild *** guess) is that you are talking about smb network name resolution issues.

    How to Determine the Master Browser in a Windows Workgroup | Scottie

    The link above will help you determine who is the master browser when things go pear shaped.

    If its the playbook that is winning the browser election then I would use google to find out how to make sure another host wins the browser election.

    Hope this helps.
    10-05-13 02:18 PM
  3. Billaboard's Avatar
    Yes, I think I am talking about smb and name resolution, and I have set up samba for the Linux machines.

    I often run Scotties Lanscan. When the playbook is on the network, it fails with Error 6118, as does Net View.

    The Linux machines are set up never to be master browser, that is left to an election, and is usually the always on W2k print server. As machines come and go, I really want to keep the setup as it is.

    I think I probably need to know how to manage the networking in the Playbook properly. I have thought of setting up an old router on a different IP group just for the PB, but we are in quite a dense wifi area and would prefer not to.
    10-05-13 05:02 PM
  4. DrBoomBotz's Avatar
    I guess you can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink.
    Wongsky likes this.
    10-05-13 05:21 PM
  5. Billaboard's Avatar
    I don't know about horses, but this will turn me to drink.

    I can run nbtstat -A against each machine in the network, and it sees a master browser until the Playbook is fired up. The PB comes up on an IP address allocated by the router as expected. nbtstat then sees each of the regular machines but not the Playbook.

    I really just would hope that someone could confirm that this occurs or doesn't occur on their similar network.

    It may be relevant that my network is on the 10.0.0.xxx range. I believe at some time in the past I did see the PB announcing itself as master browser in the 192.168 range
    10-05-13 06:41 PM
  6. DrBoomBotz's Avatar
    do you have developer mode enabled on the playbook?
    10-05-13 08:52 PM
  7. jonce2012's Avatar
    Are you running dhcp and/or static ip addresses? Do you have a server or router dishing out IPs?
    Almost sounds like an ip conflict......
    First thing I would do is connect the pb to the network, check the ip it's pulling from the server/router, disconnect the pb, and ping that ip from one of your PCs, just to make sure there's not another pc or appliance there.
    10-05-13 09:59 PM
  8. Billaboard's Avatar
    Development Mode is off.

    I have fixed ip's from 10.0.0.1 to 10.0.0.19, dhcp from 10.0.0.20 up. The playbook is currently 10.0.0.20, and returns a ping when it is on, no ping on that address when it is off.
    10-06-13 04:29 AM
  9. DrBoomBotz's Avatar
    I can think of two scenarios that could be happening.

    1. the playbook is becoming master browser and not performing its master browser duties correctly.

    or

    2. the playbook is sending a string to the master browser that it does not like.

    As a test change the workgroup string on the playbook to something totally different.
    now the playbook should not interfere with your normal workgoup.
    If all the other machines are able to see each other normally we have a handle on the problem.

    If this test produces the expected results then.

    Assuming that at least one of the linux machines is a permanent fixture of the network.
    Further assuming that the linux machine's samba server is WAY more current than Win2k.

    I would change the linux server's netbios browsing qualifications to ensure that it always wins the browser election.
    If the master browser is always the linux box scenario 1 can not occur and samba "may" handle scenario 2 better.

    Good Luck.
    10-06-13 08:37 AM
  10. Billaboard's Avatar
    The complication here is that the only usually-on machine on the network is a backup server running CentOS. The psu in this failed about a month ago and I have had to replace it with new hardware in the last few days, and I'm still trying to bring that back up. That is a different problem, and I have always kept the network primarily Windows, as the working machines (DAWs that only occasionally have networking enabled) have to be Windows.

    OK, I've put the Blackberry on a different workgroup, and ran Scotties Lanscan immediately. This now showed all the Windows machines.
    I then waited a few minutes and ran Lanscan again. Now it gives a message "A remote API error occurred", but after a further delay, the Windows machines are reported.
    Pinging the Playbook returns an answer. Running "nbtstat -A 10.0.0.20" which is the address of the Playbook returns Host not found.

    The Playbook is able to play streaming radio from around the world via the browser while I am doing this. The master browser is currently, and during these tests, 10.0.0.21, which is a Windows 7 laptop.

    I am grateful for the help. As is obvious, I'm trying to make miniscule knowledge go a long way.
    10-06-13 11:26 AM
  11. Billaboard's Avatar
    I don't know if this is progress, but in the Playbook's WiFi Status screen, there is a required field "Host", which was blank. A help file says

    "DNS Lookup - In order to use this tool, type in the Primary or Secondary DNS address in the Server field. After doing this, enter any domain name in the 'Host' field and then click Send to confirm that the BlackBerry PlayBook can resolve the domain name to an IP address. "

    This is a workgroup, so there is no domain name. Entering the router's ip address just ends up with it sitting there saying "Looking up for 10.0.0.1". There is no difference when 10.0.0.1 is entered.

    This is the same whether I have it set to the main workgroup or to the spurious one set earlier.

    I'm now running Wireshark to see if I can record any messages from the playbook. I haven't yet captured the period where the network changes from visible to invisible ( a random period up to a few minutes after the Playbook wifi is switched on).
    10-07-13 06:56 AM
  12. DrBoomBotz's Avatar
    DNS and Netbios name resolution are two separate things.

    Domain Name System - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    NetBIOS - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    Looks like the start of a fun and exciting journey to me.
    10-07-13 08:02 AM
  13. Billaboard's Avatar
    No, I'm afraid I didn't go away. I'm now back on this case, having had to build the new main backup network server following a psu failure.

    I may use the wrong nomenclature, but isn't dns to do with name resolution in the wider world, whereas netbios deals with similar resolution on the local network. I can't say that I find any of this fun or exciting.

    What I seem to be able to do is to set up a Linux machine locally so that it causes a vaguely similar effect on the local network by setting the domain master in the samba configuration file to "auto", rather than "no".

    So, is there anywhere in the Playbook's setting that I can check whether it will or will not attempt to become the master browser, and can this function be set?
    10-14-13 04:51 AM
  14. Wongsky's Avatar
    No, I'm afraid I didn't go away. I'm now back on this case, having had to build the new main backup network server following a psu failure.

    I may use the wrong nomenclature, but isn't dns to do with name resolution in the wider world, whereas netbios deals with similar resolution on the local network. I can't say that I find any of this fun or exciting.

    What I seem to be able to do is to set up a Linux machine locally so that it causes a vaguely similar effect on the local network by setting the domain master in the samba configuration file to "auto", rather than "no".

    So, is there anywhere in the Playbook's setting that I can check whether it will or will not attempt to become the master browser, and can this function be set?
    DNS is name resolution on the big wide world, as well as some internal networks.

    NetBIOS, per se, is more related to client-side API calls, and typically wrapped by a true networking protocol - in most scenarios, now, will be NetBIOS over TCP/IP (but in the past, was wrapped with netbeui or in some perverse cases, IPX/SPX). Name resolution for netBIOS usage, can be directed, and clients can use DNS first for it, but also can drop through to broadcast, and try and find the info from clients, or masters on the LAN. Samba can also provide netBIOS name resolution services too (so Unix techies, may well note daemons: smbd, nmbd and possibly / probably winbindd running on their Unix / Linux kit, running Samba - well nmbd is the netBIOS name resolution daemon).

    netBIOS name resolution, though, is only really a factor, when you're using Windows networking names - so mapping network drives, or browsing network shares (ie using UNC / SMB / CIFS type constructs on clients). So normal browsers / internet connectivity should have no involvement in any netBIOS name requests. I would have thought most Windows client OSs these days, default to DNS first to try and resolve netBIOS names, then drop through, ultimately, to broadcast, if nothing else gets a hit - which is probably just peachy for most peoples local networks in the home environment.
    10-14-13 05:16 AM
  15. DrBoomBotz's Avatar
    So, is there anywhere in the Playbook's setting that I can check whether it will or will not attempt to become the master browser, and can this function be set?
    settings->wifi->wifiConnectivity (you could turn this off)

    setttings->airplaneMode (you could turn this on to achieve the same effect as above)

    setttings->storageAndSharing->workgroup (you could change this to make the playbook a member of its own workgroup)

    settings->storageAndSharing->wifiSharing (you could turn this off)
    10-14-13 08:14 AM
  16. Billaboard's Avatar
    settings->wifi->wifiConnectivity (you could turn this off)

    setttings->airplaneMode (you could turn this on to achieve the same effect as above)

    setttings->storageAndSharing->workgroup (you could change this to make the playbook a member of its own workgroup)

    settings->storageAndSharing->wifiSharing (you could turn this off)
    I do appreciate the help with this, but I'm not sure that either this or Wongsky's reply does what I really want, or what I thought should happen.

    I would like the Playbook to just "come up" onto a straightforward Windows workgroup network and just announce that it is there without interfering with the layout, in the form of the master browsing arrangements, of the network. Yes, I can put the PB onto a different workgroup, but this does make file transfers etc. more complex.

    I do appreciate that Microsoft may have written some of their own network rules and not have documented them fully, but I am a bit surprised that no-one else seems to have encountered this quirk.

    I've been closing down machines and some running programs on the network so that later today I may be able to run Wireshark to see if I can see what commands the Playbook sends around the network on wifi startup and at the later time when it suddenly affects the network browsing.
    10-14-13 10:08 AM
  17. Wongsky's Avatar
    I do appreciate the help with this, but I'm not sure that either this or Wongsky's reply does what I really want, or what I thought should happen.

    I would like the Playbook to just "come up" onto a straightforward Windows workgroup network and just announce that it is there without interfering with the layout, in the form of the master browsing arrangements, of the network. Yes, I can put the PB onto a different workgroup, but this does make file transfers etc. more complex.

    I do appreciate that Microsoft may have written some of their own network rules and not have documented them fully, but I am a bit surprised that no-one else seems to have encountered this quirk.

    I've been closing down machines and some running programs on the network so that later today I may be able to run Wireshark to see if I can see what commands the Playbook sends around the network on wifi startup and at the later time when it suddenly affects the network browsing.
    Generally the best way of managing it - I'm assuming you have nothing definite setup for name resolution, you're just relying on broadcast? - is to dedicate a machine to be master browser, so it always wins an election. It's ages since I've played with this on Windows, but from memory, may have been a registry value you could tweak. On Linux, if you're running Samba, you should be able to set a value in smb.conf so that it's nmbd / role always wins elections.
    10-14-13 10:15 AM
  18. DrBoomBotz's Avatar
    The only relevant parameters exposed by the Playbook UI are detailed above.

    The only other way to tweak the Playbook's net-bios configuration is to make a dhcp reservation for the Playbook and fiddle with options 44 through 47.

    I am also surprised that no-one has encountered this quirk.

    Oh look
    http://forums.crackberry.com/blackbe...master-717714/
    Last edited by DrBoomBotz; 10-14-13 at 11:03 AM.
    10-14-13 10:43 AM
  19. Wongsky's Avatar
    The only relevant parameters exposed by the Playbook UI are detailed above.

    The only other way to tweak the Playbook's net-bios configuration is to make a dhcp reservation for the Playbook and fiddle with options 44 through 47.

    I am also surprised that no-one has encountered this quirk.
    Believe me, the best way of resolving unrequited browse or naming masters, is to pre-empt with something that will always win, as opposed to trying to deal with something that is winning that you don't want to.
    10-14-13 10:58 AM
  20. DrBoomBotz's Avatar
    Believe me, the best way of resolving unrequited browse or naming masters, is to pre-empt with something that will always win, as opposed to trying to deal with something that is winning that you don't want to.
    I agree see post #2 of this thread.
    10-14-13 11:29 AM
  21. Billaboard's Avatar
    Reading through the other thread, it appears that whatever one sets up as the master browser in the network, the Playbook always bursts in and insists that it is in charge.

    My reason for having my network as it is (as a simple Windows workgroup set up as it comes) is that a great deal of my time used to be spent testing audio programs on small networks, and I know of quite a few small offices set up in this way, some of them having been set up as part of contracts with local networking system providers.
    Certainly, I know of at least 3 small radio stations running networks of this type, and the mind boggles at what chaos I could cause if I relied on a Playbook being hooked up to their printer for something while they were broadcasting.

    The other thing that I don't understand is why, if the Playbook makes itself the master browser, it doesn't also build a table of machines on the network. As a complete amateur in networking, it seems to me as if the Playbook is doubly broken in this area.

    I'm really grateful to have been pointed to the other thread.
    10-14-13 12:00 PM
  22. DrBoomBotz's Avatar
    1. Have you established conclusively that the playbook is becoming the master Browser? It could be just poisoning the list of the some other master browser.

    2. Are those other networks really set up that way? I would not be surprised if those networks are running DNS and/or WINS name resolution. Letting just any old host become the master browser is generally not a great idea.
    Last edited by DrBoomBotz; 10-14-13 at 01:27 PM.
    10-14-13 01:00 PM
  23. Billaboard's Avatar
    1. Have you established conclusively that the playbook is becoming the master Browser? It could be just poisoning the list of the some other master browser.

    2. Are those other networks really set up that way? I would not be surprised if those networks are running DNS and/or WINS name resolution. Letting just any old host become the master browser is generally not a great idea.
    Well, Wireshark says

    1537 711.124583 10.0.0.20 10.0.0.255 BROWSER 260 Local Master Announcement PLAYBOOK-E783KI, Workstation, Server, Print Queue Server, Xenix Server, NT Workstation, NT Server, Master Browser, DFS server

    A short time after, the previous master browser ( a Win 7 machine) seems to say

    1548 727.670251 10.0.0.21 10.0.0.255 BROWSER 216 Get Backup List Request

    I am the first to admit I don't really understand, but I really don't want to have to enrol on a networking course just because I have (and like) a Playbook.

    2. Yes, I believe that these networks are set up so that they just elect a master browser as and when. The cabled machines may come and go on the network, and the laptops just pop up from time to time. I'm a bit unusual in having any sort of backup server - most broadcast news has a half life of approximately 20 minutes.

    Isn't the basic point that this style of networking has worked perfectly well for years, yet fails when a Playbook is introduced.

    I'll probably give up on the Playbook on the same workgroup. It remains a great alarm clock.
    10-14-13 06:52 PM
  24. DrBoomBotz's Avatar
    ...
    Isn't the basic point that this style of networking has worked perfectly well for years, yet fails when a Playbook is introduced.

    I'll probably give up on the Playbook on the same workgroup. It remains a great alarm clock.
    It is my professional opinion that anyone who would actually deploy a mission critical network using browser elections for name resolution needs a visit from the clue fairy.

    This solution never worked well.
    10-14-13 07:26 PM
  25. qwerty4ever's Avatar
    I raised this ages ago, but didn't get anywhere.

    Does anyone else here have a small (about 10 machines) home network running Windows/Linux? If so, does your PB seem to screw up the name resolution on the local network?

    Here my network is rock solid and all machines can see each other, transfer files and so on, but when I enable wifi on the Playbook, it all starts to fail. What seems to happen is that it's OK for a short time but then some sort of time-out happens on the PB and the name resolution breaks.

    When this happens, none of my machines can see each other on the local network, but they all still work fine as internet machines and will resolve the names of sites etc.

    It's a real pain, as I have to keep switching the PB's wifi off to do any work.
    I have an internal network running Debian GNU/Linux on two physical servers hosting almost twenty virtualized instances of Debian GNU/Linux plus a few physical computers (notebooks and desktops). My BlackBerry PlayBook and BlackBerry Z10 connect flawlessly to the internal network. By the way, the domain name ends with .tld although if I had a Microsoft Windows domain the name would end with .local per Microsoft's enforced naming policy. I have never had to toggle the WiFi activation on the tablet since purchase in April 2011. I run a few virtualized instances of Microsoft Windows XP and Microsoft Windows 7 Home Premium without incident.

    Please note the BlackBerry PlayBook wants to create its own local area network if plugged into a computer and the computer is rebooted. Therefore, only connect the tablet to the computer after the computer has fully booted.
    10-15-13 04:17 AM
29 12

Similar Threads

  1. How to copy and paste a link to a forum
    By Bpb_mike in forum BlackBerry PlayBook
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 10-05-13, 01:59 PM
  2. If Cisco acquired BIS and BES, would they support OS 7.1 handsets?
    By David Murray1 in forum General BlackBerry Discussion
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 10-05-13, 11:57 AM
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD