2k3 and the amazing disapearing bandwidth

[arsekicker]

Did you disable that secure internet crap?

[ezelkow1]

Yea, i had ics and ipsec disabled and all that stuff.

[arsekicker]

Do you have any network bridges listed in nw connections? I don't mean ics or ipsec i mean the secure internet crap that blocks everything.

[Chrysalis]

I measured my speed by using task manager and was testing using ftp so had the ftp measurement from the ftp client and server as well, was transferring a iso image file so nice and big for test.

[ezelkow1]

I would also mainly use the online bandwidth speedtest from bandwidth place, usually returns fairly consistent results, and that was reporting as I had expected, and now it is reporting much faster.

[uniacid]

yea I did the same, used bandwidthplace.com

[ezelkow1]

This just seems like a really bad thing to happen to people, I mean its one thing for us, people that arent really running a business or are servers are life or death, but for a business they are, and to take a speed cut out of their T3 going from 44.5mbits to 3mbits could destroy them, certainly something microsoft may want to look in to.

[ike]

yep i had the same problem on my server, yet to find the solution myself.

[G_0]

I just posted a message on the Server 2003 beta boards, so hopefuly someone there will have the answer. :p

Any luck with this? I'll vouch for ezeikiel1 (sp?) that as soon as he had XP back up and running the problem was 100% gone and even a little extra, probly cause of the pci card.

[norelidd]

any news?

fuzz

[ezelkow1]

Nope, aparently no one knows anything on this

[uniacid]

this sux :( o well , just hafta wait

[armz]

I'm having exactly the same problem on my lan with 10 clients,, speed has really dropped,

this is just a wild guess but windows server 2003 introduces some sort of new secure transimssion called SMB its installed by default,, could this be the problem?

i dont really know much about it but what i do kno is that i need my speeds back, this is unacceptable for ms to do this to users.

[Nebbish]

I seem to remember a reference to stoping using it until you could buy it... is there any possiblility everyone having problems isusing a warezed copy? and that MS did this to limit warezed copies? ie. once it determines it is warezed it just drops performance to low levels?

[uniacid]

I seem to remember a reference to stoping using it until you could buy it... is there any possiblility everyone having problems isusing a warezed copy? and that MS did this to limit warezed copies? ie. once it determines it is warezed it just drops performance to low levels?

nah don't think they would do that

[ezelkow1]

Yea, i dont think it could be that, cause I know other people running the same version, and they dont seem to have that problem. And it shouldnt be smb, smb is just samba i think and they have decided to automatically include it this time, but samba is a standard on other platforms, and has been used in windows before.

[armz]

This is very annoying, i notice a slight lag in the network too. There has got to be a solution to this, maybe a registry setting or something. I am hoping for a fix very soon. What is strange tho, is that this problem didnt exist with earlier versions (RC1, RC2 and Pre-RTM). Did this bug slip thru without ms knowing?

Also I saw a report on Binks site saying ms has pulled windows server 2003 from msdn. Does this mean anything or have any connection?

[ezelkow1]

G_0 told me today that he saw an article on msdn about our exact same problem, so apparently we are the first ones to discover this.

(Ms should give this poor student a job , hint hint)

[armz]

Any chance of a link to the relevant page?

I found a few things on msdn regarding terminals services could be causing it if there are alot of mapped drives etc... Im not even sure if i installed term services on it anyway, but i will check tomorrow.

Im hoping there is a quick fix for this.

[no name]

actually many of my friends who use 2003 have the same issue!!! and the isp can't solve the problem!

[ezelkow1]

Im working on getting the link to that page, should be up in a bit.

[Jon]

Yea, i dont think it could be that, cause I know other people running the same version, and they dont seem to have that problem. And it shouldnt be smb, smb is just samba i think and they have decided to automatically include it this time, but samba is a standard on other platforms, and has been used in windows before.

lol smb is actually server message block , samba was a name made up around that acronym for *nix compatibility.

SMB is always installed with windows, its the protocol used when you browse the network neighbourhood, when you type //128.0.0.2 etc.

You're definetly barking up the wrong tree there ;)

[no name]

well, it doesnt happen in other versions of windows!

[armz]

Thanks ezelkow1, i appreciate it.

Just out of interest did your friend 'G_0' fix the prob?

[Lexcyn]

So far no one's been able to tell me what this was... even through the MS newsgroups. :s