On Fri, Dec 03, 2010 at 09:54:13PM -0600, Christopher R. Hertel wrote: > That may seem to be in the "who cares" category, since those old transports > are essentially dead (much more dead than NBT, or even NBF). Unfortunately, > the code to handle the old transports is still there in Windows, so there > are behaviors -- things like the timeouts you're talking about and the weird > VC=0 shutdown behvior -- that exist because of these old disused transports. VC=0, how does Windows treat this facing NAT (masquerading) networks? I've done tests in the past where Windows killed valid connections from behind a NAT box when a new client came in. Volker -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-cifs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
