Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.mobile.android > #56661 > unrolled thread

What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows?

Back to article view | Back to comp.mobile.android

Contents

  What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows?  Arlen    Holder <a%rlenh.older@no.spam.net> - 2018-10-14 17:24 +0000
    Re: What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows? Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2018-10-17 01:06 +0100
      Re: What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows?  Arlen    Holder <a%rlenh.older@no.spam.net> - 2018-10-18 16:26 +0000
        Re: What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows? Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2018-10-18 18:13 +0000
          Re: What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows?  Arlen    Holder <a%rlenh.older@no.spam.net> - 2018-10-18 19:59 +0000
            Re: What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows? Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2018-10-18 20:42 +0000
              Re: What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows?  Arlen    Holder <a%rlenh.older@no.spam.net> - 2018-10-18 21:55 +0000
            Re: What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows? M.L. <me@privacy.invalid> - 2018-10-19 23:04 -0500
              Re: What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows? Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2018-10-20 00:37 -0400
                Re: What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows?  Arlen    Holder <a%rlenh.older@no.spam.net> - 2018-10-21 19:20 +0000
                  Re: What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows? Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2018-10-21 16:42 -0400
                    Re: What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows?  Arlen    Holder <a%rlenh.older@no.spam.net> - 2018-10-21 22:47 +0000
                      Re: What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows? Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2018-10-22 13:51 +0000
                        Re: What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows? "R.Wieser" <address@not.available> - 2018-10-22 16:44 +0200
                          Re: What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows? Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2018-10-22 17:21 +0000
                            Re: What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows? "R.Wieser" <address@not.available> - 2018-10-22 21:43 +0200
                              Re: What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows?  Arlen    Holder <a%rlenh.older@no.spam.net> - 2018-10-22 20:44 +0000
                              Re: What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows?  Arlen    Holder <a%rlenh.older@no.spam.net> - 2018-10-23 12:10 +0000
                                Re: What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows? Diesel <me@privacy.net> - 2018-11-02 08:03 +0000
                              Re: What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows? Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2018-10-23 16:16 +0000
                                Re: What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows?  Arlen    Holder <a%rlenh.older@no.spam.net> - 2018-10-23 19:21 +0000
                                  Re: What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows? Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2018-10-23 20:51 +0000
                                    Re: What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-10-23 16:54 -0400
                                      Re: What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows?  Arlen    Holder <a%rlenh.older@no.spam.net> - 2018-10-23 22:23 +0000
                                    Re: What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows?  Arlen    Holder <a%rlenh.older@no.spam.net> - 2018-10-23 22:23 +0000
                                  Re: What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows? "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2018-10-23 23:09 +0200
                                    Re: What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows?  Arlen    Holder <a%rlenh.older@no.spam.net> - 2018-10-23 22:23 +0000
                                      Re: What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2018-10-24 02:47 +0200
                                        Re: What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows?  Arlen    Holder <a%rlenh.older@no.spam.net> - 2018-10-24 10:35 +0000
                                          Re: What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows? "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2018-10-24 17:25 +0200
                                            Re: What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows?  Arlen    Holder <a%rlenh.older@no.spam.net> - 2018-10-24 15:50 +0000
                                            Re: What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows? M.L. <me@privacy.invalid> - 2018-10-25 17:49 -0500
                                              Re: What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows?  Arlen    Holder <a%rlenh.older@no.spam.net> - 2018-10-26 01:24 +0000
                                                Re: What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows?  Arlen    Holder <a%rlenh.older@no.spam.net> - 2018-10-27 07:32 +0000
                                Re: What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows? Diesel <me@privacy.net> - 2018-11-02 08:03 +0000
                            Re: What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows?  Arlen    Holder <a%rlenh.older@no.spam.net> - 2018-10-22 20:37 +0000
                              Re: What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows? Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2018-10-23 15:58 +0000
                                Re: What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows?  Arlen    Holder <a%rlenh.older@no.spam.net> - 2018-10-23 19:46 +0000
                                  Re: What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows?  Arlen    Holder <a%rlenh.older@no.spam.net> - 2018-10-23 19:52 +0000
                            Re: What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows?  Arlen    Holder <a%rlenh.older@no.spam.net> - 2018-10-22 22:55 +0000
                            Re: What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows?  Arlen    Holder <a%rlenh.older@no.spam.net> - 2018-10-23 00:37 +0000
                              Re: What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows? "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2018-10-23 12:55 +0200
                                Re: What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows?  Arlen    Holder <a%rlenh.older@no.spam.net> - 2018-10-23 12:10 +0000
                                  Re: What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows?  Arlen    Holder <a%rlenh.older@no.spam.net> - 2018-10-23 14:11 +0000
                                    Re: What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows?  Arlen    Holder <a%rlenh.older@no.spam.net> - 2018-10-23 22:36 +0000
                                      Re: What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows? Diesel <me@privacy.net> - 2018-11-02 08:03 +0000
                                    Re: What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows? Diesel <me@privacy.net> - 2018-11-02 08:03 +0000
                                      Re: What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows? Diesel <me@privacy.net> - 2018-11-02 19:15 +0000
                          Re: What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows?  Arlen    Holder <a%rlenh.older@no.spam.net> - 2018-10-22 21:44 +0000
                            Re: What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows? Diesel <me@privacy.net> - 2018-11-02 08:03 +0000
                        Re: What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows?  Arlen    Holder <a%rlenh.older@no.spam.net> - 2018-10-22 21:07 +0000
                          Re: What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows? Diesel <me@privacy.net> - 2018-11-02 08:03 +0000
                            Re: What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows? Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2018-11-02 19:05 +0000
                              Re: What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows? Diesel <me@privacy.net> - 2018-11-03 02:00 +0000
                                Re: What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows? Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2018-11-03 15:09 +0000
                      Re: What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows? Diesel <me@privacy.net> - 2018-11-02 08:03 +0000
                    Re: What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows? David Taylor <david-taylor@blueyonder.co.uk.invalid> - 2018-10-22 18:56 +0100
                      Re: What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows?  Arlen    Holder <a%rlenh.older@no.spam.net> - 2018-10-23 03:37 +0000
    Re: What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows? arlen holder <arlen@arlen.com> - 2019-01-21 01:30 +0000

Page 1 of 3  [1] 2 3  Next page →

#56661 — What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to something higher than 1024 on Windows?

Do you have experience port forwarding SMB ports on Windows?
Specifically forwarding SMB/CIFs TCP port 445 to higher than 1024?

If so, which port forwarding hints might you offer to a noob?

The problem set:
o Windows is "stuck" listening for SMB/CIFs on TCP port 445.
o Non-root Android is "stuck" not allowing apps access to 1-1024.

The "trick" is to get Windows to "listen" on 445 & forward to 1234.
Of course, the other trick is to get Android to send on TCP 1234.
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_TCP_and_UDP_port_numbers>

*Have you experience actually doing that exact task for this purpose?*
If you've actually _done_ it, then can you advise what's best?

For example, I found a tutorial on the net but it used a virtual machine,
which is too much overhead for what I'm trying to accomplish (IMHO).

I'm thinking of this general process where I hope you have done it:
a. Run an as-yet-unknown setup to ensure Windows can port forward
   <https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/help/555744>
   <There are some indications certain services need to be disabled.>
   etc.
b. Set up a free port mapper such as netsh, PortTunnel or Passport:
   <http://www.steelbytes.com/?mid=34>]
   <https://sourceforge.net/projects/pjs-passport/>
   <http://www.analogx.com/contents/download/network/pmapper/freeware.htm>
   <http://woshub.com/port-forwarding-in-windows/>
   netsh interface portproxy add Samba listenport=445 listenaddress=192.168.1.2 connectport=1234 connectaddress=192.168.0.3 protocol=tcp
   etc.
c. Debug inevitable issues with any free TCP viewer
   <https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/sysinternals/downloads/tcpview>
   <https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/download/details.aspx?id=9964>
   etc.

Do you have experience port forwarding SMB ports on Windows?
Specifically forwarding SMB/CIFs TCP port 445 to higher than 1024?

If so, what helpful advice can you provide sufficient to be successful?

-- 
If you're Rudy Wieser, Char Jackson, Wolf K, etc., please do not respond.

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#56709

Arlen Holder wrote:

> Do you have experience port forwarding SMB ports on Windows?

Yes, when I needed to map a drive over an SSH tunnel.

netsh interface portproxy add v4tov4 listenport=xxx 
listenaddress=192.168.xx.xx connectaddress=192.168.yy.yy connectport=yyy

Because the lanmanserver service starts early and binds to 445 on all 
interfaces, you may need to install a virtual kernel NIC driver in order 
to get an interface with a "spare" IP address to listen on, it was 
available from MS last time I needed it on Win7, not sure about Win10.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#56734

On Wed, 17 Oct 2018 01:06:20 +0100, Andy Burns wrote:

>> Do you have experience port forwarding SMB ports on Windows?
> 
> Yes, when I needed to map a drive over an SSH tunnel.
> 
> netsh interface portproxy add v4tov4 listenport=xxx 
> listenaddress=192.168.xx.xx connectaddress=192.168.yy.yy connectport=yyy
> 
> Because the lanmanserver service starts early and binds to 445 on all 
> interfaces, you may need to install a virtual kernel NIC driver in order 
> to get an interface with a "spare" IP address to listen on, it was 
> available from MS last time I needed it on Win7, not sure about Win10.

Thanks for the confirmation of the best solution for port forwarding on
Windows being the "netsh" command.

I tried to test the netsh command, but I failed, where the failure was due
to the lack of a suitable SMB server on Android that works with Windows
without being root since Windows only uses TCP port 445 but non-rooted
Android apps can't use any port lower than 1024:
 <https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/comp.mobile.android/CZolwHVb0-c>

The command you suggested is similar to the one I concocted in the OP:
 netsh interface portproxy add Samba listenport=445 listenaddress=192.168.1.2 connectport=1234 connectaddress=192.168.0.3 protocol=tcp
 netsh interface portproxy add v4tov4 listenport=xxx listenaddress=192.168.xx.xx connectaddress=192.168.yy.yy connectport=yyy

I wasn't able to test my concocted command because I can't yet find an SMB
server that works on non-rooted Android.

I had concocted that (untested) netsh command based on this reference:
 <https://android.stackexchange.com/questions/1705/using-smb-server-without-root-access>
Which, itself, referenced the tutorial here:
 <https://techforpassion.blogspot.com/2013/12/android-how-to-share-folder-over-wifi.html>
Which failed miserably due to the lack of that SMB server working on Nougat
 <https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.icecoldapps.sambaserver>

To be clear, "if" we can find an SMB server that works non root, then we
could move to the stage of testing out the "netsh" command empirically.

But that particularly SMB server clearly doesn't work on Nougat based on my
tests, and based on a bunch of the reviews, which show exactly what I see:
  Andy Gaskell, May 31, 2017
   "I used this App on a Moto G4 and it worked really well. Then I tried it
   on a Moto G5 and when I click "Add" -> "SMB Server" the app just hangs 
   with a blank black screen. I guess this might be an Android 7
   permissions problem. So, great on the Moto G4, but not working at all 
   on the Moto G5."

  Marc Ritz, September 9, 2018
   "Doesn't work. Using Nougat. Just get a black screen when trying to 
   add a server. Doesn't even ask for superuser rights up to that point."

The problem is that this particular SMB server is the _only_ server that
the authors of the tutorial found that worked at the time that tutorial was
written (which was December 16, 2013), but that particular SMB server
clearly does not work with Nougat, and, that server clearly hasn't been
updated in a long time.

For SMB to work, we need to find a solution that will allow us to
a. On Android, run a non-root Samba/SMB server to listen on port 7777
b. On Windows, run port-forwarding software to listen on port 445
c  On Windows, forward the SMB connections to port 7777

So here's my plan, for SMB, to solve this age-old problem for everyone:
1. I'll keep seeking a non-root SMB server for Android, and, 
2. Then, I'll run the netsh command on Windows to forward ports.

The port forwarding for Windows is "on hold" until I can find an 
SMB server that works on Android non-root with ports above 1024.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#56735

Arlen    Holder <a%rlenh.older@no.spam.net> wrote:
[...]

> For SMB to work, we need to find a solution that will allow us to
> a. On Android, run a non-root Samba/SMB server to listen on port 7777
> b. On Windows, run port-forwarding software to listen on port 445
> c  On Windows, forward the SMB connections to port 7777
> 
> So here's my plan, for SMB, to solve this age-old problem for everyone:
> 1. I'll keep seeking a non-root SMB server for Android, and, 
> 2. Then, I'll run the netsh command on Windows to forward ports.
> 
> The port forwarding for Windows is "on hold" until I can find an 
> SMB server that works on Android non-root with ports above 1024.

  I re-checked my notes and at the time, I looked at:

'SMB cifs samba file server'
<https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.imperioustech.www.sambaserver>
"Uses Standard port 445 for rooted devices and automatically
selects a suitable port for non-rooted devices."

  I didn't proceed with this, for the very reason you are now
investigating, the need to map port 445 to a port number above 1024.

  Perhaps 'SMB cifs samba file server' is a candidate for you to
investigate.

  Good luck.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#56737

On 18 Oct 2018 18:13:13 GMT, Frank Slootweg wrote:

>   I re-checked my notes and at the time, I looked at:
> 
> 'SMB cifs samba file server'
> <https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.imperioustech.www.sambaserver>
> "Uses Standard port 445 for rooted devices and automatically
> selects a suitable port for non-rooted devices."
> 
>   I didn't proceed with this, for the very reason you are now
> investigating, the need to map port 445 to a port number above 1024.
> 
>   Perhaps 'SMB cifs samba file server' is a candidate for you to
> investigate.

Hi Frank,
Thanks for your helpful advice.

Given that we seek a general solution that works for most people, 
you're correct that the way to approach solving this age-old problem
is in two parts, where we (first) find an Android SMB server that can work
on ports higher than 1024 on Nougat and above without being root, and then
we (second) map Windows SMB TCP requests to be on the same higher-than-1024
port (e.g., 7777).

Unfortunately, that com.imperioustech.www.sambaserver APK isn't on Google
Play, or on F-Droid, so, while both problems are formidable, we're stuck
with no resolution until we can find an SMB server for Android that can
change the port without being root.

Once we get an SMB server working, we can map Windows TCP port 445<->7777.
So we're all stuck, until we can find an SMB server that works sans root.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#56738

Arlen    Holder <a%rlenh.older@no.spam.net> wrote:
> On 18 Oct 2018 18:13:13 GMT, Frank Slootweg wrote:
> 
> >   I re-checked my notes and at the time, I looked at:
> > 
> > 'SMB cifs samba file server'
> > <https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.imperioustech.www.sambaserver>
> > "Uses Standard port 445 for rooted devices and automatically
> > selects a suitable port for non-rooted devices."
> > 
> >   I didn't proceed with this, for the very reason you are now
> > investigating, the need to map port 445 to a port number above 1024.
> > 
> >   Perhaps 'SMB cifs samba file server' is a candidate for you to
> > investigate.
> 
> Hi Frank,
> Thanks for your helpful advice.
> 
> Given that we seek a general solution that works for most people, 
> you're correct that the way to approach solving this age-old problem
> is in two parts, where we (first) find an Android SMB server that can work
> on ports higher than 1024 on Nougat and above without being root, and then
> we (second) map Windows SMB TCP requests to be on the same higher-than-1024
> port (e.g., 7777).
> 
> Unfortunately, that com.imperioustech.www.sambaserver APK isn't on Google
> Play, or on F-Droid,

  Hmmm!? I thought I checked the Google Play URL before posting, but
apparently I didn't.

  If you want to have a look at it, the APK *is. - of course! :-) - on
Apkpure:

<https://apkpure.com/smb-cifs-samba-file-server/com.imperioustech.www.sambaserver>

  That it's no longer on Google Play and rather old (2015-12-12) is not
very promising. But as - so far - you're empty-handed...

>		       so, while both problems are formidable, we're stuck
> with no resolution until we can find an SMB server for Android that can
> change the port without being root.
> 
> Once we get an SMB server working, we can map Windows TCP port 445<->7777.
> So we're all stuck, until we can find an SMB server that works sans root.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#56739

On 18 Oct 2018 20:42:41 GMT, Frank Slootweg wrote:

>   That it's no longer on Google Play and rather old (2015-12-12) is not
> very promising. But as - so far - you're empty-handed...

Hi Frank Slootweg,

Thanks for finding that APK for us.
I realize it's difficult as nobody seems to have an SMB server that works.

The goal is a general solution to run any Windows command on Android files.
(Nobody is going to solve anything without understanding that is the goal.)

That means we need a drive letter (I think) on Windows.
In other words, the Android device has to show up as a "removable drive".

That's easy to do (I've done it) but it's not easy as a general solution.

Hence we're breaking new ground (as usual).
Nobody knows how to do this ... yet.

Most of the people who responded to the last thread, simply responded to 
keywords. They never even understood the problem. They responded to 
keywords the same way they respond to those keywords every time they see 
them. They didn't even read the words between the keywords.

You know this to be true Frank, where, so far, only you and Paul (and maybe 
a couple of others) have shown any comprehension of the problem set. 

The goal is a general purpose solution for every user to run any Windows 
command on the Android file system over USB (which means it needs to be 
mounted as a drive letter, as far as I understand things on Windows).

If we can't get USB, then we'll take WiFi over SMB.
If we can't get SMB, then we already have plenty of solutions that work.

So that, in a nutshell, is the entire problem set, outlined in order.

Thanks for understanding that breaking new ground is never easy, where the 
goal is a _general_ solution for everyone. (That's _always_ the goal, by 
the way, which is why what I do is _harder_ than what most people do.)

At the risk of elevating the detail level of this thread well over the 
heads of 99% of the people here, I'll state the obvious which is that I 
already have a whole bunch of working solutions (in best-to-worst order):
o *LibMTP freeware* works _perfectly_ on Linux (as you know)
o *MTPDrive payware* works perfectly fine on Windows (as you know)
o *MTPDrive crippleware* works reasonably well on Windows (as you know)
o *WebDav servers* work ok on Android (using Windows network locations)
o *FTP servers* work ok on Android (again, using Windows network locations)
... (there are plenty of other servers such as ssh, adb, http, etc.)
o *SMB servers* would mount as drive letters (but they have other problems)

I'll repeat that I already have multiple solutions that work great for me.
That's not the problem set.

*The problem set is a _general_ solution that works for everyone.*

To that end, I see only three viable approaches:
1. Find an MTPDrive alternative (such as libMTP) for Windows
2. Find an SMB solution that works on both Android & Windows

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#56746

>Once we get an SMB server working, we can map Windows TCP port 445<->7777.
>So we're all stuck, until we can find an SMB server that works sans root.

Keep in mind that Windows 10 no longer supports SMBv1. You must find
an android app that uses SMBv2 to communicate with Windows 10.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#56747

M.L. wrote:
> 
>> Once we get an SMB server working, we can map Windows TCP port 445<->7777.
>> So we're all stuck, until we can find an SMB server that works sans root.
> 
> Keep in mind that Windows 10 no longer supports SMBv1. You must find
> an android app that uses SMBv2 to communicate with Windows 10.

Well, that's easy enough to check.

Yup, still there.

https://i.postimg.cc/0Q3YmL6p/smbv1-17763-55.gif

Win10 asks for authentication more than it should.
There is a patch for WinXP for SMBV1, which when I
applied it, broke sharing. The Win10 end was sending
"Need More Information" as a status back to the WinXP
machine, before refusing to talk to it. I removed
the patch and the connection worked again.

Lots of ways to break it, that's for sure.

But the mechanical bits... are still there. It's
up to the user to puzzle out, why it's not working
today :-)

As Char as pointed out in the past, lots and lots of
broken networking cases, can be solved by using
IP address notation

    \\192.168.7.23\datadisk

instead of

    \\bob\datadisk

as the latter needs an additional subsystem to
translate symbolic to numeric address. On a Linux
box (one where they didn't care), that typical gets
it running for you, using the IP address of
the server. There have been some Linux distros with
perfectly working and very nice file sharing (both
client *and* server!), but there is no consistency
from release to release on the topic. It's a shame
really.

    Paul

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#56758

On Sat, 20 Oct 2018 00:37:18 -0400, Paul wrote:

>     \\192.168.7.23\datadisk
> 
> instead of
> 
>     \\bob\datadisk

Hi Paul,
Can you help unstuck us on doublebackslash syntax?

The doublebackslash syntax works _great_ with WebDAV servers on Android:
 <http://www.bild.me/bild.php?file=8605173dir05.jpg>
For example this mounts Android filesystems over WiFi as a removable drive:
 net use X: \\192.168.1.6@8080\DavWWWRoot\
NOTE: This has a huge advantage that "DavWWWRoot" is a WebDAV keyword!

But, I can't figure out the doublebackslash syntax for FTP servers!
 <http://www.bild.me/bild.php?file=4785408ftpshare01.jpg>
 <http://www.bild.me/bild.php?file=8734999ftpshare02.jpg>

This doubleslash syntax works just fine as a "network location"
(Using the default of "francis" for both the login & passwd.)
 ftp://francis:francis@192.168.1.6:2221
 <http://www.bild.me/bild.php?file=4785408ftpshare01.jpg>

But I can't, for the life of me, figure out the doublebackslash syntax!
 <http://www.bild.me/bild.php?file=8734999ftpshare02.jpg>
Since these syntax attempts fail every time for me:
 dir \\francis:francis@192.168.1.6:2221
 net use \\192.168.1.6@2221\Root
 etc.

I suspect DOS will work just fine, if we can just figure out the syntax.
Can you, or anyone, help us figure out the FTP doublebackslash syntax?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#56762

Arlen Holder wrote:
> On Sat, 20 Oct 2018 00:37:18 -0400, Paul wrote:
> 
>>     \\192.168.7.23\datadisk
>>
>> instead of
>>
>>     \\bob\datadisk
> 
> Hi Paul,
> Can you help unstuck us on doublebackslash syntax?
> 
> The doublebackslash syntax works _great_ with WebDAV servers on Android:
>  <http://www.bild.me/bild.php?file=8605173dir05.jpg>
> For example this mounts Android filesystems over WiFi as a removable drive:
>  net use X: \\192.168.1.6@8080\DavWWWRoot\
> NOTE: This has a huge advantage that "DavWWWRoot" is a WebDAV keyword!
> 
> But, I can't figure out the doublebackslash syntax for FTP servers!
>  <http://www.bild.me/bild.php?file=4785408ftpshare01.jpg>
>  <http://www.bild.me/bild.php?file=8734999ftpshare02.jpg>
> 
> This doubleslash syntax works just fine as a "network location"
> (Using the default of "francis" for both the login & passwd.)
>  ftp://francis:francis@192.168.1.6:2221
>  <http://www.bild.me/bild.php?file=4785408ftpshare01.jpg>
> 
> But I can't, for the life of me, figure out the doublebackslash syntax!
>  <http://www.bild.me/bild.php?file=8734999ftpshare02.jpg>
> Since these syntax attempts fail every time for me:
>  dir \\francis:francis@192.168.1.6:2221
>  net use \\192.168.1.6@2221\Root
>  etc.
> 
> I suspect DOS will work just fine, if we can just figure out the syntax.
> Can you, or anyone, help us figure out the FTP doublebackslash syntax?

Mapping a share to a drive letter, works for smb.

https://www.howtogeek.com/118452/how-to-map-network-drives-from-the-command-prompt-in-windows/

FTP is a different URI and protocol.

There's an example of mapping an FTP site here.
I'm not convinced this is exactly what you want.

https://www.thewindowsclub.com/map-an-ftp-drive-windows

When they do it here, it doesn't have a drive letter.
What exactly has been mapped ? What is the access syntax ?
Explorer is supporting the URI, rather than some other
layer.

http://cybernetnews.com/cybernotes-map-a-ftp-to-a-drive-in-windows/

I would have to set up an FTP server to test. Something
I don't normally keep running here.

This goes to a whole bunch more trouble to achieve
that result. It's an "ftp use" equivalent to "net use",
complete with adding what appears to be a parallel stack
for storage. This appears to be free.

https://www.ferrobackup.com/map-ftp-as-disk.html

    Paul

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#56763

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-to-map-network-drives-from-the-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!).

I'm sorry this is so complex - where I think only Frank Slootweg and I seem
to have a clear handle on the complexity.

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.

The reason I say it must be syntax is that it works sometimes.
And it fails sometimes.

Specifically...
For mapping Android FTP servers over WiFi to a drive letter, these work:
o Windows NetDrive freeware 
o Windows DirectNetDrive freeware

For mapping Android FTP servers over WiFi to a drive letter, these fail:
o Windows native "net use"
o Windows FTPuse freeware
o Windows SFTPNetDrive freeware

So if we can figure out why some methods work, and others fail, we could
figure out why the methods that fail, don't work - which is most likely a
syntax problem (because some methods work just fine to map Android FTP
server shares as a drive letter over WiFi).

The problem _must_ be as simple as syntax, for all I know at this time.

The reason I say it _must_ be as simple as syntax, is because I already
long ago had FTP drives mounted as drive letters using DirectNetDrive &
NetDrive Windows freeware.
o DirectNetDrive <http://www.bild.me/bild.php?file=4731516dir011.jpg>
o NetDrive 1.3.2.0 <http://www.bild.me/bild.php?file=1383190dir014.jpg

*So certainly we _can_ mount FTP "shares" as a drive letter over WiFi.*

So all we have to figure out is the right syntax to give Windows "net use".

To get that syntax correct, it's good that you started with SMB since
o Windows works best native with SMB
o And where the UNC syntax will likely be best described for SMB

But SMB servers, as you know, are problematic on Android.
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/comp.mobile.android/3QQ8bAZeXNI>
And worse, SMB UNC syntax doesn't usually specify the port syntax
But we need that port syntax to make an FTP UNC syntax work. 

Still, that reference is good for UNC syntax help sans ports:
 <https://www.howtogeek.com/118452/how-to-map-network-drives-from-the-command-prompt-in-windows/>

Specifically the ability to specify the SMB user & password (if not port).
 net use s: \\tower\movies /user:HTG CrazyFourHorseMen
Which, for our FTP user & password "francis" & \DCIM folder, would be:
 net use s: \\192.168.1.7\DCIM /user:francis francis
Which results in the DOS error:
 System error 53 has occurred. The network path was not found.

Where I left this Android freeware FTP server at its default settings:
 <https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.theolivetree.ftpserver> 

Interestingly, this login/passwd/port URI works just fine as a URL in a
Windows web browser and that URI also works just fine as a "network
location" in Windows file explorer:
 ftp://francis:francis@192.168.1.7:2221/DCIM/Camera
Where "francis" is the default FTP server user name & default password.

Notice the default ftp server port of "2221" isn't in the SMB syntax 
(probably because it's assumed to be TCP port 445 by Windows).

For the freeware Android WebDAV server below set to its defaults:
 <https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.theolivetree.webdavserver>
This is a URI that works both as a URL in a web browser on Windows
and as a "network location" in the Windows file explorer:
 http://192.168.1.7:8080/DCIM/Camera
And, this works as a UNC to "mount" that as a "removable drive":
 net use X: \\192.168.1.7@8080\DCIM\Camera
 <http://www.bild.me/bild.php?file=8605173dir05.jpg> 

Since SMB syntax shows us how to specify the UNC user & password, and since
WebDAV syntax shows us how to specify the UNC port, maybe we can put the
two syntaxes together to specify both the UNC port & user/password?
 net use W: \\192.168.1.7@2221\DCIM\Camera /USER:francis francis

Interestingly, that didn't result in an "error 53", but an "error 59":
 System error 59 has occurred. An unexpected network error occurred.
 
> FTP is a different URI and protocol.
> There's an example of mapping an FTP site here.
> I'm not convinced this is exactly what you want.
> https://www.thewindowsclub.com/map-an-ftp-drive-windows\

That seems oh so very close to working (it almost worked!):
 <http://www.bild.me/bild.php?file=9948610ftpshare03.jpg> 
 Windows10 File Explorer: Computer > Map Network Drive > Map Network Drive
 Drive = Q:
 
 Map Network Drive > \\192.168.1.7@2221\DCIM
 [x]Connect using different credentials

It popped up a request for the credentials of "francis & francis".
But it failed with an error after asking a few times for the login/passwd: 
 "Windows
  The mapped network drive could not be created because the
  following error has occurred: 
  A device attached to the system is not functioning."
 <http://www.bild.me/bild.php?file=5127116ftpshare04.jpg>

Even though clearly the web browser & "network location" both
simultaneously worked with this URI:
 ftp://francis:francis@192.168.1.7:2221/DCIM/Camera

Since it _almost_ works to mount as a drive letter, I suspect there's just
one more thing we need to do (perhaps somehow marking the directory as
"shared" on Android?)

> When they do it here, it doesn't have a drive letter.
> What exactly has been mapped ? What is the access syntax ?
> Explorer is supporting the URI, rather than some other
> layer.
> http://cybernetnews.com/cybernotes-map-a-ftp-to-a-drive-in-windows/

Yes. This has been working all along. 
It's what I've been calling a "network location".

This URI syntax has always worked just fine as a "network location"
 ftp://francis:francis@192.168.1.7:2221/DCIM/Camera

Its _only_ the mapping to a drive letter that the syntax is needed
where you'd think this would work - but it errors out at error 59:
 net use \\192.168.1.7@2221\DCIM /USER:francis francis

The problem, as I see it, is _only_ one of syntax. 
Nothing else.

Although, I must admit, FTPuse and SFTP Net Drive don't work, so whatever
is making _them_ fail, may be what is making "net use" fail also.

> I would have to set up an FTP server to test. Something
> I don't normally keep running here.

It's easy to set up an FTP server on Android over your WiFi.
You download this server & that's it. It's set up already.
 <https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.theolivetree.ftpserver> 

> This goes to a whole bunch more trouble to achieve
> that result. It's an "ftp use" equivalent to "net use",
> complete with adding what appears to be a parallel stack
> for storage. This appears to be free.
> https://www.ferrobackup.com/map-ftp-as-disk.html

Yes. We know all about FTPuse. 

FTPUse used to work for me prior to Windows 10, and FTPUse works fine for
Frank Slootweg who is not on Windows 10 (I think he's on Win7). 
 <http://www.bild.me/bild.php?file=4223201dir010.jpg>

In summary, we _know_ it's clearly possible to map FTP servers to drive
letters since we already have working solutions, such as the older
free-for-home-use NetDrive version 1.3.2.0 freeware running on Windows:
 <https://filehippo.com/download_netdrive/history/5/>
 <http://www.bild.me/bild.php?file=1383190dir014.jpg>

And also with DirectNetDrive freware running on Windows:
 http://www.directnet-drive.net/
 <http://www.bild.me/bild.php?file=6340420dir012.jpg>

In summary, I apologize for the complexity, where, as I see it, since we
_know_ that some of the software has no problem mounting the Android FTP
"shares" as a "removable drive" in Windows 10, that the only problem we're
having with "net use" is the syntax.

Solving that syntax problem is going to take someone who knows more about
Windows than I do, as I tried experimentally, with a lot of syntaxes.

The best clue we have is that these have no problem mounting the Android
FTP directories as a drive letter over WiFi:
o NetDrive
o DirectNetDrive
While these fail to mount the Android FTP directory over WiFi as a drive
letter:
o net use
o FTPuse
o SFTPNetDrive

If we can figure out _why_ those _fail_, that will probably tell us what
the problem is with the "net use" syntax (since we know it _can_ work).

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#56768

Arlen    Holder <a%rlenh.older@no.spam.net> wrote:

[About 'Map network drive', 'Add a network location' and 'net use'.]

  AFAICT from all references sofar and some testing:

1. 'Map network drive' and 'net use' can not handle FTP syntax, period.

2. 'Add a network location' *can* handle FTP syntax, and *can* handle a
   (FTP) port number.

3. (Windows) File Explorer *can* handle FTP syntax and *can* handle a
   (FTP) port number.
   This is irrelevant for the problem at hand, but is used to verify
   that the FTP server is working correctly.

  In order to verify 2., I needed both a public FTP server (because the
FTP servers on Android (have to) use non-standard port numbers) and a/my
Android FTP server (ES File Explorer).

  As the public FTP server I used 'ftp://speedtest.tele2.net'.

Verify 3.:
==========

- The FTP URL 'ftp://speedtest.tele2.net' should work in your browser
  and in (Windows) File Explorer.

- The FTP URL 'ftp://speedtest.tele2.net:21' - i.e. with the default FTP
  port number 21 - should also work in your browser and in (Windows)
  File Explorer.

- The FTP URL 'ftp://speedtest.tele2.net:80' - i.e. with  a port number
  other than the default FTP port number 21 - should FAIL in your
  browser and in (Windows)

Verify 2.:
==========

- (Windows) File Explorer -> This PC -> Add a network location -> Next
  -> Choose a custom network location -> Next -> Internet or network
  address: -> ftp://speedtest.tele2.net -> Next -> (leave as is) -> Next
  -> (leave as is) -> Next -> untick 'Open this network location when I
  click Finish.' -> Finish.

- 'This PC' will now show a Network Location 'speedtest.tele2.net',
  which will open on a double-click.

- If you delete and re-add the Network Location, but now enter
  ftp://speedtest.tele2.net:21 as the 'Internet or network address:',
  you will see that that also works.

- If you delete and re-add the Network Location, but now enter
  ftp://speedtest.tele2.net:80 as the Internet or network address:', you
  will see that that FAILs, which it is *supposed* to do, because 80 is
  the incorrect port number.

- So we have verified that:

> 2. 'Add a network location' *can* handle FTP syntax, and *can* handle a
  (FTP) port number.

  We can also use 'Add a network location' with a FTP server on Android,
by using (for example) ftp://192.168.0.109:3721 as the 'Internet or
network address:', but that does not offer much new functionality,
because we can already enter ftp://192.168.0.109:3721 directly in the
'path' bar of (Windows) File Explorer, so this is just a way of not have
to re-enter the FTP URL.

  The FTP server is still not accessible *outside* File Explorer (and
web browsers), i.e. it is *not* accessible by normal 'DOS' command, like
'dir', etc..

  So we're stuck with:

> 1. 'Map network drive' and 'net use' can not handle FTP syntax, period.

  If someone thinks differently, then please show *real* *working*
examples with *real* FTP servers and port numbers, i.e. something like:

[ftp://]<host>.<domain>:<port>

  Where host, domain and port are real.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#56771

Frank,

>> 1. 'Map network drive' and 'net use' can not handle FTP syntax, period.
>
>  If someone thinks differently, then please show *real* *working*
> examples with *real* FTP servers and port numbers, i.e. something like:

I'm surprised that you even considered testing it.  FTP is not, and has 
never been, a way to access a drive.

In the same way "net" (use) has never been something to support internet 
protocols.

Also, FTP is a *file transfer* (as in: the whole thing) protocol, not ment 
to be used to do random reads and writes to a file.  DIR ?  Yes. COPY ? 
yes. DEL ? yes.  ATTRIB ?   Nope, only Linux-style permissions are 
supported.   Anything else ?  Not so much.   As such it cannot even be used 
to do Arlens "every window command" with it.

And that is where his story ends.



Unless he's willing to check out stuff like this here:

https://www.ferrobackup.com/map-ftp-as-disk.html

...  Which he isn't (which is a good, but limiting choice).

Than again, as long as you use third-party software (or write it yourself!) 
you can get (most) everything to work - even (full, raw) disk access over 
morse. :-)

Regards,
Rudy Wieser

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#56775

R.Wieser <address@not.available> wrote:
> Frank,
> 
> >> 1. 'Map network drive' and 'net use' can not handle FTP syntax, period.
> >
> >  If someone thinks differently, then please show *real* *working*
> > examples with *real* FTP servers and port numbers, i.e. something like:
> 
> I'm surprised that you even considered testing it.  FTP is not, and has 
> never been, a way to access a drive.

  I can assure you that I know full well what FTP can and cannot do
(I've - professionally - been doing networking since the very early 70s,
before any kind of 'Internet'), but read on.

> In the same way "net" (use) has never been something to support internet 
> protocols.

  Well, as 'Arlen' posted, 'net use' *does* work with a WebDAV server
and - in this context - WebDAV does offer similar functionality as FTP.

  So for WebDAV, 'net use' *is* "a way to access a drive" and hence
*is* "something to support internet protocols".

  The whole point is that 'net use' *does* offer WebDAV compatibility/
functionality, but for some reason does *not* offer FTP compatibility/
functionality. That might make sense to Microsoft, but it doesn't make
any sense to normal people, especially since FTP is older than WebDAV.

> Also, FTP is a *file transfer* (as in: the whole thing) protocol, not ment 
> to be used to do random reads and writes to a file.  DIR ?  Yes. COPY ? 
> yes. DEL ? yes.  ATTRIB ?   Nope, only Linux-style permissions are 
> supported.   Anything else ?  Not so much.   As such it cannot even be used 
> to do Arlens "every window command" with it.

  Yes, that's the whole point!
  
  That's why he - and everybody else - *wants* a SMB solution, but -
unless rooted - Android can not use ports below 1024 and Windows is too
stupid to use another port (than the default 445), which most other SMB
clients/servers *can*.

  So he/everybody else *wants* a SMB solution, but *until* that actually
*works* - for a SMB server on a non-rooted Android device -, he's
looking at less-ideal alternatives.

> And that is where his story ends.
> 
> Unless he's willing to check out stuff like this here:
> 
> https://www.ferrobackup.com/map-ftp-as-disk.html
> 
> ...  Which he isn't (which is a good, but limiting choice).

  I can't blame you for not following all he posts, but he *did* and
*does* look into this (FTPUSE) [1], but for some reason, he can not get
it to work on Windows *10*. (He used it before on some other Windows
version - probably Windows XP - and I used (no longer need it) it on
Windows 8.1.)

  He has asked for others to test it on Windows 10, but AFAICT nobody
has done so. I wonder why!? :-)

  If you have Windows 10 and want to help him, please feel free.

> Than again, as long as you use third-party software (or write it yourself!) 
> you can get (most) everything to work - even (full, raw) disk access over 
> morse. :-)

  Nah! Morse code is SO old-fashioned. These days we use Avian Carriers [2]!

[1] AFAIR, he was actually the first to mention FTPUSE in these groups.
> From: Jonas Schneider <Jonas123Schneider@arcor.de>
> Newsgroups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general,comp.mobile.android
> Subject: Re: What do you use to copy text files from Windows XP to Android over WiFi?
> Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2017 05:41:45 +0000 (UTC)
> Message-ID: <ob2bio$9m4$1@news.albasani.net>

[2] <http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc1149.txt>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#56780

Frank,

>  I can assure you that I know full well what FTP can and cannot
> do (I've - professionally - been doing networking since the very
> early 70s, before any kind of 'Internet')

My apologies.

>  Well, as 'Arlen' posted, 'net use' *does* work with a WebDAV
> server and - in this context - WebDAV does offer similar functionality
> as FTP.

Grumble, grumble ...  Only now, due to your WebDav reference, I see that I 
mixed two threads up: The "android over USB" and this one.  Mea culpa.  :-(

>   Yes, that's the whole point!

Phew, I got at least that one right. :-)

> That's why he - and everybody else - *wants* a SMB solution,
> but - unless rooted - Android can not use ports below 1024 and
> Windows is too stupid to use another port (than the default 445),
> which most other SMB clients/servers *can*.

I thought that that was solved ?    I saw him mention a few port echoing 
(proxy) programs, with one of them being a standard windows app.   Did it 
fizzle out for some reason ?

>  I can't blame you for not following all he posts, but he *did*
> and *does* look into this (FTPUSE) [1],

Its not that I think that he doesn't look into stuff, but that he expects 
others to name the programs that will solve his problems.

> [1] AFAIR, he was actually the first to mention FTPUSE in these groups.

I might be too pessimistic - its ofcourse possible that he found some usable 
software on his own - but seeing how he pumps everyone here to come up with 
the programs he needs my default is to assume he got it by pumping some poor 
sod outside these newsgroups.

>  He has asked for others to test it on Windows 10, but AFAICT
> nobody has done so. I wonder why!? :-)

well...  uuhh...  Yeah, what can I say.  I think he there reaps what he has 
sown. <whistle>

>  If you have Windows 10 and want to help him, please feel free.

No and no.

And thats another reason why I dislike the guy. He keeps dumping his 
requests into the XP newsgroup, even though he should be aware that programs 
working on XP likely won't work on W10 (and vise verse).

>  Nah! Morse code is SO old-fashioned. These days we use Avian Carriers 
> [2]!

:-) I thought of mentioning those, but found them a too-recent history. :-p

Regards,
Rudy Wieser

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#56784

On Mon, 22 Oct 2018 21:43:42 +0200, R.Wieser wrote:

> Its not that I think that he doesn't look into stuff, but that he expects 
> others to name the programs that will solve his problems.

Hi Rudy,

In case you forgot, this is Usenet.

We ask Windows & Android _experts_ to help us answer our questions that
don't have ready-made answers that can simply be found by googling.

For example...

Here's a screenshot each showing why I'm confused that the (X:) drive for
WebDav is treated slightly differently than the (X:) drive for FTP by
Windows:

FTP    (X:) drive: <http://www.bild.me/bild.php?file=4233679dir018.jpg>
WebDAV (X:) drive: <http://www.bild.me/bild.php?file=8624465dir019.jpg>

It turns out that Windows (with the freeware, of course, that mounted the
FTP share as the X: drive) handles FTP "slightly better" than Windows
handled the WebDAV share (using only native "net use" of course).

They both act like an "X:" drive to the DOS command line, and both can
"Open command window here", but only one shows up in the "removable drive"
section, while the other shows up in the "network location" section of the
Windows File Explorer.

I don't know Windows well enough to explain why that happens that way.
Do you?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#56794

On Mon, 22 Oct 2018 21:43:42 +0200, R.Wieser wrote:

> And thats another reason why I dislike the guy. He keeps dumping his 
> requests into the XP newsgroup, even though he should be aware that programs 
> working on XP likely won't work on W10 (and vise verse).

C'mon Rudy Wieser,

You dislike me because I mirror your own posts which prove you're stupid.

I do that, obviously, to alienate you.
I want you to just go away.

*You can _never_ add any technical value to any thread, Rudy.*

You're utterly worthless, Rudy.
You prove me right in that everything you post is worthless, Rudy.

You don't even _comprehend_ the problem set, Rudy.
Everything you wrote was dead _wrong_, Rudy.
And then you throw stones, Rudy.

I'm only _responding_ to your posts, Rudy.
If you never posted to a thread I cared about, you'd never hear from me.

When you get _that_ point, Rudy, you'll finally comprehend
o My strategy is to alienate you, Rudy.
o My tactics are to use your own words to prove you're worthless, Rudy.

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:

   "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."

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.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#57037

Arlen    Holder <a%rlenh.older@no.spam.net>
news:pqn342$4lg$1@news.mixmin.net Tue, 23 Oct 2018 12:10:43 GMT in
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 FUCKING 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 fucking 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 BULLSHITTING 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: <pqnsii$fav$1@news.mixmin.net>
http://al.howardknight.net/msgid.cgi?ID=154114027600

From:  Arlen    Holder <a%rlenh.older@no.spam.net>
Newsgroups: alt.comp.freeware
Subject: Re: 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: <pqnsii$fav$1@news.mixmin.net>

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: <pqnsii$fav$1@news.mixmin.net>
http://al.howardknight.net/msgid.cgi?ID=154114027600

From:  Arlen    Holder <a%rlenh.older@no.spam.net>
Newsgroups: alt.comp.freeware
Subject: Re: 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: <pqnsii$fav$1@news.mixmin.net>

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 here:
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.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#56799

R.Wieser <address@not.available> wrote:

['chit-chat' deleted. :-)]

> > That's why he - and everybody else - *wants* a SMB solution,
> > but - unless rooted - Android can not use ports below 1024 and
> > Windows is too stupid to use another port (than the default 445),
> > which most other SMB clients/servers *can*.
> 
> I thought that that was solved ?    I saw him mention a few port echoing 
> (proxy) programs, with one of them being a standard windows app.   Did it 
> fizzle out for some reason ?

  No, AFAIK the portmapping issue is not solved and - AFAIK - getting a
SMB server on non-rooted Android to work - i.e. even with a port higher
than 1024 - is not solved yet.

> >  I can't blame you for not following all he posts, but he *did*
> > and *does* look into this (FTPUSE) [1],
> 
> Its not that I think that he doesn't look into stuff, but that he expects 
> others to name the programs that will solve his problems.

  To be fair, I think he actually does both, i.e. does some research and
'expects' others to do the rest. In some cases , the research part is
minimal to (nearly) absent. In other cases, there's quite a bit of
research, but the prresentation is ... ummm .. 'sub-optimal'. :-)

  The main problem is his MO when interacting with people who he
'disagrees' with for some strange 'reason's. He tries to justify that
MO, but before you know it, he again draws first blood and things go
down hill with lightning speed.

  I've been in and out of his bad/good books several times. Now I'm
again in his good book and get praised like there's no tomorrow. But
some day in the not too distant future, I'm sure I'll be 'vermin', a
'moron', etc. again.

> > [1] AFAIR, he was actually the first to mention FTPUSE in these groups.
> 
> I might be too pessimistic - its ofcourse possible that he found some usable 
> software on his own - but seeing how he pumps everyone here to come up with 
> the programs he needs my default is to assume he got it by pumping some poor 
> sod outside these newsgroups.
> 
> >  He has asked for others to test it on Windows 10, but AFAICT
> > nobody has done so. I wonder why!? :-)
> 
> well...  uuhh...  Yeah, what can I say.  I think he there reaps what he has 
> sown. <whistle>

  Exactly! I wonder if he even realizes this consequence of his MO.

> >  If you have Windows 10 and want to help him, please feel free.
> 
> No and no.

  Oops, sorry, didn't want to offend you by implying that you might be
so stupid as to have 10, let alone run it! :-)

> And thats another reason why I dislike the guy. He keeps dumping his 
> requests into the XP newsgroup, even though he should be aware that programs 
> working on XP likely won't work on W10 (and vise verse).

+1

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 1 of 3  [1] 2 3  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | comp.mobile.android

csiph-web