"Network is Busy" Error Message

Steve McClary
Tue, 19 Dec 2000 18:47:09 -0000

Well, folks, I still haven't been able to get rid of this problem. Maybe
it's a reverse DNS lookup issue, as has been suggested by some. But if so,
I can't figure out how to fix it.

More details: the network includes several Win98 clients. We are hooked up
to our ISP via a DSL router which provides NAT and DHCP. Most of the
clients get IP numbers via DHCP, but not all. Samba 2.0.7 is running on
RedHat 7.0 (used to be 5.2, updated since my last message). So far as I
know, the Samba server is not providing DNS to the local network. Samba
server is the browse master.

When some of the clients log on first thing in the morning, they get the
infamous "Network is Busy" message when their machines try to
establish
connections to mapped drives that are Samba shares. The same share shows up
fine when they go to Network Neighborhood, and connection is readily
established. Seems to happen most days but not all, to about six out of 20
users.

smb.log shows following for these users:

[2000/12/19 09:31:28, 1] lib/util_sock.c:client_name(1007)
   Gethostbyaddr failed for 192.168.1.30
[2000/12/19 09:31:28, 0] lib/util_sock.c:write_socket_data(540)
   write_socket_data: write failure. Error = Broken pipe
[2000/12/19 09:31:28, 0] lib/util_sock.c:write_socket(566)
   write_socket: Error writing 4 bytes to socket 6: ERRNO = Broken pipe
[2000/12/19 09:31:28, 0] lib/util_sock.c:send_smb(754)
   Error writing 4 bytes to client. -1. Exiting
[2000/12/19 09:34:21, 1] lib/util_sock.c:client_name(1007)
   Gethostbyaddr failed for 192.168.1.56
[2000/12/19 09:34:21, 0] lib/util_sock.c:write_socket_data(540)
   write_socket_data: write failure. Error = Broken pipe
[2000/12/19 09:34:21, 0] lib/util_sock.c:write_socket(566)
   write_socket: Error writing 4 bytes to socket 6: ERRNO = Broken pipe

I have tried changing WINS setting, letting some Win98 clients use the DHCP
server for WINS, some are not. Makes no difference. Tried changing hubs to
which the users connect (all are on 100MB connections at both ends). No
difference.

I am baffled and confused, and my users are scornful of Linux and Samba.
They correctly point out that we have old Win95 machines on the network
that act as servers and do not have this problem.

Does anyone have suggestions? If it is a reverse DNS problem, what does
that mean and what can I do about it?

Thanks for any help you can give me!

Steve McClary


At 03:15 PM 10/27/2000 +0200, Stephan Duehr wrote:
>On Fre, Okt 27, 2000 at 03:07:06 -0700, samba-request@lists.samba.org wrote:
> > Message: 1
> > Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2000 18:37:56 -0700
> > To: samba@lists.samba.org
> > From: "Steve McClary" <scm@mrwassoc.com>
> > Subject: "Network is Busy" Error Message
> >
> >
> > I have a Samba server on a Dell Poweredge 2300 running RedHat 5.2 .
About
> > 20 users, all on Win98, connect to  this server, most of them with
mapped
> > drives but not all. System has worked fine for over a year.
> >
> > Recently, many of the users (but not all) are getting a "Network
is Busy"
> > message from Windows when they boot up in the morning and try to
> connect to
> > Samba share, though most of them don't get the message every time
they
> boot
> > up.  I haven't been able to isolate anything peculiar to those
users that
> > encounter the error, and it is erratic enough that I can't get it
to
> repeat
> > on any consistent basis. Usually, the user can connect successfully to
the
> > Samba share as soon as their machine finishes booting up.
> >
> > Can anyone help me with this error message and how to correct the
problem?
> > It only happens when the users connect to the Samba share, not to any
> other
> > server (there are a few Win98 machines acting as limited-purpose
> servers on
> > the network).
> >
> >
> > For those of you following my issue, note that the problem persisted
even
> > after I enabled a netlogon.  I just reinstalled samba-2.0.7, and
I'll see
> > how that goes, but I have my doubts.  I'm beginning to think that
it has to
> > do with samba-sensitivity to network traffic or a flaky hub (even
though
> > the network doesn't have a heavy traffic load).
>
>I encountered a similar problem. It appeared on some Win 3.11 Clients which
>still had netbeui installed besides TCP/IP. The resolution was to simply
>remove
>netbeui, which is not needed anyway if you hav TCP/IP installed.
>--
>Stephan D?hr <duehr@ID-PRO.net> (Support)
>* ID-PRO Deutschland GmbH * Am Hofgarten 20 * D-53113 Bonn
>* Tel +49 228 4 21 54 0 * Fax +49 228 4 21 54 359
>* http://open-for-the-better.com/
-------------- next part --------------
HTML attachment scrubbed and removed