Windows Networking: Why does it suck so?

[womzilla]

Yesterday I finally set up my new computer. It's fast, it's got a good network connection, it's running Windows XP (a fairly recent release, with all fresh security patches).

After many hours of tinkering with XP network settings, Norton Internet Security, goat entrails, and cetera, I managed to get it to connect to the file shares on my old Win98 machine. Well, sorta. I can see my older machine (Y) from my new machine (A), get directory listings, and so forth, but when I actually try to do file copies, they crap out--very little or nothing gets transferred before the connection gives up (which often takes five minutes or so, with nothing transferred in the interval).

It's actually probably unfair to solely blame Windows Networking, though. Direct TCP/IP connections--say, an FTP connection--over the household network *also* suck, with transfer rates as low as 1K per second. (I can get 300K/second or more on connections to servers outside the household network, from either machine.) And TCP/IP connections are still unreliable, crapping out at unpredicable points.

Here are some of the details. The machines are both connected to an 802.11a wireless network, routed through a D-Link DL-704 connected to a D-Link wireless access point. As noted above, both connections are pretty strong and reliable. I enabled IPX/SPX networking on A to allow it access to the shares on Y.

Can anyone make suggests for improvement which don't involve abandoning Windows? (I need Windows XP for some work-related projects, which is why I bought the new machine in the first place.) I'm suspecting that the network router or the access point is doing a crappy job of routing packets within my household network; is there any way to test this hypothesis, or improve it?

Comments

[spacecrab.livejournal.com]

Your setup sounds strange from your description. A 10BaseT TCP/IP connection with two Windows machines plugged into a hub should average between 500KB to 1MB/sec theoretical speed with 250KB/sec to 350KB/sec real transfers over sustained periods of time. 100Base-T is faster.

I don't know about 802.11a; but I use 802.11b between my W2K, W98 and XP boxes, and average approximately the same speeds as through 10BaseT Ethernet. (The wireless clients need to be configured so that they allow access through shared passwords or no encryption -- I don't know how 802.11a works). You don't need FTP to do Windows-Windows or Windows-Linux transfers. You can do direct fileshares. Are you using FTP to connect to a Mac?

Does the 802.11a software allow you to set up a peer connection between the two Windows boxes? Try it and see if the transfer speeds are better than when you go through the WAP.

Why can't you use TCP/IP as the only protocol with the router and the wireless cards? Is it not supported under 802.11a?

You might also try temporarily disconnecting from the Internet and disabling Norton Internet Security to see if transfer speeds get better, locally.

If you can get better direct speeds, don't put Norton Internet Security back (you can use the AV without the firewall). Download and use ZoneAlarm if you need a software firewall for Internet browsing on WIndows machines. Or let the router do it, if you can.

[spacecrab.livejournal.com]

It may be the Wireless Access Point that's slowing everything up. I'd try setting up a peer connection between the Win98 and WinXP machines using just their wireless adapters (bypassing the WAP) and see what kind of transfer speeds you get, then. (If you use a different channel for that, you can leave the cable modem and WAP in operation for Supergee and Nellorat.) Turn off the XP machine's built-in firewall for the wireless connection.

[spacecrab.livejournal.com]

*Sigh* I wrote a detailed explanation, which LJ just ate. Here goes again.

You need to give the XP box a fixed IP, if it's the server. Open My Network Places, right-click the wireless connection icon in the Network Connections folder, open Properties, choose Internet Protocol(TCP/IP) and open its properties. Assign an IP address like 192.168.1.2 (something that doesn't conflict with the WAP & the cable modem) Subnet 255.255.255.0, and gateway the same as the IP address.

To disable the built-in XP firewall, go to the Advanced tab in the connection properties and remove the checkmark next to Firewall. Click OK.

Now, to bypass the WAP and set up a peer connection under XP, right-click the connection icon again and choose "View available connections" from the popup menu. Note whether you have any neighbor SSIDs showing up, then click the Advanced button. In the Advanced settings, under Preferred connections, click Add. On the next screen, allow Windows to manage the settings and enter a new SSID name. If you're not worried about neighbors, disable encryption. If you are worried, checkmark encryption, checkmark "use shared connection" and enter a password. Make sure the box at the bottom that says "This is a computer-to-computer adhoc network" is checkmarked. Click OK and you're done with that.


On the Win98 box, disable any third-party firewall from Norton & such. You also need to give the wireless adapter an assigned IP address. Right-click Network Neighborhood, open Properties, choose TCP/IP properties and give it an IP of 192.168.1.3 subnet 255.255.255.0 with the gateway as 192.168.1.2. DNS settings don't matter if you're not on the Internet. Click OK and reboot. (Maybe run Winipcfg from the Start->Run menu on the next boot to confirm that the IP address has taken.)

The wireless detection settings under Win98 are usually different for every vendor's adapter. In general, right-click on the icon in the Taskbar System Tray; find the WEP encryption settings, and enable or disable to match the XP box. Choose 64-bit encryption if it offers you a choice and enter the password. Then scan for new SSIDs and choose the name you set up under XP. That should allow the two Windows boxes to connect to each other under TCP/IP, ignoring the WAP and the cable modem.