Network Map is *almost* accurate. Help?

I have many machines in my house and have put the responder on most of
them. The XP machines show up connected to the correct switches. The
vista machine (only 1 currently) shows up connected to the correct
wireless access point. The "windows home server" and xbox also show
up correctly.

However...

The map has 1 bug which I'd love to correct - somehow.

The Vista client connects to a wireless access point - drawn
correctly. That access point connects to a switch which then connects
to a gateway which then connects to the internet. This part isn't
drawn correctly. The map shows that the wireless access point
connects directly to the gateway.

Since I can't post a picture - perhaps some quick labels will help.

I have 5 computers on the map (have more, but haven't incorporated
them yet). Let's call them C1 - C5.
I have 2 switches on the map. Let's call them S1 - S2.
I have 1 wireless access point on the map. Let's call it W1.
I have 1 gateway on the map. Let's call it G1.

The map shows:
C1 (vista) -> W1
C2 (xp) -> S1
C3 (xp) -> S1
C4 (xbox) -> S2
C5 (homeserver) -> S2
S2 -> S1
S1 -> W1
W1 -> G1
G1 -> Internet

What it *should* show is (with *** showing the lines that differ from
above):
C1 (vista) -> W1
C2 (xp) -> S1
C3 (xp) -> S1
C4 (xbox) -> S2
C5 (homeserver) -> S2
S2 -> S1
***W1 -> S1
***S1 -> G1
G1 -> Internet

Any ideas?

--Gordon

sorry, no i have no ideas. but i have a question, and I'm NOT being
rude. I just don't understand the need for these maps. Can u please
briefly explain what value they have for setting up/managing/accessing
your networked devices? I've got a 4 PC household with 2 vistas and 2
XP's and I just go to Network, in Explorer, when i need to grab a file
off another machine.

Dave

geez, i posted one reply, but there are 2 from me showing up. can
someone tell me if they see 2 identical responses from me in this
thread? first time I've seen that happen in the NG's in a long time.

Dave

On Thu, 13 Sep 2007 04:38:30 -0000, ghsmith@gmail.com wrote:

>I have many machines in my house and have put the responder on most of
>them. The XP machines show up connected to the correct switches. The
>vista machine (only 1 currently) shows up connected to the correct
>wireless access point. The "windows home server" and xbox also show
>up correctly.
>
>However...
>
>The map has 1 bug which I'd love to correct - somehow.
>
>The Vista client connects to a wireless access point - drawn
>correctly. That access point connects to a switch which then connects
>to a gateway which then connects to the internet. This part isn't
>drawn correctly. The map shows that the wireless access point
>connects directly to the gateway.
>
>Since I can't post a picture - perhaps some quick labels will help.
>
>I have 5 computers on the map (have more, but haven't incorporated
>them yet). Let's call them C1 - C5.
>I have 2 switches on the map. Let's call them S1 - S2.
>I have 1 wireless access point on the map. Let's call it W1.
>I have 1 gateway on the map. Let's call it G1.
>
>The map shows:
>C1 (vista) -> W1
>C2 (xp) -> S1
>C3 (xp) -> S1
>C4 (xbox) -> S2
>C5 (homeserver) -> S2
>S2 -> S1
>S1 -> W1
>W1 -> G1
>G1 -> Internet
>
>What it *should* show is (with *** showing the lines that differ from
>above):
>C1 (vista) -> W1
>C2 (xp) -> S1
>C3 (xp) -> S1
>C4 (xbox) -> S2
>C5 (homeserver) -> S2
>S2 -> S1
>***W1 -> S1
>***S1 -> G1
>G1 -> Internet
>
>Any ideas?
>
>--Gordon

Gordon,

The Network Map is based upon network identity. Switches aren't addressable, ie
they don't have any identity that can be mapped. They are invisible.

--
Cheers,
Chuck, MS-MVP 2005-2007 [Windows - Networking]
http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/
Paranoia is not a problem, when it's a normal response from experience.
My email is AT DOT
actual address pchuck mvps org.

On Wed, 12 Sep 2007 22:07:11 -0700, David <david@invalid.com> wrote:

>geez, i posted one reply, but there are 2 from me showing up. can
>someone tell me if they see 2 identical responses from me in this
>thread? first time I've seen that happen in the NG's in a long time.

I'm only seeing one reply here.

Chris

>
>
> I'm only seeing one reply here.
>
> Chris
>
cool. thanks Chris!

Dave

Thanks for the reply - I understand that they aren't addressable.
However, they ARE showing up on the network map. I'm assuming the
reason that the map is inaccurate is because the algorithm is guessing
about topology of switches etc?

--Gordon

On Sep 12, 10:13 pm, "Chuck [MVP]" <n...@example.net> wrote:
> Gordon,
>
> The Network Map is based upon network identity. Switches aren't addressable, ie
> they don't have any identity that can be mapped. They are invisible.
>
> --
> Cheers,
> Chuck, MS-MVP 2005-2007 [Windows - Networking]http://nitecruzr.blogspot.com/
> Paranoia is not a problem, when it's a normal response from experience.
> My email is AT DOT
> actual address pchuck mvps org.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

ghsmith@gmail.com wrote:
> Thanks for the reply - I understand that they aren't addressable.
> However, they ARE showing up on the network map. I'm assuming the
> reason that the map is inaccurate is because the algorithm is guessing
> about topology of switches etc?
>
> --Gordon
>
>
>
>
and thanks for ignoring my question. you expect YOURS to be answered
here, but u dont see fit to answer my question?

On Sep 13, 7:26 am, David <da...@invalid.com> wrote:
> ghsm...@gmail.com wrote:
> > Thanks for the reply - I understand that they aren't addressable.
> > However, they ARE showing up on the network map. I'm assuming the
> > reason that the map is inaccurate is because the algorithm is guessing
> > about topology of switches etc?
>
> > --Gordon
>
> and thanks for ignoring my question. you expect YOURS to be answered
> here, but u dont see fit to answer my question?

I don't know of a practical reason for it yet - I haven't thought it
through that far yet. I just know it's a new feature and I'm hoping
to have it work correctly.

BTW: I don't think it's rude to focus on MY question in MY thread.
If you want YOURS to be the focal point of a thread, start a new
thread? I didn't want this thread being hijacked into a different
topic so I wasn't going to respond until the real purpose of this
thread had been resolved.

--Gordon

> I don't know of a practical reason for it yet - I haven't thought it
> through that far yet. I just know it's a new feature and I'm hoping
> to have it work correctly.
>
> BTW: I don't think it's rude to focus on MY question in MY thread.
> If you want YOURS to be the focal point of a thread, start a new
> thread? I didn't want this thread being hijacked into a different
> topic so I wasn't going to respond until the real purpose of this
> thread had been resolved.
>
> --Gordon
>
>
ah, gordon, I guess my point was that while you ask questions that you'd
hope to get answers for, isn't it reasonable to be forthcoming with an
answer for someone with a question only you can answer, since it's
directed to you specifically? I'm just trying to learn as much about
this new OS as I can and your assistance would be helpful to me in that
regard, just as surely as assistance from someone who can answer YOUR
question will be helpful to you. ie think of the Golden Rule. and i
never said you were rude. cheers!

oh, and thanks for mentioning that you aren't really sure of a
practical reason for viewing the map. I've not seen it, so thats why i
was asking about it.

Dave