Windows Vista 32 Bit has slowed down after joining a domain

  • Thread starter Thread starter Guest
  • Start date Start date
G

Guest

Dear Desktop Support Guru,

I have joined Windows Vista 32 bit to a Windows 2003 Small business server
domain that is running service pack 2. Since this time the PC has increased
the time it takes to do things. For example, if the start button is clicked,
you can wait for up to 60 seconds for the start menu to appear - and
sometimes a not responding menu appears. Are there any known issues or tips
and tweaks for this problem?

The Vista machine is running a Pentium 3 (D) CPU with 1 GB of ram and the
server is running a Pentium 3 (D) CPU with 2 GB of ram. The rest of the
domain comprises 11 Windows XP service pack 2 PC's.

Many thanks
 
Justin said:
Dear Desktop Support Guru,

I have joined Windows Vista 32 bit to a Windows 2003 Small business server
domain that is running service pack 2. Since this time the PC has
increased
the time it takes to do things. For example, if the start button is
clicked,
you can wait for up to 60 seconds for the start menu to appear - and
sometimes a not responding menu appears. Are there any known issues or
tips
and tweaks for this problem?

The Vista machine is running a Pentium 3 (D) CPU with 1 GB of ram and the
server is running a Pentium 3 (D) CPU with 2 GB of ram. The rest of the
domain comprises 11 Windows XP service pack 2 PC's.

Many thanks
Click to expand...


Is the Vista computer using the SBS Server for DNS and no other DNS servers?
Are you using roaming profiles?
 
Dear Kerry,

I am using the Small business server for DNS, PDC and exchange. It services
12 PC's all of them being Windows XP SP2 except the Vista machine. I am
running roaming profiles - but not on the Windows Vista PC.

The machine has slow response times working locally - i.e when clicking the
Start button.
 
Yes, but is the Vista client configured to use the SBS server for DNS? I
have seen the exact symptoms you describe when the Vista client DNS settings
were misconfigured. Please post the results of ipconfig /all from the Vista
client. This may not be the cause in your case but we have to eliminate it
first.
 
Dear Kerry, I ran an IPCONFIG /all and I get the following:

Ethernet adapter Local Area Connection:

Connection-specific DNS Suffix . : RAF.local
Description . . . . . . . . . . . : Intel(R) PRO/100 VE Network Connection
Physical Address. . . . . . . . . : 00-19-D1-59-CA-39
DHCP Enabled. . . . . . . . . . . : Yes
Autoconfiguration Enabled . . . . : Yes
Link-local IPv6 Address . . . . . : fe80::c1c3:8c96:154e:9944%8(Preferred)
IPv4 Address. . . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.0.129(Preferred)
Subnet Mask . . . . . . . . . . . : 255.255.255.0
Lease Obtained. . . . . . . . . . : Tuesday, June 19, 2007 9:58:02 AM
Lease Expires . . . . . . . . . . : Wednesday, June 20, 2007 10:58:26 PM
Default Gateway . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.0.2
DHCP Server . . . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.0.2
DHCPv6 IAID . . . . . . . . . . . : 201333201
DNS Servers . . . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.0.2
192.168.0.88
Primary WINS Server . . . . . . . : 192.168.0.88
NetBIOS over Tcpip. . . . . . . . : Enabled

192.168.0.2 is a Linux Firewall that provides ADSL internet access
192.168.0.88 is the 2003 Small business server.

Many thanks!
 
The DNS is pointing to the Linux firewall before the SBS server. In Active
Directory and particularly with SBS the all the AD clients should point only
to the SBS server. With XP you can sometimes get away with the configuration
you have. Vista doesn't like it all. All the computers in the SBS domain
should be configured to use the SBS server for DNS. The SBS DNS server
should be set up with forwarders to a couple of outside DNS servers. Try
setting the Vista box to use only the SBS for DNS and see what happens.
Personally I would reconfigure the DHCP server on the Linux firewall to do
this for all the computers on the network.
 
I experience this problem also. I experience it particularly when I take an
AD-joined laptop and carry it to another location, such as a friend's house
or coffee shop. When I do this, and the provider (e.g. Comcast or T-Mobile,
because I know the problems occur there) blocks port 445 outgoing, the
symptoms will arise. In particular, any function that requires interaction
with Explorer (.exe) will take 30-90 seconds to complete. This includes, for
example, saving a downloaded file using Firefox. Because Firefox integrates
with Explorer to save files (I think to render the icons), when I try to save
a file using firefox in this environment, the download will block for 30-90
seconds before proceeding.

It seems to be that Explorer is blocking to perform some sort of Active
Directory action which requires port 445 (microsoft-ds) on which to
communicate. Explorer resolves a name for the AD action but must wait for
the TCP timeout to occur before returning control to the calling application.

I don't use isolated DNS, so my Active Directory DNS is visible from any
host on the Internet. I can see in other deployments why this symptom would
not arise -- because if the DNS were isolated, the host would not have an AD
server to attempt a connection, and thus would not have to wait for the TCP
timeout.

I would not be feasible for me to put an AD server at every location,
because I have about 2 PCs per location, so it's also difficult for me to
isolate the DNS.

This problem occurs with or without roaming profiles. It occurs on brand
new Vista machines recently joined to the domain. This problem also
exhibited itself to a lesser degree in Windows XP.

One work-around that often works is to establish a VPN connection to one of
the domain controllers. In this way, microsoft-ds traffic can pass
unobstructed, and the problem goes away immediately. Unfortunately, it's
cumbersome to instruct other users to establish a VPN connection to keep
their machine from becoming non-responsive.

This to me is clearly a design flaw or design oversight, or possibly just an
unsupported configuration.

I would very much appreciate any suggestions for alleviating this problem.
I'm also happy to provide additional details if a Microsoft rep takes
interest in reproducing the problem.

Sincerely,
Jason R. Coombs
 
Back
Top