P2P: "network ... no longer available"

Hello:

On my rather dated PC--with it's dated NIC--I find that
Windows Peer-to-Peer (P2P) network communication *almost*
works. Unfortunately, almost is not nearly enough.

I have a Home Network with four PCs connected via a
D-Link DI-704P router--so they all can share an ADSL modem.
Two of the PCs are running WinXP, and two are running Win98SE.
WEB browsing and email works great with all four PCs.

My current urgent quest (because of a nasty Trojan virus) is
to copy my data files from my Older Win98SE machine, "233", to
the not quite as old Win98SE machine, "AMD".

I'm trying to use Windows P2P to do this copy. All of the
PCs can "Windows Explorer" (WExp) browse the files on "each other's"
disks. Also, they all can do file transfers successfully to/from
"each other" except "233". File transfers *from* "233" don't work.

By the way, "233" is the one with the virus. This inability to
transfer files from "233" "predates" the virus. P2P file transfers
haven't ever worked from "233".

I typically have been bringing up WExp on "AMD" and can successfully
browsing files on "233". When I try to transfer files from "233"
to "AMD", I get the following message.

coping ... network resource or device is no longer available


I get the same error if I try to run WExp on "233". Interestingly,
whenever I try to copy a folder full of files, the new folder is
always created on "AMD", but none of the files transfer successfully.
It seems the connection stays up long enough to create a directory
on the target machine--but then dies when file transfer tries to
start.

I have searched on "network resource or device is no longer available"
and found that many others have seen this string--and been puzzled by
it. The messages that correlate with my situation seem to have to do
with my network interface card.

Realtek RTL8029 PCI Ethernet NIC


Also, a couple folks mentioned that they can't ping with larger
packet sizes when they get the above message. All of the PCs on
our home network can ping each other.

"AMD" has no problem with ping packet sizes of 1472 bytes or greater.
"233" can't ping at all with packet sizes that large. Even at ping
packet sizes of 736, "233" can "miss-ping". [ Is that a word? ]
I think this is another symptom of "the problem".

P2P coping from "AMD" to "233" works fine. So, apparently, the problem
has to do with "233" transmitting large packets. (?) My message
searches indicate that many others have experienced such a "one
directional" problem.

I have made sure that I have the latest Realtek driver from the
vendor's site. I have checked all of the Network settings between
"233" and "AMD". They are all the same--except for NIC driver related
differences. "AMD" has a different NIC card.

I tried setting the NIC on "233" to "full duplex". That seemed to
make pinging of large packets even more of a problem on "233".

I don't really want to mess with replacing the NIC card on "233" at
this point. I just want to get my data files off of "233" and onto
"AMD". If I succeed at that, I plan to get a new XP PC to replace
"233".

I hope that my above description is a bit clearer "than mud". I'm
hoping that someone has some hot tips that I haven't managed to find
from my searching so far.

Thank you--just for reading this far.

--Less Entropy

[ This is my "posting to news groups" name. It doesn't seem to
actually cause entropy to decrease. ]


================================================== =================

Network Components
==================
Client for Microsoft Networks
Microsoft Family Logon
Realtek RTL8029 PCI Ethernet NIC
IPX/SPX-compatible Protocol
TCP/IP
File and printer sharing for Microsoft Networks


Realtek RTL8029 PCI Ethernet NIC Properties under "Network"
================================================== =========

Bindings
--------
IPX/SPX-compatile Protocol
TCP/IP

Advanced
--------
Duplex Mode: Half Duplex (Default)
Network Address: Not Present



"Driver File Details" Window of Device Manager
==============================================

C:\WINDOWS\SYSTEM\NDIS.VXD
C:\WINDOWS\SYSTEM\vmm32.vxd(ntkern.vxd)
C:\WINDOWS\SYSTEM\RTL8029.SYS
C:\WINDOWS\SYSTEM\NWLINK.VXD
C:\WINDOWS\SYSTEM\VREDIR.VXD
C:\WINDOWS\SYSTEM\VSERVER.VXD
C:\WINDOWS\SYSTEM\VTDI.386
C:\WINDOWS\SYSTEM\VIP.386
C:\WINDOWS\SYSTEM\VTCP.386
C:\WINDOWS\SYSTEM\VDHCP.386
C:\WINDOWS\SYSTEM\VNBT.386
C:\WINDOWS\SYSTEM\VSERVER.VXD
C:\WINDOWS\SYSTEM\VREDIR.VXD


C:\WINDOWS\SYSTEM\RTL8029.SYS
-----------------------------
Provider: Realteck Semiconductor Corporation
File version: 5.508.0803.2000

Hello:

Oops.

>
> coping ... network resource or device is no longer available
>

This was supposed to start with "copying". My PC may feel that
it is "coping"--but I don't. :|

--Less

=================================
Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary
=================================
http://www.m-w.com/

Main Entry: cope
Function: verb
Inflected Form(s): coped; cop·ing
Etymology: Middle English copen, coupen, from Middle French couper to
strike, cut, from Old French, from coup blow, from Late Latin colpus,
alteration of Latin colaphus, from Greek kolaphos buffet
intransitive senses

1 obsolete : STRIKE, FIGHT
2 a : to maintain a contest or combat usually on even terms or with
success -- used with with
b : to deal with and attempt to overcome problems and
difficulties -- often used with with
3 archaic : MEET, ENCOUNTER
transitive senses
1 obsolete : to meet in combat
2 obsolete : to come in contact with
3 obsolete : MATCH

You don't mention the name of the "nasty virus". If it is network aware, you are
better off pulling the machine from the network and cleaning it.

I suggest using FProt for DOS (free):
http://www.f-prot.com/products/home_use/dos/

Download the latest definitions found on the same page as well.
The best way to run it is by extracting/copying all the files to a folder on the
hard drive, boot to DOS and run FProt.exe from the location on the drive.

I'm not sure I'd chance it even with an up-to-date av on the other 98 machine,
but you could pull the compromised drive and install it in the other 98 machine
as a slave and then copy your data files.

--

Brian A. Sesko
{ MS MVP_Shell/User }
Conflicts start where information lacks.
http://www.dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
http://basconotw.mvps.org/



"Less Entropy" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed) oups.com...
> Hello:
>
> On my rather dated PC--with it's dated NIC--I find that
> Windows Peer-to-Peer (P2P) network communication *almost*
> works. Unfortunately, almost is not nearly enough.
>
> I have a Home Network with four PCs connected via a
> D-Link DI-704P router--so they all can share an ADSL modem.
> Two of the PCs are running WinXP, and two are running Win98SE.
> WEB browsing and email works great with all four PCs.
>
> My current urgent quest (because of a nasty Trojan virus) is
> to copy my data files from my Older Win98SE machine, "233", to
> the not quite as old Win98SE machine, "AMD".
>
> I'm trying to use Windows P2P to do this copy. All of the
> PCs can "Windows Explorer" (WExp) browse the files on "each other's"
> disks. Also, they all can do file transfers successfully to/from
> "each other" except "233". File transfers *from* "233" don't work.
>
> By the way, "233" is the one with the virus. This inability to
> transfer files from "233" "predates" the virus. P2P file transfers
> haven't ever worked from "233".
>
> I typically have been bringing up WExp on "AMD" and can successfully
> browsing files on "233". When I try to transfer files from "233"
> to "AMD", I get the following message.
>
> coping ... network resource or device is no longer available
>
>
> I get the same error if I try to run WExp on "233". Interestingly,
> whenever I try to copy a folder full of files, the new folder is
> always created on "AMD", but none of the files transfer successfully.
> It seems the connection stays up long enough to create a directory
> on the target machine--but then dies when file transfer tries to
> start.
>
> I have searched on "network resource or device is no longer available"
> and found that many others have seen this string--and been puzzled by
> it. The messages that correlate with my situation seem to have to do
> with my network interface card.
>
> Realtek RTL8029 PCI Ethernet NIC
>
>
> Also, a couple folks mentioned that they can't ping with larger
> packet sizes when they get the above message. All of the PCs on
> our home network can ping each other.
>
> "AMD" has no problem with ping packet sizes of 1472 bytes or greater.
> "233" can't ping at all with packet sizes that large. Even at ping
> packet sizes of 736, "233" can "miss-ping". [ Is that a word? ]
> I think this is another symptom of "the problem".
>
> P2P coping from "AMD" to "233" works fine. So, apparently, the problem
> has to do with "233" transmitting large packets. (?) My message
> searches indicate that many others have experienced such a "one
> directional" problem.
>
> I have made sure that I have the latest Realtek driver from the
> vendor's site. I have checked all of the Network settings between
> "233" and "AMD". They are all the same--except for NIC driver related
> differences. "AMD" has a different NIC card.
>
> I tried setting the NIC on "233" to "full duplex". That seemed to
> make pinging of large packets even more of a problem on "233".
>
> I don't really want to mess with replacing the NIC card on "233" at
> this point. I just want to get my data files off of "233" and onto
> "AMD". If I succeed at that, I plan to get a new XP PC to replace
> "233".
>
> I hope that my above description is a bit clearer "than mud". I'm
> hoping that someone has some hot tips that I haven't managed to find
> from my searching so far.
>
> Thank you--just for reading this far.
>
> --Less Entropy
>
> [ This is my "posting to news groups" name. It doesn't seem to
> actually cause entropy to decrease. ]
>
>
> ================================================== =================
>
> Network Components
> ==================
> Client for Microsoft Networks
> Microsoft Family Logon
> Realtek RTL8029 PCI Ethernet NIC
> IPX/SPX-compatible Protocol
> TCP/IP
> File and printer sharing for Microsoft Networks
>
>
> Realtek RTL8029 PCI Ethernet NIC Properties under "Network"
> ================================================== =========
>
> Bindings
> --------
> IPX/SPX-compatile Protocol
> TCP/IP
>
> Advanced
> --------
> Duplex Mode: Half Duplex (Default)
> Network Address: Not Present
>
>
>
> "Driver File Details" Window of Device Manager
> ==============================================
>
> C:\WINDOWS\SYSTEM\NDIS.VXD
> C:\WINDOWS\SYSTEM\vmm32.vxd(ntkern.vxd)
> C:\WINDOWS\SYSTEM\RTL8029.SYS
> C:\WINDOWS\SYSTEM\NWLINK.VXD
> C:\WINDOWS\SYSTEM\VREDIR.VXD
> C:\WINDOWS\SYSTEM\VSERVER.VXD
> C:\WINDOWS\SYSTEM\VTDI.386
> C:\WINDOWS\SYSTEM\VIP.386
> C:\WINDOWS\SYSTEM\VTCP.386
> C:\WINDOWS\SYSTEM\VDHCP.386
> C:\WINDOWS\SYSTEM\VNBT.386
> C:\WINDOWS\SYSTEM\VSERVER.VXD
> C:\WINDOWS\SYSTEM\VREDIR.VXD
>
>
> C:\WINDOWS\SYSTEM\RTL8029.SYS
> -----------------------------
> Provider: Realteck Semiconductor Corporation
> File version: 5.508.0803.2000
>

Brian A. Sesko:

Thanks for your message.

>> You don't mention the name of the "nasty virus".

The unique identifier for the Trojan appears to be ...

"Trojan-Spy.HTML.Smitfraud.c"


I've posted messages about how to get rid of this thing. The
remedies I've found appear to be arduous and risky. I hope to
get my files backed up before I try any of these remedies.

I haven't heard about "FProt". Running something at the DOS
level makes a lot of sense to me. I'll be trying it.

>> I'm not sure I'd chance it even with an up-to-date av
>> on the other 98 machine, but you could pull the
>> compromised drive and install it in the other 98
>> machine as a slave and then copy your data files.

Actually moving the drive is sort of "at the end of my list".
It seems likely right now that I will end up there.

I have download a bunch of different virus scanners. One of the
ones who's scan is free--but not the removal--seems to detect
it. It's hard to know which of these virus tools are of any
value.

Another difficulty is that my hard drive on this machine is
almost full. It's an old machine with only 7 GB of total disk
space. As with so many things in my life, "I should have done
something about this a long time ago."

Thanks again for your help.

--Less

Have you seen this one:
http://wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?t=75890

--

Brian A. Sesko
{ MS MVP_Shell/User }
Conflicts start where information lacks.
http://www.dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
http://basconotw.mvps.org/



"Less Entropy" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed) oups.com...
> Brian A. Sesko:
>
> Thanks for your message.
>
>>> You don't mention the name of the "nasty virus".
>
> The unique identifier for the Trojan appears to be ...
>
> "Trojan-Spy.HTML.Smitfraud.c"
>
>
> I've posted messages about how to get rid of this thing. The
> remedies I've found appear to be arduous and risky. I hope to
> get my files backed up before I try any of these remedies.
>
> I haven't heard about "FProt". Running something at the DOS
> level makes a lot of sense to me. I'll be trying it.
>
>>> I'm not sure I'd chance it even with an up-to-date av
>>> on the other 98 machine, but you could pull the
>>> compromised drive and install it in the other 98
>>> machine as a slave and then copy your data files.
>
> Actually moving the drive is sort of "at the end of my list".
> It seems likely right now that I will end up there.
>
> I have download a bunch of different virus scanners. One of the
> ones who's scan is free--but not the removal--seems to detect
> it. It's hard to know which of these virus tools are of any
> value.
>
> Another difficulty is that my hard drive on this machine is
> almost full. It's an old machine with only 7 GB of total disk
> space. As with so many things in my life, "I should have done
> something about this a long time ago."
>
> Thanks again for your help.
>
> --Less
>