Hi
I was wondering how to install BOINC on my Domain Controller? BOINC says it won't install on a domain controller. Also I got a WIN 7 laptop that does not see my shares on my server. How do I configure my WIN 7 laptop to see my shares on a non WIN 7 server something about the increased security on the WIN 7 systems.
Bye Paul

I believe you'll need a BOINC version before the 6.X.XX 5.10.45 would most likely work fine. Ozzfan answer something very similar to this a few days to a few weeks ago on the Q&A Windows section

I'll leave the second part of your query to others because I'm not quite clear what you are asking for.

---

In a rich man's house there is no place to spit but his face.
Diogenes Of Sinope

I'm guessing BOINC refuses to install on a DC because Microsoft best practices dictate that you don't do such things on a DC.

That said, I've never tried to do so. There might be a way from the command line, or by using a .MST file to alter the behavior of the BOINC installer.

I'd advise against installing BOINC on a DC, though.

---

see this thread

---

In a rich man's house there is no place to spit but his face.
Diogenes Of Sinope

see this thread

Thanks Skulldude

I got my win 7 laptop I could not open any shares on my server because of ntlmv2 in win 7 and pre win 7 uses ntlm and so win 7 does not see the earlier server shares. I was told to install active directory which is domain controller and now I can see my shares on my win 7 laptop but BOINC won't install on my server because it is now a domain controller. I will try the older versions of BOINC.
Many thanks.
Paul

Here is a possible solution for you.

I'm making an assumption here the DC is for a small home network and not a business environment. You 'should' be able to set up your DC, then set up a Virtual Machine on it, using something like VirtualBox. Install your the OS of your choice (Windows OS, Ubuntu, whatever) in the VM. The run BOINC on the VM. If the DC is being used on a home network, the resource requirements will be very low for that (DC) functionality.

Now, having thrown out this possibility, I have to let you know I have not tried this myself on a Domain Controller, so there may be issues I haven't thought of.
I've been thinking of trying this on my network, but will need to build a 2003 server to experiment with.

Good luck if you try this routs

---

Thanks Flainn
You are right it is my home network and seems to work fine.
But what about the win 7 use of the ntlmv2 while earlier windows use ntlm.
I have seen all kind of solutions to reg hacks to permission hacks and to install active directory which worked for me and now use of VM software. It seems windows wants everybody to upgrade to win 7/2008r2. Win 7 will only see shares on win 7 ntlmv2 excluding all os except win 7 ntlmv2 without reg edits or other hacks or installs of other programs. I believe it is Microsoft attempt at making people into win 7/2008r2 users all in the name of increased security.
Thanks Paul

its a typical non reverse engineered OS from M$. they want you to upgrade or install everything new which is why many of their progs dont work on or for previous OSes

---

In a rich man's house there is no place to spit but his face.
Diogenes Of Sinope

Just because the shares don't show up in Network Places (or whatever MS decided to call it in your flavor of Windows), doesn't mean you can't access the shares at all.

I just created a shortcut to the server on my desktop, or manually type it in the address bar of any other computer I wish to access the shares.

I don't run Active Directory on my home network. Everything works fine for me, and I have Windows 3.11, 95, 98, 2000, XP, Vista and 7 all on my network.

---

Yhanks for the info guys

My win 7 laptop would not show the shares on my win 2000 ad server and I am not alone it also applies to SAMBA servers on Linux also not just windows servers but all non win 7 servers that do not have the ntlmv2 and from what I have read you have to make ntlm available on the win 7 system to acess shares on window servers that are before win 7 that use ntlm so that on the win 7 machine can access both ntlmv2 and ntlm. It involves a lot of edits in registery and policies and a lot of people are having problems with it not just me it is all over the internet search ntlmv2 on google to see for your self. The ntlmv2 is 128 bit encryption while the ntlm is not or something like that and Microsoft wanted to improve the security cause they were having so many problems with security.

Paul

Right, because you made your server Active Directory, and Windows 2000 Active Directory uses the original NTLM authentication protocol. NTLMv2 provided with Vista and Win7, as you said, provides higher security with 128bit encryption.

I never said you were lying or were wrong. All I said was that you don't need Active Directory, and you said you were told you had to promote your server to AD to make things work. This was the wrong advice.

I can access the shares on my Windows 2000 server from my Windows 7 laptop just fine, because I'm not using NTLM authentication or Active Directory. The shares may not automatically show up when I open "Network" on my laptop, but they are still accessible by manually typing the name of the server or by creating a shortcut to the server on my desktop, then the shares show up as they should.

---

The visibility of Network Shares is normally controlled by NetBIOS (back to Windows for Workgroups). Because of Internet and the addition of TCP/IP for the primary protocol on a "network" "NetBIOS," over TCP/IP is disabled. The reason is that it does not require "authentication" for access to shares.

Thus I block port 135-139 and 445 in my Router. Then I can turn on NetBIOS over TCP/IP in the "advanced" network adapter settings. then go into the firewall and allow NetBIOS through (for Local Network).

So to force authentication when you create a Share, You would have to do advanced settings removing "everyone" and adding "authenticated users" (which would use NTLM unless you changed local policy to force NTLMv2). IF they don't know of a local account on the box, they can see it but cannot access it.

So my Win 7 box see all my shares.

Regards

---

Please consider a Donation to the Seti Project.

Hmmm... I always use "authenticated users" instead of "users" or "everyone", but I don't have a problem accessing my shares from any version of Windows.

---

@ozzfan
Hi
What is wrong advice about active directory.
Just want to know.
If I understand right ntlmv2 is default on win 7 and ntlm is used default on win 2000 and 2003. How do I enable ntlm and ntlmv2 on my win 7 laptop.
Or should I de enable ntlm on my win 2000 or enable ntlmv2 on my win 2000.
A lot of people are having trouble see shares from their server from win 7 including linux servers.

Paul

@ozzfan
Hi
What is wrong advice about active directory.
Just want to know.
If I understand right ntlmv2 is default on win 7 and ntlm is used default on win 2000 and 2003. How do I enable ntlm and ntlmv2 on my win 7 laptop.
Or should I de enable ntlm on my win 2000 or enable ntlmv2 on my win 2000.
A lot of people are having trouble see shares from their server from win 7 including linux servers.

Paul

I've not had any problems accessing redhat, fedora, hpux, solaris, aix, or novell network shares with windows 7. Are you getting any errors in your security event log on your server?

---

SETI@home classic workunits: 93,865 CPU time: 863,447 hours
Join the [url=http://tinyurl.com/8y46zvu]BP6/VP6 User Group[

or novell network shares

Just so long as you're not still running IPX/SPX?? :-)

or novell network shares

Just so long as you're not still running IPX/SPX?? :-)

IPX/SPX had one huge advantage not shared by NetBIOS over TCP/IP: it's drop-dead simple.

Our "modern" windows networks were born as an IBM product designed for networks around five nodes, and have been continually kluged to make them "scale" to the size of an enterprise. "Browsers" to cut down on broadcasts, "Master Browsers" to cut down on browser traffic, Domain Controllers to layer better security, WINS to map NetBIOS names to IP addresses, then the DNS kluge to replace WINS (and put internal and external resolution into the same pile) and finally Active Directory.

All of that while IPX just worked.

---

@ozzfan
Hi
What is wrong advice about active directory.
Just want to know.
If I understand right ntlmv2 is default on win 7 and ntlm is used default on win 2000 and 2003. How do I enable ntlm and ntlmv2 on my win 7 laptop.
Or should I de enable ntlm on my win 2000 or enable ntlmv2 on my win 2000.
A lot of people are having trouble see shares from their server from win 7 including linux servers.

Paul

Active Directory uses the NTLM protocol to authenticate computer or user accounts, with NTLM being used on older versions of Windows and Windows Server, and NTLMv2 being used in Server 2008/Vista/7.

To avoid using NTLM and running into compatibility issues, don't use Active Directory. Of course, this advise is only good for people running on small networks with two or less servers. Larger networks will have an obvious need for AD and NTLM. I'm assuming you're running a home network with one or two servers, hence my suggestion that running AD was bad advice, especially if you use different versions of Windows, or any of the Home Editions of Windows which cannot partake in an AD network properly.

I don't believe you can use NTLMv2 on older OSes unless Microsoft releases a software kit which provides this functionality. I'm still testing Server 2008 myself, so I do not know how to change the default authentication protocol from NTLMv2 to NTLMv1 or if it's even possible.

All I can tell you is that if you have a single server you shouldn't need AD, and I can only state that on my network, using every version of Windows all the way back to Windows for Workgroups 3.11, I have no issues accessing shares on my Windows 2000 Server and Windows Server 2003 R2 machines. I do not run Linux beyond testing since it never seems functional enough out of the box.

If there is a need for your particular network to run AD, then I'm afraid you're at odds with the situation and the best advice is to simply use BOINC v5.10.45 like I do on my servers (even if they aren't AD).

---

or novell network shares

Just so long as you're not still running IPX/SPX?? :-)

IPX/SPX had one huge advantage not shared by NetBIOS over TCP/IP: it's drop-dead simple.

Our "modern" windows networks were born as an IBM product designed for networks around five nodes, and have been continually kluged to make them "scale" to the size of an enterprise. "Browsers" to cut down on broadcasts, "Master Browsers" to cut down on browser traffic, Domain Controllers to layer better security, WINS to map NetBIOS names to IP addresses, then the DNS kluge to replace WINS (and put internal and external resolution into the same pile) and finally Active Directory.

All of that while IPX just worked.

IPX was very simple, but as I understand it, it was non-routable.

---

or novell network shares

Just so long as you're not still running IPX/SPX?? :-)

IPX/SPX had one huge advantage not shared by NetBIOS over TCP/IP: it's drop-dead simple.

Our "modern" windows networks were born as an IBM product designed for networks around five nodes, and have been continually kluged to make them "scale" to the size of an enterprise. "Browsers" to cut down on broadcasts, "Master Browsers" to cut down on browser traffic, Domain Controllers to layer better security, WINS to map NetBIOS names to IP addresses, then the DNS kluge to replace WINS (and put internal and external resolution into the same pile) and finally Active Directory.

All of that while IPX just worked.

IPX was very simple, but as I understand it, it was non-routable.

That's when bridging is your friend.

In a sense, every ethernet switch is "routing" based on MAC addresses, and the same would work fine (and efficiently) for IPX/SPX.

---