LMHOST?

  • Thread starter Thread starter qas
  • Start date Start date
Q

qas

On a W2K Pro / XP Pro workgroup is there any benefit in "check"ing
Enable LMHOST lookup?

thanks

q
 
I neglected one detail :-)
Is there a benefit in enabling LMHOST on a workgroup with DHCP?

Thanks

q
 
If the IP addresses of all resources are constantly changing, then lmhosts
files are of little use, and in fact, should/could not be used. However, if
this is the case, then it is at least worth asking whether exclusive
reliance on DHCP without reservations is appropriate for the particular
workgroup. If accessing shared resources is important to you, then it is
usually worthwhile to employ redundant/alternative means of accessing those
resources. The use of static IPs for shared network resources makes sense
because it allows for easy and seamless lmhosts name resolution and direct
SMB hosting in the event of browse list or broadcast failure. General
networking theory advocates static or reserved IPs for all servers - a
'server' is any machine regardless of operating system which provides
resources accessible over the network.

Doug Sherman
MCSE, MCSA, MCP+I, MVP.
 
Thanks for the elaboration.

I prefer static IPs as well and originally implemented them. I reverted
to DHCP because I consistently ran into problems on 1 machine where the
DLink USB Adapter and Zone Alarm just didnt get along under static IP (I
think the adapter is to blame). With DHCP I refer to the subnet and the
dlink adapter is not so troublesome.

I have now sidestepped some Network Places issues by scripting the
mapping. Current hot item is the inability of 1 W2K (SP4) machine to
print to the network printer or even open the properties dialogue in
less than many many minutes.

Give me the days of DOS, some batch files and a null modem

regards

q
 
Back
Top