DOS client gets error 53 with Win2003 SP1

Typical MS-DOS TCP/IP connection using MS DOS networking...

Works fine with Windows 2000 server,
Works fine with Windows 2003 (no SP's) with NTLM & LM protocol capability
enabled and packet signing turned off, a
and works fine with Linux Samba on SuSE 10.0

All naming is done on the local hosts and LMhosts file. Naming or IP
connectivity isn't the issue here as pings work A-OK and all naming,
duplexing and hosts files all are setup properly. Just adding SP1 to a
Windows 2003 server broke the DOS client. (I'm forced to use DOS for an old
application...) Double checked that NTLM & LM and packet signing were set
to disabled...

Anyone else see this issue with SP1 on Windows 2003 server?

System error 53 means connection or name resolution. Make sure not NAT or firewall blocking the LAN traffic.

Bob Lin, MS-MVP, MCSE & CNE
Networking, Internet, Routing, VPN Troubleshooting on http://www.ChicagoTech.net
How to Setup Windows, Network, VPN & Remote Access on http://www.HowToNetworking.com
"Mike M" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message news:(E-Mail Removed)...
Typical MS-DOS TCP/IP connection using MS DOS networking...

Works fine with Windows 2000 server,
Works fine with Windows 2003 (no SP's) with NTLM & LM protocol capability
enabled and packet signing turned off, a
and works fine with Linux Samba on SuSE 10.0

All naming is done on the local hosts and LMhosts file. Naming or IP
connectivity isn't the issue here as pings work A-OK and all naming,
duplexing and hosts files all are setup properly. Just adding SP1 to a
Windows 2003 server broke the DOS client. (I'm forced to use DOS for an old
application...) Double checked that NTLM & LM and packet signing were set
to disabled...

Anyone else see this issue with SP1 on Windows 2003 server?

can you change to that folder where the program resides from a command
prompt?
error 53 is network path not found

"Mike M" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> Typical MS-DOS TCP/IP connection using MS DOS networking...
>
> Works fine with Windows 2000 server,
> Works fine with Windows 2003 (no SP's) with NTLM & LM protocol capability
> enabled and packet signing turned off, a
> and works fine with Linux Samba on SuSE 10.0
>
> All naming is done on the local hosts and LMhosts file. Naming or IP
> connectivity isn't the issue here as pings work A-OK and all naming,
> duplexing and hosts files all are setup properly. Just adding SP1 to a
> Windows 2003 server broke the DOS client. (I'm forced to use DOS for an
> old application...) Double checked that NTLM & LM and packet signing were
> set to disabled...
>
> Anyone else see this issue with SP1 on Windows 2003 server?
>
>
>

DOS will not interact with Server2003 until you reduce the security on
Server2003. the same is the case for Win95 and NT4 prior to SP3.

811497 - Error Message When Windows 95 or Windows NT 4.0 Client
Logs On to Windows Server 2003 Domain
http://support.microsoft.com/default...b;en-us;811497

--
Phillip Windell [MCP, MVP, CCNA]
www.wandtv.com
-----------------------------------------------------
Understanding the ISA 2004 Access Rule Processing
http://www.isaserver.org/articles/IS...cessRules.html

Microsoft Internet Security & Acceleration Server: Guidance
http://www.microsoft.com/isaserver/t...dance/2004.asp
http://www.microsoft.com/isaserver/t...dance/2000.asp

Microsoft Internet Security & Acceleration Server: Partners
http://www.microsoft.com/isaserver/partners/default.asp
-----------------------------------------------------




"Mike M" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> Typical MS-DOS TCP/IP connection using MS DOS networking...
>
> Works fine with Windows 2000 server,
> Works fine with Windows 2003 (no SP's) with NTLM & LM protocol capability
> enabled and packet signing turned off, a
> and works fine with Linux Samba on SuSE 10.0
>
> All naming is done on the local hosts and LMhosts file. Naming or IP
> connectivity isn't the issue here as pings work A-OK and all naming,
> duplexing and hosts files all are setup properly. Just adding SP1 to a
> Windows 2003 server broke the DOS client. (I'm forced to use DOS for an
old
> application...) Double checked that NTLM & LM and packet signing were set
> to disabled...
>
> Anyone else see this issue with SP1 on Windows 2003 server?
>
>
>

Robert, No NATs nor firewalls at all...everything is on the standard LAN.

seth, I can't change to the folder as it returns Error 53 even with a simple
Net View command. Ping by name and/or IP works fine. It won't even map a
drive since it can't "see" the server's shared folders.

Phillip, Security was relaxed by changing to LM and NTLM responses and then
disabling the packet signing options that are on by default. This worked in
Win2003 without SP1...




__________________________________
"Robert L [MS-MVP]" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
System error 53 means connection or name resolution. Make sure not NAT or
firewall blocking the LAN traffic.

what do you receive if using net share on the 2003 server?

Bob Lin, MS-MVP, MCSE & CNE
Networking, Internet, Routing, VPN Troubleshooting on http://www.ChicagoTech.net
How to Setup Windows, Network, VPN & Remote Access on http://www.HowToNetworking.com
"Mike M" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message news:%(E-Mail Removed)...
Robert, No NATs nor firewalls at all...everything is on the standard LAN.

seth, I can't change to the folder as it returns Error 53 even with a simple
Net View command. Ping by name and/or IP works fine. It won't even map a
drive since it can't "see" the server's shared folders.

Phillip, Security was relaxed by changing to LM and NTLM responses and then
disabling the packet signing options that are on by default. This worked in
Win2003 without SP1...




__________________________________
"Robert L [MS-MVP]" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
System error 53 means connection or name resolution. Make sure not NAT or
firewall blocking the LAN traffic.

Figured it out...binding order. 1 of the built-in interfaces is on a private LAN, the other the public LAN. The private LAN interface was listed first. Once I disabled it, re-enabled it, then moved it to be 2nd in the binding order, all worked fine.

Weird.

Thankfully a resolution was found.


Thank you,
Mike

"Robert L [MS-MVP]" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message news:OMaRUC%(E-Mail Removed)...
what do you receive if using net share on the 2003 server?

Bob Lin, MS-MVP, MCSE & CNE
Networking, Internet, Routing, VPN Troubleshooting on http://www.ChicagoTech.net
How to Setup Windows, Network, VPN & Remote Access on http://www.HowToNetworking.com

Thank you for the update.

Bob Lin, MS-MVP, MCSE & CNE
Networking, Internet, Routing, VPN Troubleshooting on http://www.ChicagoTech.net
How to Setup Windows, Network, VPN & Remote Access on http://www.HowToNetworking.com
"Mike M" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message news:eNFYVP%(E-Mail Removed)...
Figured it out...binding order. 1 of the built-in interfaces is on a private LAN, the other the public LAN. The private LAN interface was listed first. Once I disabled it, re-enabled it, then moved it to be 2nd in the binding order, all worked fine.

Weird.

Thankfully a resolution was found.


Thank you,
Mike

"Robert L [MS-MVP]" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message news:OMaRUC%(E-Mail Removed)...
what do you receive if using net share on the 2003 server?

Bob Lin, MS-MVP, MCSE & CNE
Networking, Internet, Routing, VPN Troubleshooting on http://www.ChicagoTech.net
How to Setup Windows, Network, VPN & Remote Access on http://www.HowToNetworking.com