If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#46
|
|||
|
|||
What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows?
Arlen Holder
news comp.mobile.android, wrote: On Sun, 21 Oct 2018 16:42:22 -0400, Paul wrote: Mapping a share to a drive letter, works for smb. https://www.howtogeek.com/118452/how...drives-from-th e-command-prompt-in-windows/ Hi Paul, I appreciate you're trying to help, since this is the holy grail for mounting FTP "shares" over WiFi as a drive letter on Windows using nothing on Windows but the native "net use" command (which we _know_ must work!). It's not a holy grail, and I'll remind you, I offered to tell you exactly what you needed to do; with one condition. An apology for your assinine comments towards me. You didn't provide one, I didn't provide you the detailed information you're continuing to ask others for help with. How's that working out for you so far? I'm sorry this is so complex - where I think only Frank Slootweg and I seem to have a clear handle on the complexity. It's *NOT* complex. With respect to mounting Android FTP "shares" as a drive letter on Windows using "net use" syntax.. the problem, as I see it, is _only_ of syntax. Nothing else. You clearly don't understand how FTP works then. It's not an issue of syntax. UNC is NOT understood by FTP, period. -- To prevent yourself from being a victim of cyber stalking, it's highly recommended you visit he https://tekrider.net/pages/david-brooks-stalker.php ================================================== = Sleep is nature's way of telling you to go to bed. |
Ads |
#47
|
|||
|
|||
What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows?
Arlen Holder
news comp.mobile.android, wrote: If I'm not clear Rudy, let me know. BTW, to add value, it came up in the a.c.f thread the following, which others may benefit from, particularly those, like Rudy, on older versions of Windows - which is very useful technical information for those of you on older Windows who still wish to do what we've done here to mount Android file systems onto Windows in order to run Windows commands directly on them: I see you didn't credit me for telling you about this... Yet, you felt free to quote directly from me, verbatim. Nice of you. So, about that apology for having called me a moron, previously? Since when do you quote morons and proceed to claim what they (not you) wrote is useful technical information? BIG ****ING GRIN "Win2k and down net use does NOT support WebDAV on their own. You have to use 3rd party utilities if you want to map a drive via webDAV in those cases." Ayep. Would you like the MID of MY message that you quoted this from? *I* was the one who told you about this, not pooh, not frank, not anybody else. *I* did. Pooh for example misinformed you by telling you that net use only supported samba. Windows XP has been around for a very long ****ing time and has supported webdav natively via built in client since it's release...nearly two decades ago. There's no valid reason for a 'tech' or 'network' wizard, engineer, etc, not to know that. Unless, they've been BULL****TING about their expertise the entire time. Here's what you initially wrote about it though, until a couple of others on the thread jumped in to explain how off you were... Message-ID: http://al.howardknight.net/msgid.cgi?ID=154114027600 From: Arlen Holder Newsgroups: alt.comp.freeware Subject: Does freeware exist on Windows that will mount (as a drive letter) Android connected via USB as MTP? Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2018 19:25:07 -0000 (UTC) Organization: Mixmin Message-ID: Is it just me, or are these two verbatim quotes about "net use" WebDav support in this thread, both from the same person, completely contradictory? Verbatim quote 1: "Win2k and down net use does NOT support WebDAV on their own. You have to use 3rd party utilities if you want to map a drive via webDAV in those cases." Verbatim quote 2: "Starting with Windows XP, net use does support WebDAV, natively. Do you remember one of the touted new features of XP? The so called 'web folders'? Well, that's how it works." Am I the only one having trouble comprehending Diesel's posts? *** end paste Since Rudy is on WinXP (I believe), then maybe _he_ can act like an adult to figure out what those 3rd-party utilities might be. That would be an adult thing to do - which would be to _add value_. But it would take an adult to actually add technical value to this thread. Indeed, You quoted a piece of my post and credited it for it's technical value. Any particular reason you didn't credit me as the author? It's easy enough to verify I wrote it. Is this an example of your superior adult attitude vs my own, Arlen? It seems rather childish to quote me, admit the technical value and not credit me for the information you acquired, at no cost. I've learned in the brief (thankfully) period of time I've interacted with you though that you aren't what you claim to be and don't do the things you claim you'll do. You're intentionally dishonest, shifty, and rather obnoxious with your grade school level insults. It would be much more amusing if it wasn't the upper limit of your abilities. That I find to be somewhat, saddening. Case in point: Message-ID: http://al.howardknight.net/msgid.cgi?ID=154114027600 From: Arlen Holder Newsgroups: alt.comp.freeware Subject: Does freeware exist on Windows that will mount (as a drive letter) Android connected via USB as MTP? Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2018 19:25:07 -0000 (UTC) Organization: Mixmin Message-ID: Is it just me, or are these two verbatim quotes about "net use" WebDav support in this thread, both from the same person, completely contradictory? Verbatim quote 1: "Win2k and down net use does NOT support WebDAV on their own. You have to use 3rd party utilities if you want to map a drive via webDAV in those cases." Verbatim quote 2: "Starting with Windows XP, net use does support WebDAV, natively. Do you remember one of the touted new features of XP? The so called 'web folders'? Well, that's how it works." Am I the only one having trouble comprehending Diesel's posts? *** end paste -- To prevent yourself from being a victim of cyber stalking, it's highly recommended you visit he https://tekrider.net/pages/david-brooks-stalker.php ================================================== = If God hadn't wanted me to be paranoid, He wouldn't have given me such a vivid imagination. |
#48
|
|||
|
|||
What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows?
Arlen Holder
news comp.mobile.android, wrote: On 22 Oct 2018 13:51:21 GMT, Frank Slootweg wrote: 1. 'Map network drive' and 'net use' can not handle FTP syntax, period. To be clear to all, Frank and I are in complete agreement on _everything_ that Frank wrote in that post above. Frank wasn't the first to tell you that you cannot use UNC via FTP. I was, several weeks ago. Specifically, after much experimentation, this morning, I gave up on trying to mount Android FTP shares over WiFi as a "removable drive" drive letter using only native Windows "net use" commands. Again, weeks ago, I already told you that you couldn't use it in the manner in which you were trying. Ironically, as Frank astutely noted, "net use" works great with WebDAV shares under the exact same conditions (even down to my tests changing the ports and login credentials). Of course it does. It has since Windows XP, as I told you, previously. I changed the login credentials and ports to match them as best I could, and the results were astounding (to me). WebDAV works: o net use X: \\192.168.1.7@8000\DCIM\Camera /user:francis francis Yep. FTP fails: o net use X: \\192.168.1.7@8000\DCIM\Camera /user:francis francis Yep. Why? See below. Hell if I know why. That's obvious. You know very little...In spite of your claims to the contrary. Someone (like Rudy?) who understands Windows will have to explain why. It's quite simple. FTP does NOT support UNC. UNC and FTP don't know each other. Never have, never will. FTP is an ancient by todays standards protocol; no changes are going to be made to it anytime soon to give you any UNC support. That's just not happening. So much code would have to be modified to allow for it, that you'd just wind up breaking a pile of ftp servers and clients. For no gain. Shame you wanted to be an immature little asshole towards me for weeks now. You could have been using drive letters, mounted to your internal/external memory (available or not, your choice) via your entire network, had you manned up for what you did, accepted responsibility for it, 0wned your ****up as they say where I'm from. In the unlikely event you didn't already know, you've exceeded the amount of time I was willing to wait on that apology by a significant margin. Perhaps that's why you're slowing down on posts in that thread and appear to be giving up? Can't find anyone willing to show you how to do it, even for nothing more than to spite me? Pooh backed out when offered, I noticed. Nice of the idiot to suggest a symlink to you, wasn't it? How did that advice workout for you Arlen? Come to think of it, has any of his suggestions (I bet he laughed his ****ing ass off reading your posts about libmtp) actually given you those 'DOS' friendly drive letters you've been asking for? You know that Windows NT doesn't have DOS though, right? What you're calling 'DOS' is an emulated console environment. With 64bit systems, 16bit native code emulation is no more. It can still be run on those systems, but a 3rd party app is required to play middleman. There's no IO.SYS/MSDOS.SYS, ibm.com, etc etc etc, used for the purposes of an NT startup, Arlen. Unlike windows 9x family and the 3x family, NT doesn't ride on top of, or share code common natively with DOS. It's not a glorified 'shell'. Remember, pooh told you that net use only supported samba. YOU (yes, you) noticed net use (by trying it no doubt, you didn't know beforehand) noticed it worked with webdav too. I told you it has supported webdav since the Windows XP days and even went so far as to provide a demonstration of it that was touted as a new 'feature' of Windows XP. Viva la 'Web Folders'. Hehehe. Windows XP has been out for a long long time Arlen. There's no excuse for someone like pooh with the self proclaimed expertise (on multiple occasions mind you) to not have known that. None whatsoever. Pooh slipped up again (it's rare, but it happens) and showed his hand again. He's a considerable bull****ter, don't ya know. Ahem, well, you know that now... [g] Despite still praising him and intentionally not crediting me for my posts that you find are beneficial. I think that's pretty good, considering you've previously referred to me as a moron, stupid, etc. I'm stupid, yet I provided two posts (hehe, quite a bit more, but who's counting) that you yourself admit have technical value. Thanks, I guess? -- To prevent yourself from being a victim of cyber stalking, it's highly recommended you visit he https://tekrider.net/pages/david-brooks-stalker.php ================================================== = Man who run behind car get exhausted. |
#49
|
|||
|
|||
What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows?
Arlen Holder
news comp.mobile.android, wrote: To pay Frank back the favor, I showed him (and everyone else) how to mount the WebDAV shares using only native Windows - which only Frank seems to appreciate the sheer beauty of when you compare what happens with FTP shares under the same circumstances. ROFL. I'd be very surprised to learn that nobody knew that prior to your 'demonstration'. And, you may thank ME! for the background history concerning it. Especially considering you've already admitted it's technical value. [g] While I am likely only of average intelligence, you, Rudy, are so far below the bell curve that it's shocking that nobody has informed you yet. I'm sorry, but, based on the limited amount of interactions I've had with you, and this example post: Message-ID: http://al.howardknight.net/msgid.cgi?ID=154114027600 It would appear to be you who has information processing problems. Not Rudy. -- To prevent yourself from being a victim of cyber stalking, it's highly recommended you visit he https://tekrider.net/pages/david-brooks-stalker.php ================================================== = It is incumbent on us to avoid archaisms. |
#50
|
|||
|
|||
What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows?
Diesel wrote:
Arlen Holder news comp.mobile.android, wrote: [...] WebDAV works: o net use X: \\192.168.1.7@8000\DCIM\Camera /user:francis francis Yep. FTP fails: o net use X: \\192.168.1.7@8000\DCIM\Camera /user:francis francis Yep. Why? See below. Hell if I know why. That's obvious. You know very little...In spite of your claims to the contrary. Someone (like Rudy?) who understands Windows will have to explain why. It's quite simple. FTP does NOT support UNC. UNC and FTP don't know each other. Never have, never will. FTP is an ancient by todays standards protocol; no changes are going to be made to it anytime soon to give you any UNC support. That's just not happening. So much code would have to be modified to allow for it, that you'd just wind up breaking a pile of ftp servers and clients. For no gain. Not that it matters, because the end result is the same, but (IMO) the issue is not so much that "FTP does NOT support UNC", but that 'net use' (and the underlying components) have no support to map a drive letter to a FTP server. Theoretically speaking, 'net use' *could* have a FTP syntax similar to the WebDAV syntax. The point is that is *does not* have it. 'net use' can/does already handle 'dotted domain name' in its '/USER:' option, can/does already handle IP addresses in its 'computer' name parameter and can/does already handle port numbers, so there is no technical reason that 'net use' couldn't map a drive letter to a ftp server. The third-party add-one FtpUse [1] shows that all of this is techincally feasible, it 'just' hasn't been implemented. :-) So (IMO) the point is that - for very good reasons - Microsoft (and others) never added FTP (server) support to 'net use' et al. [...] [1] https://www.ferrobackup.com/map-ftp-as-disk.html |
#51
|
|||
|
|||
What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows?
Diesel Fri,
02 Nov 2018 08:03:30 GMT in alt.comp.freeware, wrote: Arlen Holder news comp.mobile.android, wrote: On Tue, 23 Oct 2018 12:10:45 -0000 (UTC), Arlen Holder wrote: If the next technical question I post has only 1 to 3 adult responses from the likes of Frank Slootweg, Paul, Andy Burns, ML, and me, then we _all_ benefit since we're the only ones who added any value in this thread (IMHO). To continue the adult task of adding technical value, this snippet from a.c.f implies that the older WinXP _can_ handle "net use" mounting of WebDAV servers: "Starting with Windows XP, net use does support WebDAV, natively. Do you remember one of the touted new features of XP? The so called 'web folders'? Well, that's how it works." Which we can combine with this related snippet from the same person: "Win2k and down net use does NOT support WebDAV on their own. You have to use 3rd party utilities if you want to map a drive via webDAV in those cases." I appreciate you once again admitting that something I wrote I'll show your new found audience that you lifted those quotes directly from me in a moment) does have technical value. Now, explain to me how I'm stupid, a moron, etc, when you've quoted my words, verbatim twice now in this very thread and admitted it's technical value. And yes, I'm going to use the post that clearly shows you really do have reading comprehension issues as proof of where those quotes originated as well as your initial, FAILURE TO COMPREHEND what I wrote. To the point where you attempted to attack me and invited others to join in. [g] As anyone who follows the thread can see though, it blew up in your face. You initially didn't understand what I wrote, and, attempted do your lack of understanding to attack me; and you quickly learned, it was YOU in error. Here's your post, questioning what you've now admitted for the second time in the same thread IS valuable technical information, provided by me and only by me. [g] Message-ID: http://al.howardknight.net/msgid.cgi?ID=154114027600 From: Arlen Holder Newsgroups: alt.comp.freeware Subject: Does freeware exist on Windows that will mount (as a drive letter) Android connected via USB as MTP? Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2018 19:25:07 -0000 (UTC) Organization: Mixmin Message-ID: Is it just me, or are these two verbatim quotes about "net use" WebDav support in this thread, both from the same person, completely contradictory? Verbatim quote 1: "Win2k and down net use does NOT support WebDAV on their own. You have to use 3rd party utilities if you want to map a drive via webDAV in those cases." Verbatim quote 2: "Starting with Windows XP, net use does support WebDAV, natively. Do you remember one of the touted new features of XP? The so called 'web folders'? Well, that's how it works." Am I the only one having trouble comprehending Diesel's posts? *** end paste You may continue ignoring my newer posts which are asking you point blank, blunt, very pointed questions calling you out for the things you wrote that aren't true, if you'd like. It won't stop me from continuing to point out your mistakes, and, laugh a bit about it as I do. You've earned that from me, at this point, Arlen. You want to act like an immature child, I'll happily treat you like one. Matter of fact, I'm going to convert your question into a tagline for future laughs for others benefit. Yes, it's that kind of tagline material. Especially when you call others, idiots, stupid, morons, etc.. And then you go and do something as stupid as you did in that post...Do you see the irony Arlen? It's staring you right in the face, nice n bright. Btw, I re-inserted alt.comp.freeware; I thought some/maybe one other might like to see you trolling other newsgroups and lifting my material verbatim as you do so. It's so nice of you to again, admit it has technical value, after two other posters had to explain how the statements aren't contradictory. You realize by posting that question with those examples, you can no longer deny that you actually do, as in real life, have a reading comprehension issue.. Right? I mean, seriously, there's no way for you to deny it now. You really stepped into a pile of **** this time, Arlen. I don't think you're going to be able to save those shoes. *BUMP* ROFL. -- To prevent yourself from being a victim of cyber stalking, it's highly recommended you visit he https://tekrider.net/pages/david-brooks-stalker.php ================================================== = What is the difference between mechanical engineers and civil engineers? Mechanical engineers build weapons and civil engineers build targets. |
#52
|
|||
|
|||
What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows?
Frank Slootweg
news 19:05:05 GMT in alt.comp.freeware, wrote: Theoretically speaking, 'net use' *could* have a FTP syntax similar to the WebDAV syntax. The point is that is *does not* have it. It doesn't because the ftp server itself really wouldn't know what net use was asking of it. It would have to remain resident and serve as a middleman to maintain a mounted drive letter to a share on the ftp server. 'net use' can/does already handle 'dotted domain name' in its '/USER:' option, can/does already handle IP addresses in its 'computer' name parameter and can/does already handle port numbers, so there is no technical reason that 'net use' couldn't map a drive letter to a ftp server. The third-party add-one FtpUse [1] shows that all of this is techincally feasible, it 'just' hasn't been implemented. :-) The third party ftpuse does it by doing what I described above. [g] It remains resident to provide the mapped drive letter because it has to do the go between work. IE: translate ftp server commands back and forth so the user can copy/paste files, open files, etc on the 'mapped drive' which isn't really a mapped drive at all. It's a virtual drive provided by what amounts to a semi modern tsr (do you remember those?) that's doing the heavy lifting. It also has to check in with the ftp server every so often, so the ftp server doesn't drop the connection due to inactivity, unless the server isn't configured for that. Mine always are just because I don't want someone sitting at a prompt all day,wasting a slot that someone else could be using who actually wants to get files from the server or send some, if they have the permission. So, squatting (sitting idle at a prompt just to be sure you can get files whenever you want) is heavily frowned upon and if continued could lead up to account deletion. I never allow unlimited connections due to the nature of the contents of the server, it's very restrictive and private access (as in you have to know someone who already has an established account that's willing to risk theirs by vouching for you to get one) So if you ****up as a new member, not only do you get ****canned, but the person who got you in goes out the door with you, no 2nd chance. -- To prevent yourself from being a victim of cyber stalking, it's highly recommended you visit he https://tekrider.net/pages/david-brooks-stalker.php ================================================== = How can you tell the dance from the dancer? |
#53
|
|||
|
|||
What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows?
Diesel wrote:
Frank Slootweg news 19:05:05 GMT in alt.comp.freeware, wrote: Theoretically speaking, 'net use' *could* have a FTP syntax similar to the WebDAV syntax. The point is that is *does not* have it. It doesn't because the ftp server itself really wouldn't know what net use was asking of it. It would have to remain resident and serve as a middleman to maintain a mounted drive letter to a share on the ftp server. 'net use' can/does already handle 'dotted domain name' in its '/USER:' option, can/does already handle IP addresses in its 'computer' name parameter and can/does already handle port numbers, so there is no technical reason that 'net use' couldn't map a drive letter to a ftp server. The third-party add-one FtpUse [1] shows that all of this is techincally feasible, it 'just' hasn't been implemented. :-) The third party ftpuse does it by doing what I described above. [g] It remains resident to provide the mapped drive letter because it has to do the go between work. IE: translate ftp server commands back and forth so the user can copy/paste files, open files, etc on the 'mapped drive' which isn't really a mapped drive at all. It's a virtual drive provided by what amounts to a semi modern tsr (do you remember those?) that's doing the heavy lifting. It also has to check in with the ftp server every so often, so the ftp server doesn't drop the connection due to inactivity, unless the server isn't configured for that. [...] Thanks for your response/explanation. As boring as it is, we're totally on the same page. [Rewind:] what amounts to a semi modern tsr (do you remember those?) Yup! :-) Probably a decade or more *after* we already had this kind of stuff in HP's Real-Time systems. |
#54
|
|||
|
|||
What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows?
On Sun, 14 Oct 2018 17:24:15 -0000 (UTC), Arlen Holder wrote:
Do you have experience port forwarding SMB ports on Windows? Specifically forwarding SMB/CIFs TCP port 445 to higher than 1024? IMPORTANT UPDATE! (Please add to your local tribal knowledge archives.) See also new information from Frank Slootweg & Paul & Dan Purgert & Poutnik in this thread from today where we figured out that the Android freeware SMB clients are using (apparently) SMBv1 while Windows 10 SMB server, by default, expressly does not enable SMBv1 (Windows 10 apparently only enables SMBv2 or SMBv3). https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/comp.mobile.android/iIjcGCYnm-E The error message you get using the AndSMB client is cryptic: o "at jcifs.e.a.c.run(Unknown Source) at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java: 761)" o "Connecting, please wait ..." o "Cannot change directory to /pubpc2" http://www.bild.me/bild.php?file=5615405smb_win10_default03.jpg What that AndSMB client error actually indicates is something like: "The AndSMB client, using SMBv1, cannot connect to your Windows 10 SMB server because SMBv2 or SMBv3 is enabled, but not SMBv1." To enable SMBv1 in Windows 10, all you need to do are these steps: o Start Run control OK o Programs Programs and Features Turn Windows Features on or off o Change from: [_]SMB 1.0/CIFS File Sharing Support [_]SMB 1.0/CIFS Automatic Removal === I'm not sure what this is??? [_]SMB 1.0/CIFS Client [_]SMB 1.0/CIFS Server [x]SMB Direct o Change to: [x]SMB 1.0/CIFS File Sharing Support [x]SMB 1.0/CIFS Automatic Removal === I'm not sure what this is??? [x]SMB 1.0/CIFS Client [x]SMB 1.0/CIFS Server [x]SMB Direct o Reboot Here's what one machine had as the defaults (and what I changed it to): http://www.bild.me/bild.php?file=2299279smb_win10_default01.jpg Here's the similar (slightly different) default on the other Win10 machine: http://www.bild.me/bild.php?file=3580897smb_win10_default02.png Here is what AndSMB looks like once you have SMBv1 running on Win10: http://www.bild.me/bild.php?file=9491157smb_win10_default04.jpg Here is SyncMe WiFi working once you have SMBv1 running on Win10: http://www.bild.me/bild.php?file=4819399smb_win10_default05.jpg In summary, thanks to Paul & Dan Purgert & Poutnik, and particularly to Frank Slootweg, we can now get an SMBv1 *client* to talk to Windows 10. This is useful for a variety of purpose, e.g., for passing CalDAV exports back and forth between Windows, Linux, Mac, iOS, and Android, so as to manage a calendar on your home LAN sans need for putting your calendar on the Internet: o Can we come up with a free, ad free, cloud-free calendaring system that works with Windows and Linux and mobile devices? https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/alt.os.linux/ydQ9sG-8Y08 Or, for passing a KeePass passwd.kdbx encrypted password file db across your personal LAN to all your Windows, Linux, Mac, iOS, and Android devices, again, sans need for putting passwds on the Internet: o Have You Been Pwned? Do you have a working cross-platform PASSWD database for Windows, Linux, Mac, iOS, & Android on your home LAN? https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/comp.mobile.android/iIjcGCYnm-E CAVEAT: This only works for SMB *clients* on Android. The Android SMB *server* still has the deadly catch22 of: o Windows SMB clients are hard coded to TCP port 445 traffic o Unrooted Android SMB severs are not allowed to use ports 1-1024 |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|