Win ME & 2000 Networking

[Jerry]

I have a 3 computer wireless network using Netgear
adapters. The computer with Windows ME can not browse the
other 2 pcs(running XP Home & Win 2000) on the network.
The 2000 pc can browse the other 2 pcs and the XP can
browse the other 2 pcs. Drives & folders are set for
sharing on the other 2 pcs. I can get internet access on
all 3 pcs. I can ping from the ME computer to the other 2
pcs. I have all 3 pcs set up in the workgroup
named "WORKGROUP". All pcs have file & printer sharing
enabled. Netgear suggested installing NetBEUI which I
installed on the ME and 2000 pcs, but this did not solve
the problem. I also went thru the Windows ME home
networking wizard but this did not solve the problem. Any
suggestions?

[Steve Winograd [MVP]]

In article >, "Jerry"
> wrote:
>I have a 3 computer wireless network using Netgear
>adapters. The computer with Windows ME can not browse the
>other 2 pcs(running XP Home & Win 2000) on the network.
>The 2000 pc can browse the other 2 pcs and the XP can
>browse the other 2 pcs. Drives & folders are set for
>sharing on the other 2 pcs. I can get internet access on
>all 3 pcs. I can ping from the ME computer to the other 2
>pcs. I have all 3 pcs set up in the workgroup
>named "WORKGROUP". All pcs have file & printer sharing
>enabled. Netgear suggested installing NetBEUI which I
>installed on the ME and 2000 pcs, but this did not solve
>the problem. I also went thru the Windows ME home
>networking wizard but this did not solve the problem. Any
>suggestions?

I disagree with Netgear, Jerry. In my experience, adding a protocol
to a malfunctioning Windows network can make the problem worse,
especially when XP is involved. Even if the network works after
adding another protocol, it won't work optimally, because the
additional protocol is a bandage covering up a basic problem that
still exists. It's better to fix the basic problem and have an
optimal network setup.

Remove NetBEUI from all computers, and make sure that TCP/IP is the
only protocol.

Is the problem that ME can't see the other computers at all? If so,
make sure that:

1. A firewall program isn't blocking access, and:
2. NetBIOS over TCP/IP is enabled on all computers.
3. Browse Master is disabled on ME.

Is the problem that ME sees the other computers but can't access the
shared disks and folders that it sees because "access is denied"? If
so, create matching user accounts on all computers, with the same user
name and password.
--
Best Wishes,
Steve Winograd, MS-MVP (Windows Networking)

Please post any reply as a follow-up message in the news group
for everyone to see. I'm sorry, but I don't answer questions
addressed directly to me in E-mail or news groups.

Microsoft Most Valuable Professional - Windows Networking
http://mvp.support.microsoft.com

Steve Winograd's Networking FAQ
http://www.bcmaven.com/networking/faq.htm

[Lou]

On Sun, 15 Aug 2004 22:15:29 -0600, "Steve Winograd [MVP]" >
wrote:

>In article >, "Jerry"
> wrote:
>>I have a 3 computer wireless network using Netgear
>>adapters. The computer with Windows ME can not browse the
>>other 2 pcs(running XP Home & Win 2000) on the network.
>>The 2000 pc can browse the other 2 pcs and the XP can
>>browse the other 2 pcs. Drives & folders are set for
>>sharing on the other 2 pcs. I can get internet access on
>>all 3 pcs. I can ping from the ME computer to the other 2
>>pcs. I have all 3 pcs set up in the workgroup
>>named "WORKGROUP". All pcs have file & printer sharing
>>enabled. Netgear suggested installing NetBEUI which I
>>installed on the ME and 2000 pcs, but this did not solve
>>the problem. I also went thru the Windows ME home
>>networking wizard but this did not solve the problem. Any
>>suggestions?
>
>I disagree with Netgear, Jerry. In my experience, adding a protocol
>to a malfunctioning Windows network can make the problem worse,
>especially when XP is involved. Even if the network works after
>adding another protocol, it won't work optimally, because the
>additional protocol is a bandage covering up a basic problem that
>still exists. It's better to fix the basic problem and have an
>optimal network setup.
>
>Remove NetBEUI from all computers, and make sure that TCP/IP is the
>only protocol.
>
>Is the problem that ME can't see the other computers at all? If so,
>make sure that:
>
>1. A firewall program isn't blocking access, and:
>2. NetBIOS over TCP/IP is enabled on all computers.
>3. Browse Master is disabled on ME.
>
>Is the problem that ME sees the other computers but can't access the
>shared disks and folders that it sees because "access is denied"? If
>so, create matching user accounts on all computers, with the same user
>name and password.

Steve,

How do you disable Browse Master on ME?

Thank you,

Lou

[Steve Winograd [MVP]]

In article >, Lou
> wrote:
>Steve,
>
>How do you disable Browse Master on ME?
>
>Thank you,
>
>Lou

1. Go to Control Panel | Network.
2. Double click "File and Printer Sharing" in the list of components.
3. Specify "Disabled" as the value for Browse Master.
--
Best Wishes,
Steve Winograd, MS-MVP (Windows Networking)

Please post any reply as a follow-up message in the news group
for everyone to see. I'm sorry, but I don't answer questions
addressed directly to me in E-mail or news groups.

Microsoft Most Valuable Professional - Windows Networking
http://mvp.support.microsoft.com

Steve Winograd's Networking FAQ
http://www.bcmaven.com/networking/faq.htm

[Jerry]

>-----Original Message-----
>In article >,
Lou
> wrote:
>>Steve,
>>
>>How do you disable Browse Master on ME?
>>
>>Thank you,
>>
>>Lou
>
>1. Go to Control Panel | Network.
>2. Double click "File and Printer Sharing" in the list of
components.
>3. Specify "Disabled" as the value for Browse Master.
>--
>Best Wishes,
>Steve Winograd, MS-MVP (Windows Networking)
>
>Please post any reply as a follow-up message in the news
group
>for everyone to see. I'm sorry, but I don't answer
questions
>addressed directly to me in E-mail or news groups.
>
>Microsoft Most Valuable Professional - Windows Networking
>http://mvp.support.microsoft.com
>
>Steve Winograd's Networking FAQ
>http://www.bcmaven.com/networking/faq.htm
>.
>I got the Windows ME computer to see the other computers
in the network by removing the IPX protocol which was
installed along with the TCP/IP protocol. Thanks.

[Steve Winograd [MVP]]

In article >, "Jerry"
> wrote:
>I got the Windows ME computer to see the other computers
>in the network by removing the IPX protocol which was
>installed along with the TCP/IP protocol. Thanks.

You're welcome, Jerry. You might have seen messages in this news
group that recommend adding the IPX protocol as a necessary step in
solving all networking problems. That advice appears here so often
that some people who haven't tried it might think that it must be
true. You've confirmed what I've been saying for years:

1. Windows networks work best with the same single protocol on all
computers.

2. Adding another protocol, even on just one computer, can make the
network unreliable.
--
Best Wishes,
Steve Winograd, MS-MVP (Windows Networking)

Please post any reply as a follow-up message in the news group
for everyone to see. I'm sorry, but I don't answer questions
addressed directly to me in E-mail or news groups.

Microsoft Most Valuable Professional - Windows Networking
http://mvp.support.microsoft.com

Steve Winograd's Networking FAQ
http://www.bcmaven.com/networking/faq.htm

[Carey Holzman]

The only advice I have seen about IPX is for DIAGNOSING networking problems.
I don't see any post that says it's required or recommended as a permanent
solution or requirement for networking.

So, if you're referring to my tips, you've obviously misunderstood them. If
IPX solves the networking problem, some people just leave it alone because
it works and they are frustrated and don't want to diagnose any further.
That's entirely their choice.

It's up to the end user to make that decision and not a requirement or
pre-requisite of a 'properly configured' or 'working network.'

Hope that clears up any mis-understanding.

Carey


"Steve Winograd [MVP]" > wrote in message
...
> In article >, "Jerry"
> > wrote:
>>I got the Windows ME computer to see the other computers
>>in the network by removing the IPX protocol which was
>>installed along with the TCP/IP protocol. Thanks.
>
> You're welcome, Jerry. You might have seen messages in this news
> group that recommend adding the IPX protocol as a necessary step in
> solving all networking problems. That advice appears here so often
> that some people who haven't tried it might think that it must be
> true. You've confirmed what I've been saying for years:
>
> 1. Windows networks work best with the same single protocol on all
> computers.
>
> 2. Adding another protocol, even on just one computer, can make the
> network unreliable.
> --
> Best Wishes,
> Steve Winograd, MS-MVP (Windows Networking)
>
> Please post any reply as a follow-up message in the news group
> for everyone to see. I'm sorry, but I don't answer questions
> addressed directly to me in E-mail or news groups.
>
> Microsoft Most Valuable Professional - Windows Networking
> http://mvp.support.microsoft.com
>
> Steve Winograd's Networking FAQ
> http://www.bcmaven.com/networking/faq.htm

[Steve Winograd [MVP]]

In article >, "Carey Holzman"
> wrote:
>>>I got the Windows ME computer to see the other computers
>>>in the network by removing the IPX protocol which was
>>>installed along with the TCP/IP protocol. Thanks.
>>
>> You're welcome, Jerry. You might have seen messages in this news
>> group that recommend adding the IPX protocol as a necessary step in
>> solving all networking problems. That advice appears here so often
>> that some people who haven't tried it might think that it must be
>> true. You've confirmed what I've been saying for years:
>>
>> 1. Windows networks work best with the same single protocol on all
>> computers.
>>
>> 2. Adding another protocol, even on just one computer, can make the
>> network unreliable.
>
>The only advice I have seen about IPX is for DIAGNOSING networking problems.
>I don't see any post that says it's required or recommended as a permanent
>solution or requirement for networking.
>
>So, if you're referring to my tips, you've obviously misunderstood them. If
>IPX solves the networking problem, some people just leave it alone because
>it works and they are frustrated and don't want to diagnose any further.
>That's entirely their choice.
>
>It's up to the end user to make that decision and not a requirement or
>pre-requisite of a 'properly configured' or 'working network.'
>
>Hope that clears up any mis-understanding.
>
>Carey

Your web site doesn't mention any form of the word "diagnose". It
claims to "fix every peer-to-peer networking problem that anyone has
ever reported over two years with Windows".

Your first tip says to install IPX, and you insist that people follow
your steps: "If you want your network to work properly, you must
follow each step exactly." Your web site doesn't say to remove IPX
after diagnosing or fixing a problem.

I've diagnosed and fixed problems on dozens of networks in person, and
I've diagnosed and fixed problems on thousands of networks in the news
groups, without ever installing IPX, recommending that someone else
install IPX, or following the other steps on your web site.
--
Best Wishes,
Steve Winograd, MS-MVP (Windows Networking)

Please post any reply as a follow-up message in the news group
for everyone to see. I'm sorry, but I don't answer questions
addressed directly to me in E-mail or news groups.

Microsoft Most Valuable Professional - Windows Networking
http://mvp.support.microsoft.com

Steve Winograd's Networking FAQ
http://www.bcmaven.com/networking/faq.htm

[Carey Holzman]

I may have to make that clarification, as it was once there on my web-site,
but it has been through several revisions and through such, may have been
lost in the shuffle.

It's all well and good that your diagnosis technique does not require IPX.
I'm sure you'll agree there is more than one way to diagnose any computer
problem. I can only speak for what has personally worked for me. I have
resolved each and every network problem I've ever encountered using my
techniques. That is my experience. I cannot speak or promote your experience
over mine, except to say that what works for you may not work or be
acceptable to others, and my tips are no different in that respect.

What concerns me is that you seem to suggest I am some how profiting and/or
endangering the stability or reliability when you make libelous claims. What
do you suppose my motivation is? What goal do you think I am trying to
accomplish?

I assure you, we're both here for the same purpose. We should be backing up
and supporting each other, even though our ways are different. That's what
enriches this forum - diversity.

I had a company redesign and maintain my site. I will double check to see if
the "This is not a how-to INSTALL, but rather a how-to DIAGNOSE" statement
was somehow left out of the revised page.

Had you (or anyone else) brought that to my attention, I would have had it
corrected sooner.

Thanks for your understanding and cooperation.

Carey

"Steve Winograd [MVP]" > wrote in message
...
> In article >, "Carey Holzman"
> > wrote:
>>>>I got the Windows ME computer to see the other computers
>>>>in the network by removing the IPX protocol which was
>>>>installed along with the TCP/IP protocol. Thanks.
>>>
>>> You're welcome, Jerry. You might have seen messages in this news
>>> group that recommend adding the IPX protocol as a necessary step in
>>> solving all networking problems. That advice appears here so often
>>> that some people who haven't tried it might think that it must be
>>> true. You've confirmed what I've been saying for years:
>>>
>>> 1. Windows networks work best with the same single protocol on all
>>> computers.
>>>
>>> 2. Adding another protocol, even on just one computer, can make the
>>> network unreliable.
>>
>>The only advice I have seen about IPX is for DIAGNOSING networking
>>problems.
>>I don't see any post that says it's required or recommended as a permanent
>>solution or requirement for networking.
>>
>>So, if you're referring to my tips, you've obviously misunderstood them.
>>If
>>IPX solves the networking problem, some people just leave it alone because
>>it works and they are frustrated and don't want to diagnose any further.
>>That's entirely their choice.
>>
>>It's up to the end user to make that decision and not a requirement or
>>pre-requisite of a 'properly configured' or 'working network.'
>>
>>Hope that clears up any mis-understanding.
>>
>>Carey
>
> Your web site doesn't mention any form of the word "diagnose". It
> claims to "fix every peer-to-peer networking problem that anyone has
> ever reported over two years with Windows".
>
> Your first tip says to install IPX, and you insist that people follow
> your steps: "If you want your network to work properly, you must
> follow each step exactly." Your web site doesn't say to remove IPX
> after diagnosing or fixing a problem.
>
> I've diagnosed and fixed problems on dozens of networks in person, and
> I've diagnosed and fixed problems on thousands of networks in the news
> groups, without ever installing IPX, recommending that someone else
> install IPX, or following the other steps on your web site.
> --
> Best Wishes,
> Steve Winograd, MS-MVP (Windows Networking)
>
> Please post any reply as a follow-up message in the news group
> for everyone to see. I'm sorry, but I don't answer questions
> addressed directly to me in E-mail or news groups.
>
> Microsoft Most Valuable Professional - Windows Networking
> http://mvp.support.microsoft.com
>
> Steve Winograd's Networking FAQ
> http://www.bcmaven.com/networking/faq.htm

[Carey Holzman]

Steve,

As a symbol of my sincerity in truly wanting to help others with regards to
the information contained on my web-site, I make you this offer:

If there is any additional installation/diagnostic information you would
like to see to make my page 'acceptable' in your eyes, submit it to me in
e-mail and I make certain that it gets added, word-for-word, to the site
with full credit to you. There is no space limitation and you will be free
to add anything you feel would be an alternative or more complete solution
to what is already offered there.

If you are unwilling to do that, then I ask you with all due respect to
please cease any future disparaging comments about my site or tips.

Carey




"Steve Winograd [MVP]" > wrote in message
...
> In article >, "Carey Holzman"
> > wrote:
>>>>I got the Windows ME computer to see the other computers
>>>>in the network by removing the IPX protocol which was
>>>>installed along with the TCP/IP protocol. Thanks.
>>>
>>> You're welcome, Jerry. You might have seen messages in this news
>>> group that recommend adding the IPX protocol as a necessary step in
>>> solving all networking problems. That advice appears here so often
>>> that some people who haven't tried it might think that it must be
>>> true. You've confirmed what I've been saying for years:
>>>
>>> 1. Windows networks work best with the same single protocol on all
>>> computers.
>>>
>>> 2. Adding another protocol, even on just one computer, can make the
>>> network unreliable.
>>
>>The only advice I have seen about IPX is for DIAGNOSING networking
>>problems.
>>I don't see any post that says it's required or recommended as a permanent
>>solution or requirement for networking.
>>
>>So, if you're referring to my tips, you've obviously misunderstood them.
>>If
>>IPX solves the networking problem, some people just leave it alone because
>>it works and they are frustrated and don't want to diagnose any further.
>>That's entirely their choice.
>>
>>It's up to the end user to make that decision and not a requirement or
>>pre-requisite of a 'properly configured' or 'working network.'
>>
>>Hope that clears up any mis-understanding.
>>
>>Carey
>
> Your web site doesn't mention any form of the word "diagnose". It
> claims to "fix every peer-to-peer networking problem that anyone has
> ever reported over two years with Windows".
>
> Your first tip says to install IPX, and you insist that people follow
> your steps: "If you want your network to work properly, you must
> follow each step exactly." Your web site doesn't say to remove IPX
> after diagnosing or fixing a problem.
>
> I've diagnosed and fixed problems on dozens of networks in person, and
> I've diagnosed and fixed problems on thousands of networks in the news
> groups, without ever installing IPX, recommending that someone else
> install IPX, or following the other steps on your web site.
> --
> Best Wishes,
> Steve Winograd, MS-MVP (Windows Networking)
>
> Please post any reply as a follow-up message in the news group
> for everyone to see. I'm sorry, but I don't answer questions
> addressed directly to me in E-mail or news groups.
>
> Microsoft Most Valuable Professional - Windows Networking
> http://mvp.support.microsoft.com
>
> Steve Winograd's Networking FAQ
> http://www.bcmaven.com/networking/faq.htm

[Steve Winograd [MVP]]

In article >, "Carey Holzman"
> wrote:
>Steve,
>
>As a symbol of my sincerity in truly wanting to help others with regards to
>the information contained on my web-site, I make you this offer:
>
>If there is any additional installation/diagnostic information you would
>like to see to make my page 'acceptable' in your eyes, submit it to me in
>e-mail and I make certain that it gets added, word-for-word, to the site
>with full credit to you. There is no space limitation and you will be free
>to add anything you feel would be an alternative or more complete solution
>to what is already offered there.
>
>If you are unwilling to do that, then I ask you with all due respect to
>please cease any future disparaging comments about my site or tips.
>
>Carey

Carey,

You, and you alone, are responsible for what appears on your web site.
I don't want to contribute to your web site or to be associated with
it in any way.

I'll continue to comment on your site, and any other web site, that
contains technical errors or unsupportable claims. I hope that anyone
who finds technical errors or unsupportable claims on my web site will
comment on them.

Your web site contains several technical errors, which anyone who
reads and follows your tips can easily find. For example:

1. Tip #7 mentions "Windows Family Logon". There's no such thing.

2. Tip #19 suggests rebuilding Winsock manually, which has nothing to
do with the subject of the tip.

3. The first hyperlink in Tip #19 doesn't work.
--
Best Wishes,
Steve Winograd, MS-MVP (Windows Networking)

Microsoft Most Valuable Professional Program
http://mvp.support.microsoft.com

[Carey Holzman]

Thanks for bringing those errors to my attention. I'll forward them to my
site developer and make sure they get implemented.

Carey

"Steve Winograd [MVP]" > wrote in message
...
> In article >, "Carey Holzman"
> > wrote:
>>Steve,
>>
>>As a symbol of my sincerity in truly wanting to help others with regards
>>to
>>the information contained on my web-site, I make you this offer:
>>
>>If there is any additional installation/diagnostic information you would
>>like to see to make my page 'acceptable' in your eyes, submit it to me in
>>e-mail and I make certain that it gets added, word-for-word, to the site
>>with full credit to you. There is no space limitation and you will be free
>>to add anything you feel would be an alternative or more complete solution
>>to what is already offered there.
>>
>>If you are unwilling to do that, then I ask you with all due respect to
>>please cease any future disparaging comments about my site or tips.
>>
>>Carey
>
> Carey,
>
> You, and you alone, are responsible for what appears on your web site.
> I don't want to contribute to your web site or to be associated with
> it in any way.
>
> I'll continue to comment on your site, and any other web site, that
> contains technical errors or unsupportable claims. I hope that anyone
> who finds technical errors or unsupportable claims on my web site will
> comment on them.
>
> Your web site contains several technical errors, which anyone who
> reads and follows your tips can easily find. For example:
>
> 1. Tip #7 mentions "Windows Family Logon". There's no such thing.
>
> 2. Tip #19 suggests rebuilding Winsock manually, which has nothing to
> do with the subject of the tip.
>
> 3. The first hyperlink in Tip #19 doesn't work.
> --
> Best Wishes,
> Steve Winograd, MS-MVP (Windows Networking)
>
> Microsoft Most Valuable Professional Program
> http://mvp.support.microsoft.com

[Carey Holzman]

I just got off the phone with my developer and she fixed them as I read them
to her. If you have any other suggestions or corrections, please let me
know.

Thank you!

Carey

"Steve Winograd [MVP]" > wrote in message
...
> In article >, "Carey Holzman"
> > wrote:
>>Steve,
>>
>>As a symbol of my sincerity in truly wanting to help others with regards
>>to
>>the information contained on my web-site, I make you this offer:
>>
>>If there is any additional installation/diagnostic information you would
>>like to see to make my page 'acceptable' in your eyes, submit it to me in
>>e-mail and I make certain that it gets added, word-for-word, to the site
>>with full credit to you. There is no space limitation and you will be free
>>to add anything you feel would be an alternative or more complete solution
>>to what is already offered there.
>>
>>If you are unwilling to do that, then I ask you with all due respect to
>>please cease any future disparaging comments about my site or tips.
>>
>>Carey
>
> Carey,
>
> You, and you alone, are responsible for what appears on your web site.
> I don't want to contribute to your web site or to be associated with
> it in any way.
>
> I'll continue to comment on your site, and any other web site, that
> contains technical errors or unsupportable claims. I hope that anyone
> who finds technical errors or unsupportable claims on my web site will
> comment on them.
>
> Your web site contains several technical errors, which anyone who
> reads and follows your tips can easily find. For example:
>
> 1. Tip #7 mentions "Windows Family Logon". There's no such thing.
>
> 2. Tip #19 suggests rebuilding Winsock manually, which has nothing to
> do with the subject of the tip.
>
> 3. The first hyperlink in Tip #19 doesn't work.
> --
> Best Wishes,
> Steve Winograd, MS-MVP (Windows Networking)
>
> Microsoft Most Valuable Professional Program
> http://mvp.support.microsoft.com

[Carey Holzman]

Steve,
Any tme you are credited with a fix at my netfixes site, would you like your
name to be linked to a site or email address?

Carey

"Steve Winograd [MVP]" > wrote in message
...
> In article >, "Carey Holzman"
> > wrote:
>>Steve,
>>
>>As a symbol of my sincerity in truly wanting to help others with regards
>>to
>>the information contained on my web-site, I make you this offer:
>>
>>If there is any additional installation/diagnostic information you would
>>like to see to make my page 'acceptable' in your eyes, submit it to me in
>>e-mail and I make certain that it gets added, word-for-word, to the site
>>with full credit to you. There is no space limitation and you will be free
>>to add anything you feel would be an alternative or more complete solution
>>to what is already offered there.
>>
>>If you are unwilling to do that, then I ask you with all due respect to
>>please cease any future disparaging comments about my site or tips.
>>
>>Carey
>
> Carey,
>
> You, and you alone, are responsible for what appears on your web site.
> I don't want to contribute to your web site or to be associated with
> it in any way.
>
> I'll continue to comment on your site, and any other web site, that
> contains technical errors or unsupportable claims. I hope that anyone
> who finds technical errors or unsupportable claims on my web site will
> comment on them.
>
> Your web site contains several technical errors, which anyone who
> reads and follows your tips can easily find. For example:
>
> 1. Tip #7 mentions "Windows Family Logon". There's no such thing.
>
> 2. Tip #19 suggests rebuilding Winsock manually, which has nothing to
> do with the subject of the tip.
>
> 3. The first hyperlink in Tip #19 doesn't work.
> --
> Best Wishes,
> Steve Winograd, MS-MVP (Windows Networking)
>
> Microsoft Most Valuable Professional Program
> http://mvp.support.microsoft.com

[Steve Winograd [MVP]]

In article >, "Carey Holzman"
> wrote:
>Steve,
>Any tme you are credited with a fix at my netfixes site, would you like your
>name to be linked to a site or email address?
>
>Carey

Carey,

Thanks for the offer. I don't want to be credited with any fixes on
your site. Please don't list my name, web site, or email address on
any fixes.
--
Best Wishes,
Steve Winograd, MS-MVP (Windows Networking)

Microsoft Most Valuable Professional Program
http://mvp.support.microsoft.com

[Carey Holzman]

Not a problem, I will have any reference to your name removed.

Thanks again!

Carey

"Steve Winograd [MVP]" > wrote in message
...
> In article >, "Carey Holzman"
> > wrote:
>>Steve,
>>Any tme you are credited with a fix at my netfixes site, would you like
>>your
>>name to be linked to a site or email address?
>>
>>Carey
>
> Carey,
>
> Thanks for the offer. I don't want to be credited with any fixes on
> your site. Please don't list my name, web site, or email address on
> any fixes.
> --
> Best Wishes,
> Steve Winograd, MS-MVP (Windows Networking)
>
> Microsoft Most Valuable Professional Program
> http://mvp.support.microsoft.com