Community discussions

MUM Europe 2020
 
vk7zms
Member Candidate
Member Candidate
Topic Author
Posts: 227
Joined: Thu Jun 29, 2006 3:01 am
Location: Hobart, Tasmania
Contact:

netbios not working between bridged interfaces

Tue Oct 31, 2006 1:33 pm

I have just used several RB532 boards as LAN wifi routers. Ether1 is used as the WAN port and goes to an ADSL modem. ether2 is plugged into the LAN switch and bridged to wlan1.

PC's connected via the wireless can't access windows shares by name (ie \\server\share). all works ok if IP addresses are used (ie \\10.0.0.1\share).

Is there a way to pass the netbios host info between bridged interfaces?
 
User avatar
janisk
MikroTik Support
MikroTik Support
Posts: 6283
Joined: Tue Feb 14, 2006 9:46 am
Location: Riga, Latvia

Tue Oct 31, 2006 2:40 pm

if ask me - i allways disable windows netbios protocol and use ip address, and never.

on the other hand bridge should forward all ports and stuff through, check your firewall for settings that could disable netbios
 
vk7zms
Member Candidate
Member Candidate
Topic Author
Posts: 227
Joined: Thu Jun 29, 2006 3:01 am
Location: Hobart, Tasmania
Contact:

Tue Oct 31, 2006 11:44 pm

I removed all firewall settings just to check, but it made no difference. I am sure it isn't a wireless problem because when I add ether 3 to the bridge - netbios info doesn't pass between ether2 and ether3.....
 
pedja
Long time Member
Long time Member
Posts: 684
Joined: Sat Feb 26, 2005 5:37 am

Wed Nov 01, 2006 8:06 am

Youhave to use WINS server if you want to see full functionality of the windows networking.

If you just want to replace IP's with coumputer names, then place static enties in local DNS.
 
vk7zms
Member Candidate
Member Candidate
Topic Author
Posts: 227
Joined: Thu Jun 29, 2006 3:01 am
Location: Hobart, Tasmania
Contact:

Wed Nov 01, 2006 2:29 pm

The Static DNS entries are a good idea for a "work around", Explaining to customers they have to manually add every new machine when they can buy an AP for $25.00 that will do it right out of the box is a bit tricky.........
 
User avatar
tneumann
Member
Member
Posts: 394
Joined: Sat Apr 16, 2005 6:38 pm
Location: Germany

Wed Nov 01, 2006 2:43 pm

The Static DNS entries are a good idea for a "work around", Explaining to customers they have to manually add every new machine when they can buy an AP for $25.00 that will do it right out of the box is a bit tricky.........
So what does that $25 AP do different in your opinion? What algorithm or technique does it provide that a RouterOS based AP with a correct bridging setup would not offer?


--Tom
 
vk7zms
Member Candidate
Member Candidate
Topic Author
Posts: 227
Joined: Thu Jun 29, 2006 3:01 am
Location: Hobart, Tasmania
Contact:

Thu Nov 02, 2006 12:07 am

Tom, I did not intend to indicate that any $25.00 home user AP could do things that MT OS can't. I have just over 120 MT licenses and I think it is a great OS. The point I was making was that static DNS entries was a good "work around" or "quick fix" to get the customer off my back, but there must be a setting somewhere that I am missing. My reasoning for thinking this is that at one sight they have an old Edimax AP that works between the LAN and WLAN as I had intended the MT box to.

There is 17 PC's in the office and 4 are Laptops. If I plug the laptops physically into the lan with a network cable, they can access the server by simply using \\sever\share. If they connect via the generic wireless AP they can also access shares in this way. If, However they access the network via the MT WLAN (bridged to an ethernet port that is connected to the LAN Switch), they can only access shares by IP address \\10.0.0.1\

Conclusion - there must be something in MT OS that I havn't configured correctly - Hence my post on the Forum :)
 
vk7zms
Member Candidate
Member Candidate
Topic Author
Posts: 227
Joined: Thu Jun 29, 2006 3:01 am
Location: Hobart, Tasmania
Contact:

Mon Feb 12, 2007 12:14 am

I havn't yet resolved it - MT support told me to turn on RSTP - but it did not fix the problem - I am sure it is nothing to do with the hardware platform, but rather the MT OS. I have tested on x86 systems RB530 RB153 RB230 and RB112, betwewn wired interfaces and wired to wirelesss etc - If you find out how to make it work - please please please post it here - I would be most grateful.
 
bside
just joined
Posts: 13
Joined: Tue Sep 19, 2006 2:56 pm

Thu Mar 29, 2007 2:08 pm

it's because Mikrotik doesn't support multicast and netbios uses those packets to discover each other.
the only solution is to use wins server or domain controller.
:(
 
The Grog
just joined
Posts: 10
Joined: Wed Aug 24, 2005 11:27 pm
Location: South Africa

Thu Mar 29, 2007 9:55 pm

As it should be. MT is great OS and should not be spoilt be something like this. Most uses of MK dictates that netbios should *NOT* be forwarded and I will be mighty disappointed if it did.

Install a WINS server or domain controller. Else use lmhost in the advanced network settings on a desktop on each pc to resolve IPs to a server or desktop on the other bridged network and make certain that netbios over tcp/ip is enabled.
 
User avatar
andrewluck
Forum Veteran
Forum Veteran
Posts: 702
Joined: Fri May 28, 2004 9:05 pm
Location: Norfolk, UK

Thu Mar 29, 2007 10:11 pm

Netbios doesn't use multi-cast for name resolution, in the absence of DNS, WINS or LMhosts it will use broadcast.


Regards

Andrew
 
vk7zms
Member Candidate
Member Candidate
Topic Author
Posts: 227
Joined: Thu Jun 29, 2006 3:01 am
Location: Hobart, Tasmania
Contact:

possible resolution

Fri Mar 30, 2007 2:07 am

Not sure if this will help you, but here is my experience and the fix.

setup - RB530
ether1 - PPPoE session to ISP
Bridge1 (Wlan1+ether2+ether3)

all windows machines connected to ether2,3 or wlan1 could connect to each other via IP address. Connection by host name was only possible between windows machines connected to the same interface (ie machines on ether1 ould talk to other machines on ether 1 but not on ether2 or wlan1). No amount of static DNS entries on the MT box or LMHOSTS entries made any difference.

In the end I discovered that the NAT rule used to NAT all internet traffic out through the PPPoE session was missing an outgoing interface.

the outgoing rule I was using was
0 ;;; LAN
chain=srcnat src-address=192.168.0.0/24 action=masquerad

the rule that finally fixed my problems was
0 ;;; LAN
chain=srcnat out-interface=netspace ADSL1 src-address=192.168.0.0/24 action=masquerade

What was happening was the NAT rule was Masquerading between the three bridge interfaces resulting in IP traffic being passed, but NetBIOS traffic being blocked.
 
User avatar
pinotage
just joined
Posts: 21
Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2005 7:06 pm
Location: South Africa

Thanks!

Thu Apr 05, 2007 8:37 pm

Thank you very much sir. This issue has come up in various posts and Mikrotik has been unable to say what was the cause or able to suggest a fix up to now.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: CZFan, MSN [Bot], OlegQuagoroyalry and 116 guests