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 | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Speedup "net view"?
The "net view" command took about 10 seconds to finish in my system. Is
there a way to decrease the time it took to list the computers? PS) How many seconds does "net view" take in your system? |
Ads |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Speedup "net view"?
JJ wrote:
The "net view" command took about 10 seconds to finish in my system. Is there a way to decrease the time it took to list the computers? PS) How many seconds does "net view" take in your system? AFAIK, "net view" would rely on the "browse master" for information. Netbios service communicates with other nodes on the subnet. In non-domain setups (my home LAN), two machines have an "election", one machine wins, and it becomes the "browse master". If a third computer boots, it first queries for a browse master, and if it finds one, it doesn't have to call for an election. The browse master keeps a list of nodes, as they register. The time horizon for this activity is 12-15 minutes or so. It can take a couple of time periods for machines that are turned off, to "disappear" from the net view list. Windows 7 would have Netbios and optionally has SSDP. But SSDP is not supposed to be needed for this function. Windows 7 also has HomeGroups, a set of seven services plus the need for IPV6, to support the MSHOME workgroup and the usage of Home Groups. But that should be separate from Netbios and shares (where a user could use some other Workgroup name). For example, on my LAN, my workgroup=WORKGROUP. And then VMs I get from Microsoft that are set to MSHOME, at least initially, they're not in my netBIOS view. I use this program to get a view too. It actually scans the subnet, rather than querying the browse master. nbtscan-1.0.35__unixwiz_net.exe http://www.unixwiz.net/tools/nbtscan.html nbtscan 192.168.1.0/24 What that means, is 24 bits are masked and 8 bits change, so the command scans from 192.168.1.0 to 192.168.1.255 (minus a few). That will also show you nodes which are on different workgroups. If you had a machine on WORKGROUP and one on MSHOME, it would list both of them. "net view" is only likely to list one of the workgroup values and the other would remain invisible. You can watch master browser activity in Wireshark. The packets are a different color. You see a little bit of action every 12-15 minutes or so. Maybe when you run "net view", you would see a single packet head off to the "browse master" ? Except if the "browse master" is 127.0.0.1 (i.e. the machine itself is browse master). As to your question, my "net view" works instantly. Or as instantly as this kind of software could be expected to run. A ten second delay would be enough time for a "network timeout". A figure we used to bat around for that, was five seconds per timeout. So if a protocol broke, that would be a "ballpark estimate" for how many things didn't sequentially work. Our field service guys used to use that "delay number" when pulling network cables out of hot equipment - the joke being "they'll never notice if we can move the cable in five seconds". Of course, they never managed to do that in five seconds, and, well, "we noticed". Paul |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Speedup "net view"?
In message , JJ
writes: The "net view" command took about 10 seconds to finish in my system. Is there a way to decrease the time it took to list the computers? No idea, sorry. 10 seconds wouldn't worry me. PS) How many seconds does "net view" take in your system? I just tried - 6 seconds on first run, immediate when repeated. (Two computers - this W7-32 one, and a W7-64. [Both Home Premium I think.]) -- J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf The thing about smut is it harms no one and it's rarely cruel. Besides, it's a gleeful rejection of the dreary and the "correct". - Alison Graham, RT 2014/10/25-31 |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Speedup "net view"?
On 23-2-2019 10:19, JJ wrote:
The "net view" command took about 10 seconds to finish in my system. Is there a way to decrease the time it took to list the computers? PS) How many seconds does "net view" take in your system? 0.5 seconds.(On my other comp 1.5 sec). List: C:\01-sjouke\testnet view Servernaam Opmerking ---------------------------------------------- \\INTERNETBUGGY Sjouke's internetbuggy \\NOVALUX novalux computer \\SMBSHARE Samba Server De opdracht is voltooid. C:\01-sjouke\test |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Speedup "net view"?
JJ wrote:
The "net view" command took about 10 seconds to finish in my system. Is there a way to decrease the time it took to list the computers? PS) How many seconds does "net view" take in your system? Took a split second on mine to show just the base host from where I ran 'net view'. While there may be 1 to 4 other hosts on the subnet in my intranet, usually there is only 1 other host. None of them have shares defined which is what 'net view' finds. You never mentioned how many hosts are on the same subnet in your intranet as your base host from where you run 'net view' and also how many shares each of those other hosts have defined. No mention of how many hosts are in the subnet. No mention how many shares are defined on each of those hosts. No mention if some hosts are across a switch or access point. No mention if hosts are Ethernet (wired) or wi-fi connected or perhaps even ad hoc Bluetooth. Lots not mentioned that could affect response and traffic speed. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|