Article View: comp.protocols.tcp-ip
Article #15445Re: Why can't my WWW Browser load pages from some Web sites in NT, when Windows 95 is OK?
From: Malcolm Hoar
Date: Mon, 04 Mar 1996 00:00
Date: Mon, 04 Mar 1996 00:00
52 lines
2986 bytes
2986 bytes
In article <313A89DB.354F@mbrg.com>, Mike Berg <mike@mbrg.com> wrote: >I'm having problems reaching some Web sites both with the Netscape and >Microsoft browsers in Windows NT 3.51 and 4.0. However, in Windows 95 >everything is OK (even with the very same Netscape browser!). Two >of the sites I'm having problems with are www.visa.com and www.mks.com. > >In Windows NT, the browsers seem to be able to connect to the sites, but >then hang attempting to load the first page. In Windows 95, >both Netscape 2.0 and the Microsoft Explorer exhibit no such problem. > >I have a PPP account from Quake.Net. My configurations in Windows NT >and Windows 95 are essentially the same -- I configured only what was >necessary to get it to work, and haven't tweaked any of the registry >values. And aside from this, I haven't noticed any other problems with >my PPP connection in either OS. > >It seems that both www.mks.com and www.visa.com are behind some kind of >firewall, since I am unable to get to them with tracert (i.e, >traceroute) even in Windows 95. > >It would appear that there is some difference in the TCP/IP >implementation between Windows 95 and Windows NT that is causing the >problem. What could it be? Hmmm. I can reach both of these sites from my NT 4.0 machine and Netscape 2.0. However, pings from Unix and NT show 100% packet loss to both sites. Tracert from NT and traceroute from my ISP's Unix box both suggest routing problems although their behaviour is somewhat different suggesting some differences in packet formation. In the case of www.visa.com it looks like an MCI problem in Atlanta. NT gives host unreachable and Unix indicates a continuous loop. In the case of www.mks.com, NT reaches UUNET Toronto and then gives a series of timeouts. Unix gets through to the final destination which always drops the second of the three trace packets. These things are not uncommon and will probably clear up in a day or three. In the meantime, I don't believe there is a problem with your machine. -- |~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| | Malcolm Hoar These are NOT my views. My views have | | malch@malch.com been censored by the Communications | | http://www.malch.com/ Decency Act of 1996. Shpx gur PQN. | ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<4hee7c$fil@nntp1.best.com>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!unknown!not-for-mailReferences:
<313A89DB.354F@mbrg.com>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: fa874,1c96d9bdaa93b808,start X-Google-Attributes: gidfa874,public X-Google-Thread: f9325,1c96d9bdaa93b808,start X-Google-Attributes: gidf9325,public From: malch@malch.com (Malcolm Hoar) Subject: Re: Why can't my WWW Browser load pages from some Web sites in NT, when Windows 95 is OK? Date: 1996/03/04 Message-ID: <4hee7c$fil@nntp1.best.com> X-Deja-AN: 141975555 references: <313A89DB.354F@mbrg.com> organization: Malch Enterprizes newsgroups: comp.protocols.tcp-ip,ba.internet