raj@hpindwa.cup.hp.com (Rick Jones) (11/02/90)
I am told that the periodic server name broadcasts of LAN Manager RFC NetBIOS will tend to sync-up over time. Aparently, if one server sees a name packet from another server, it will immediately send-out its name, and reset its name-send timer. Is this really true??? Assuming it is, what would people say should be the maximum number of servers on a logical segment? inquiringly, rick jones ___ _ ___ |__) /_\ | Richard Anders Jones | MPE/XL TCP/IP Networking Weanie | \_/ \_/ Hewlett-Packard Co. | Does your's b'cast inform IP ;-? ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Being an employee of a Standards Company, all Standard Disclaimers Apply
jbvb@vaxeline.COM (James Van Bokkelen) (11/07/90)
In article <38470005@hpindwa.cup.hp.com>, raj@hpindwa.cup.hp.com (Rick Jones) writes: > > I am told that the periodic server name broadcasts of LAN Manager RFC > NetBIOS will tend to sync-up over time.... Experimental evidence suggests that *all* protocols that involve a periodic broadcast from each of many hosts tend to synch-up over time. The moment two hosts collide, they stay in synch, and the subsequent collisions increase the probability that others will fall into step. > ... Aparently, if one server sees > a name packet from another server, it will immediately send-out its > name, and reset its name-send timer. If this is the case, the protocol will synch-up much faster than it would if it were better-designed (e.g. RWHO, which doesn't have any such 'reset timer' logic). The problem isn't RFC NETBIOS, which doesn't have any periodic broadcasts at all. Instead, it is LANMAN's server-location logic which would appear to need improvement... -- James B. VanBokkelen 26 Princess St., Wakefield, MA 01880 FTP Software Inc. voice: (617) 246-0900 fax: (617) 246-0901
dannygl@microsoft.UUCP (Danny GLASSER) (11/09/90)
In article <38470005@hpindwa.cup.hp.com> raj@hpindwa.cup.hp.com (Rick Jones) writes: > >I am told that the periodic server name broadcasts of LAN Manager RFC >NetBIOS will tend to sync-up over time. Aparently, if one server sees >a name packet from another server, it will immediately send-out its >name, and reset its name-send timer. > >Is this really true??? Assuming it is, what would people say should be >the maximum number of servers on a logical segment? I'm not clear exactly what you're referring to, but if you're talking about LANMAN server announcements (which are sent out via NetBIOS datagrams), the answer is that they should not sync up. For one thing, a server will not immediately send out its announcement when it receives an announcement from another server. (It will respond immediately if it receives an announcement *request*, however.) Secondly, there is a randomizing factor built into each server announcement which is designed to avoid the broadcast synchronization you describe. This factor is in fact configurable, by modifying the "srvanndelta" parameter in the [server] section of the LANMAN.INI file. (The server chooses a pseudo-random number in the [0,srvanndelta-1] range and sleeps for that number of milliseconds before sending the announcement.) -- Danny Glasser