Novell Map Network Drive fails: "Path could not be found" error

One of my users is unable to map a drive letter for a path on one of my NW6 servers.
We need to map the path to a drive letter to support an application that doesn't
like UNC Paths.
Any attempt to map a drive letter on this volume fails with a "Path could not be found" error.

Another user in the same department can map the same folder on the same
server to a drive letter with no problem. This user cannot.
However this user can access the folder via its UNC path with
no problem. It's not a rights issue, because the user can read, write, delete, etc. the
contents of the directory with no problem. It's just the drive letter mapping that
fails.

Both clients can successfully map multiple drive letters on the main file server.

The clients are Windows XP with SP2 and the 4.90sp2 Novell client installed. Servers are SBS 6.0.
This is the same network on which I recently installed edir 8.7.3, as mentioned in a couple of
previous questions.

I've tried reinstalling the client, but that didn't help.

Any suggestions?
LVL 19
billmercerAsked:
Who is Participating?
 
ShineOnCommented:
Check your license search policy to make sure the server will search up to where the license is.  Alternatively, install the license in the server context.  Make sure it's the right server license version.
If this server doesn't hold any replicas, make sure it has a reference server.

Also - how many servers do you have?  I just double-checked, and I was mistaken - you get up to 2 servers for each server license you buy with SBS6.0, and up to 4 server licenses total in your tree, but apparently you have to make sure the licenses (and the associated servers) get installed in different containers.  That went to more with SBS 6.5.  I thought it was 5, but it might be "virtually unlimited" just like regular 6.5's licensing.
0
 
ShineOnCommented:
Check your licensing.  The user licenses should NOT be associated to a server.  Use iManager or nwadmn32 - Console One can't do licensing assignments.  I'll bet some of the licenses are associated to server A and some to server B.  The user licenses in NetWare 6.x (even SBS) should only be associated to a user object. I have seen much like what you're describing happen when user licenses have server associations.

If that isn't it, try the 4.9 client's post-SP2 patch for SRVLOC.SYS.  That seems to fix a 'cannot locate server" login script error, which is similar to what you're seeing.
0
 
billmercerAuthor Commented:
Well, 25 licenses were definitely associated with my primary file server. I removed that association, but I won't be able to test the results til tomorrow when the user returns. Are there any possible consequences to this change that I should watch out for?

While looking at the licenses, I noticed something odd. It looks like half of my licenses are in my .organization, and the other half are in the .OU. This seems kind of silly. Is there any reason not to move them all together under one object or the other? What's the best practice in such a situation?


(I've already got the SRVLOC.SYS update installed, BTW. I have most of the post-SP2 updates installed.)
0
Cloud Class® Course: CompTIA Cloud+

The CompTIA Cloud+ Basic training course will teach you about cloud concepts and models, data storage, networking, and network infrastructure.

 
ShineOnCommented:
With NW6.x user licenses, you put them at or higher in the tree than the users, unless you are in a WAN situation where you don't want the users going across the WAN to get licenses, in which case you'd put them at the highest location in their partition.

If you are in a single location, having them all at the org level works just fine.

License search can't go down, only up the tree.

Keep in mind that if you still use traditional queue-based printing, the print server takes a license, so also has to be able to find one.

Admins of bigger trees can limit the search policy so users don't go searching past their branch's license container.

The biggest consequence is you won't have user licenses that will restrict access only to the server that they were associated to.
0
 
billmercerAuthor Commented:
I've got a small self-contained network, and my tree is pretty flat, so I guess that means I probably won't have any problems. (knock on plastic)

0
 
billmercerAuthor Commented:
Well, at first I thought all was well. When the user arrived in the AM, she was able to map the drive letter. However a bit later when she rebooted, it failed again, same exact situation as yesterday.  I've not been able to get it to work since. None of the user licenses are associated with a server anymore.

I did notice error messages on the server in question that mentioned the Cache Memory Allocator was running out of memory. I don't know if that's relevant or not.
0
 
ShineOnCommented:
Hmmm ..  Could be ..

Are you doing this mapping using a login script or is it being mapped by the user on the PC?

If it's being mapped on the PC, is it being done using the Windows Explorer or My Network Places "map network drive" or by the Novell Map Network Drive function (either off the Exporer context menu or the systray "N" menu)?

If it's being done with the Windows Explorer "map network drive" try doing it with the Novell Map Network Drive.

If it's being done through the context menu using the "my network places" Explorer icon, expanding Novell Connections, is it being done against the server/volume/path or against the tree/o/ou/volume_object/path ?
0
 
billmercerAuthor Commented:
I've tried all of the above with no luck. First I noticed it failing from the login script, then I tried doing it manually using Novell Map Network Drive. I have tried mapping from both the Netware Servers and NDS Tree objects.

In light of the out of memory issue, I'm going to try rebooting the server and see if that makes any difference.



0
 
ShineOnCommented:
If it's being done in a login script, be sure to use the volume object in the mapping, and not server\volume.  

For example:

Good:   MAP ROOT R:=.myserver_myvol.myou.myorg:dir1\dir2\
Bad:     MAP ROOT R:=myserver/myvol:dir1\dir2\

They both can work, but it's recommended to use the object.  There are recorded incidents (not that I've found for 6.x, but still...) that one way of mapping works better than the other way.

I think part of the problem with one way working and the other not can be attributed to switches/routers/firewalls blocking multicast, or otherwise messing with service location protocol.  The services that are logged in eDirectory by SLP will refer the request directly to the service's address when referred to using object names.  If referred to by server name or IP address, it  appears not to use eDirectory to find SLP services, so it tries multicasting to find the service to try to connect, and I don't think login script mapping uses DNS to locate named services...
0
 
ShineOnCommented:
Never mind.  I was typing that while you were sending your response... ;)
0
 
billmercerAuthor Commented:
Well, after rebooting the server, the one user I was having trouble with was then able to map the drive. However then the other user who had previously mapped OK is now getting the error. So it does seem like it's probably license-related somehow. What else can I try? Is just removing the server reference from the license object enough? Should I remove and reinstall the licenses?
Is there some magic "fix licenses" button somewhere? :)

0
 
ShineOnCommented:
How's your SLP set up - is your main server set up as a DA, with this problem server set up so it's aware of the DA through SLP.CFG?
Do you have a different switch between this server and the users in question than with the other server?  Have you checked to make sure you aren't getting comm errors on the server's NIC?
0
 
billmercerAuthor Commented:
Basically it looks like SLP isn't really being used. I've never done anything with it on this network. There's an SLPDA object for my primary file server in the tree, but I've never touched it. All of the SLP.CFG files are all empty except for comments, and there's nothing in any of my startup or autoexec files about SLP either.

Both servers are connected to the same switch.
I haven't seen any obvious indications of communication errors, is there some specific place I should look?


0
 
ShineOnCommented:
Both servers should be running SLP.NLM.  The DA server should be running SLPDA.NLM.  Check that, first, and if they aren't "make it so" as Picard would say.

Add the IP of the main server in the SLP.CFG of the second server.   Format is: DA IPv4, <da.server.ip.address>

Don't change the SLP.CFG on the main server.  The SLP DA should never point to itself.

Do a SLP RESET on both servers.  The default SLP setup should have created an SLP scope container object in your tree when you did your install - check in there to see if all the services on both servers show up now.

Once that's done, instead of your clients multicasting to find the services made available by contacting the SA on each server, it should unicast to the right place once it has located the DA.

If you had SLPDA running already on your main server and the secondary server wasn't  registering its services with the DA, that could explain oddball things happening when users attempt access to the secondary server.
0
 
billmercerAuthor Commented:
Well, it's looking like I have a boogered SLP installation on this tree.
SLP.NLM is definitely loaded on all servers, but SLPDA isn't running on any of them. Also, there was no SLP scope object in the tree. I'm creating one now. Sheesh, what a can of worms....


 

0
 
billmercerAuthor Commented:
Well, I've now got what seems to be a consistent SLP environment, one server acting as DA, others looking to it. All the servers are now talking nice to each other, and if I do DISPLAY SLP SERVICES I get a nice list of services being advertised from each server.

But I have still gotten the same mapping error message. It looks like it affects different people depending on the order in which they log in, which makes me think it's somehow licensing related. Any more suggestions?



0
 
ShineOnCommented:
What is the number associated with the error message?  Is it 8809, 8901, 0057, 890, ... ?  Is it from LGNWNT32.DLL or some other module?
0
 
billmercerAuthor Commented:
I don't remember any error number.  As I recall, it just shows the path and says "The path could not be found."
I'll get a screencap of it tomorrow when I have enough people logging in to make it happen.
 

0
 
billmercerAuthor Commented:
Here's the exact text of the error dialog...

"The path could not be found.
 Make sure you typed the path correctly and try again."

There's no number or indication of the module.
And of course, I've confirmed the path is correct.
The mapping works for the first couple of people who connect to the server, then it fails for anyone after that.  


0
 
ShineOnCommented:
It sounds like you have a server license problem.  It might think that you're still running in the default unlicensed, 2-user server mode you get when you first install the server, if you don't have a server license to apply to it.

I don't know how second thru fifth (I think you're limited to 5) server licenses work with SBS6.  SBS6.5, the one server license can be associated with all 5 servers, but 6.0 might require you to download a license.
0
 
ShineOnCommented:
If you do have a good server license for that server and it is associated, you might have to reinstall licensing on that server.  This TID might have some relevance, even though it says it's for a post-NW6SP3 licensing problem: http://support.novell.com/cgi-bin/search/searchtid.cgi?/10083707.htm
0
 
ShineOnCommented:
You can check that server's error log to see if you're getting C0001006 errors - that might help confirm the diagnosis.
0
 
billmercerAuthor Commented:
I have tons of server licenses, but only one was associated with a server. I associated a license with each server, and tried again, but still had the same issue. I then tried removing the licenses, deleting the server's NLS_LSP_ object, reinstalling the licenses and running SETUPNLS for that server. I rebooted just for good measure, and tried again. Still getting the same error.
I don't see C0001006 in any of my logs, but I am seeing Error # C0001002, which seems to be a similar error. "Unable to obtain a connection license unit"

Is there anything else I can try? This is starting to get on my nerves...



0
 
billmercerAuthor Commented:
Searches go all the way up the tree.

The licenses look like the right version. (I did notice a few NW5 licenses hanging around... from before the upgrade I suppose.)

I've got 2 working servers and one development (aka play) server . But all are in the same container, perhaps that's the problem? Should I try moving the problem server to a different context?

The problem server does have a replica, BTW.

0
 
ShineOnCommented:
The docs I saw on SBS6.0 seem to suggest that if you have more than 2 servers to have at least one in a separate container, along with its server license.  Worth a shot.
0
 
billmercerAuthor Commented:
I'll give it a try tomorrow. Thanks for sticking with this.
:)
0
 
ShineOnCommented:
No probs.
0
 
billmercerAuthor Commented:
YIKES! Apparently something I did yesterday has completely balled up my licensing.

This morning when I came in, I'm getting this error for every user and printer on either server...
POLICY MANAGER - (5.00-015): Unable to obtain a connection license unit. Operation will continue.  Contact your network administrator to verify that licensing services are functioning properly and that license units are available. Error # C0001002

In addition, I'm getting this error on a legacy printer queue:
 4-20-2005   8:01:14 am:    DS-10551.53-268
   Severity = 1  Locus = 17  Class = 19
   Intruder lock-out on account .7+Snake Lj4 Q.Gainesville.nccer [20104488:0060B01CAE8A]

0
 
ShineOnCommented:
Ouch!  Can you put the server/license association back to where it was before last night?
0
 
billmercerAuthor Commented:
I'm trying that now...
0
 
billmercerAuthor Commented:
OK, after several hours of panic, nail-chewing, and a visit from my local CNE, it looks like the problem was a server license version issue after all.
It seems I had some 6.0 FULL (not SBS) server licenses in my bag-o-licenses folder. After deleting and reinstalling, the main file server picked up the full license, and suddenly the SBS users couldn't connect. Removing the bogus license and reinstalling the original license from a backup copy fixed the crisis. Now I'm back to where I was originally, with the mapping error when folks try to use the second server. At least this time I know what the cause is.

Per Novell's channel rep for this area, I can only use one server with my SBS, and if I want a second server I need a second license. What really threw me is that I did have two servers with SBS5, but somehow I lost one in the upgrade to 6.0.

Anyway, now I need to decide if I should just get a single SBS6 server license, or go ahead with the 6.5/OES upgrade, which I planned to do this year anyway, and which would eliminate server license issues.


 

0
 
ShineOnCommented:
From what I understand, you can copy the SBS license the main server is using to another container with another server in it and use the same license for 2 servers instead of downloading the 2nd license that you're supposed to be able to get with SBS6.0.

For a third (and fourth) server you'd have to buy another server license, and then download a license or 2, but you still have to have more than one container for your servers, at least if you go with more than 2...
0
 
ShineOnCommented:
I thot you were going with SBS 6.5...  you've decided to go full-blown OES along with upgrading all your other licensing to full-blown (GW, BM. Zen?)
0
 
ShineOnCommented:
As far as your upgrade, say for example you started with 2 SBS5 25-user licenses.  If you did a SBS 6.0 with 25 users and then a 25-user additive as your upgrade from 5, you'd have had the right to have 2 SBS6.0 servers plus 50 users, effectively doubling your user capacity while keeping the number of servers the same.  Or, maybe you only used one of the 2 5.0 licenses, giving you the same user count as well as the same number of servers without having to upgrade both licenses...  My guess, not having been there in your head ;) and going from what I would have done depending on the circumstance/need.  You hinted money's not exactly coming out your ears, so it's a likely scenario that maybe you thought you'd save a buck somewhere along the line without losing either the number of servers or user connections... dunno.  Just a guess, like I said - maybe help jog your memory.

If you actually remember upgrading both server licenses, you should have another SBS6.0 server license laying around somewhere, so you could get that "up to 4" I mentioned...
0
 
billmercerAuthor Commented:
"From what I understand, you can copy the SBS license the main server is using to another container with another server in it and use the same license for 2 servers instead of downloading the 2nd license that you're supposed to be able to get with SBS6.0."

Can you point me to a link about this? The Novell rep said no way.

By 6.5/OES I meant the new SBS that's still basically 6.5, but they're calling it something else to keep it in line with the Linux SBS. No way in heck could I afford to go full on all that stuff. SBS is the only reason I'm not running a bunch of Win98 machines in a workgroup...


0
 
billmercerAuthor Commented:
The upgrade was three years ago, and basically I told our reseller to "make it so" and let them do the upgrade, so I may not have ever known.

"maybe help jog your memory."
These days my memory doesn't even get off the couch, let alone go jogging... :/

0
 
ShineOnCommented:
http://support.novell.com/cgi-bin/search/searchtid.cgi?/10074523.htm

Paragraph #2 states "... The second server license is free with with every purchase of a SBS server license. You can either install the same license a second time, but it has to go into a different container in the tree. Or you can contact Novell directly to request a second one. You can also have more than two servers in the Tree, but you have to purchase a second server license, which will allow you to install two additional servers following the same rules .."
0
 
billmercerAuthor Commented:
Thank you sir!
I've forwarded the link and the quote to my rep, and asked him to please produce my free license. :)

0
Question has a verified solution.

Are you are experiencing a similar issue? Get a personalized answer when you ask a related question.

Have a better answer? Share it in a comment.

All Courses

From novice to tech pro — start learning today.