none
Cannot copy %filename%, network name no longer available. RRS feed

  • Question

  • I get this error sooo many times it is no longer just a fluke on my home network.

    I have Windows Home Server setup in my own workgroup,  it's name is still SERVER.   Does changing the workgroup mess it up?

    Everytime I start a file copy to the server this happens somewhere along the line.   It will happen more often on large file copies.   I am simply trying to copy my home data to this server so that I can test the other uses of it.

    I posted a bug for it.   I am not seeing that other people are having the same issue.  If you are please vote.


    https://connect.microsoft.com/WindowsHomeServer/feedback/ViewFeedback.aspx?FeedbackID=261530
    Tuesday, March 6, 2007 1:26 PM

All replies

  • I am having this same issue with mine. Server name is SERVER and the workgroup is the WHS default workgroup and on certain machines I'm getting that error.

    On your bug I have voted and validated. Thanks!

    Tuesday, March 6, 2007 2:42 PM
    Moderator
  • Yep, I'm getting this too - usually after several gigabytes of copying has worked!

    Have added my validation to the bug.

    Tuesday, March 6, 2007 3:32 PM
  • Trying to bump this back up on 1st page so that it gets noticed.
    Tuesday, March 6, 2007 6:26 PM
  • Have created a new bug also, as in my case the copy or DVD rip fails with the directory no longer accessible. At this point no shares are available, but the connector and remote desktop still work, but only for a few minutes before the server hangs.

    I caught it this time, and the server doesn't actually hang, but it does respond extremely slowly, and the DEmigrator.exe progess is no-where in the task list - as though it's died and that's caused the problem.

    https://connect.microsoft.com/WindowsHomeServer/feedback/ViewFeedback.aspx?FeedbackID=261956

    Tuesday, March 6, 2007 6:33 PM
  • i'm having this same issue with the RC installation.  Have any fixes been discovered as of yet?
    Monday, June 18, 2007 11:52 PM
  • I have the same issue: Cannot copy *name of file* Network name no longer available. Tried different drivers, new NIC, some teaks on the NIC as well. Right now I am reinstalling the OS.
    Tuesday, June 19, 2007 12:30 AM
  • I am still seeing this issue with the RC version. If I disable and re-enable the network card after the problem occurs, the WHS will recover.  I now use robocopy with success, but the transfers from my machines on a 100Mb network are not that fast, about 2-3% network utilization, but at least it does not kill the network on the WHS.
    Tuesday, June 19, 2007 1:08 AM
  • I have the same problem.

    I tried to copy a lot of small files at the same time ie music will get through several thousand and then the share is no longer available.

     

    Also had the problem when I copy several directories with photo's say total 1.8Gig at the same time.

     

    I have no problems with any other shares on any other PC's on the network.

     

    Ron

    Tuesday, June 19, 2007 2:04 AM
  • It looks like there are some other guys with the same problem. Check http://forums.microsoft.com/WindowsHomeServer/ShowPost.aspx?PostID=1750426&SiteID=50
    Tuesday, June 19, 2007 3:12 AM
  • Same problem here copying large files of any sort start of fine then the network will just stop.
    Some times it will start up again by itself after 1-2 mins and other I get the path unavailable.
    I get no ware near the throughput I should get on 100mb or Gbit. I have swapped out everything on my network switches cables everything and updated all my network card drivers, it makes no difference. There have been some suggestions about turning of duplication on the relevant folder but that makes no difference ether.


    Tuesday, June 26, 2007 8:48 PM
  • Add me to the growing list of people seeing this issue. However, I had not seen it until I was attempting to back up a laptop. Up until now I had not seen this issue while using either of my two desktops. The laptop is my Mom’s and I brought it over to do a backup and save her files. The NIC built into the laptop doesn’t work, so I installed a USB2.0 NIC adapter. The initial backup took just over 3 hours for 20GB of data. I thought this was taking way to long, but I thought it had more to do with her laptop being old and the USB2.0 adapter working off of a USB1.1 port. I then wanted to copy all of her document and pictures to a share on the server. I just selected all of it and walked away (the initial time projected by Windows was 130minutes). I came back an hour later and found the system had stopped with network error after what looked like only a couple of minutes. At that point I decided to start copying a folder at a time and continued to receive the error over and over. I suspected a problem on my end since neither of my desktops have had this issue. I changed out the network cable and I installed a USB2.0 cardbus adapter with no success. As a final test I connected my USB hard drive to the laptop and copied all of the files to it. I then connected the USB hard drive to one of my desktops and transferred the files to the server without an issue.

     

    “Error Copying File or Folder”

    “Cannot copy ATT00070: The specified network name is no longer available.”

     

    I also received some other strange errors. The strangest was Cannot Copy File: File Exists. I’ve never seen that in Windows because a copy normally ask if you want to overwrite the file. But what was really strange was that when I opened the folder on the share it was empty. So, I attempted to delete the folder and Widows responded that it Cannot delete the folder as the folder is not empty. Again, I’d never see that message before.

    Tuesday, June 26, 2007 10:14 PM
  • My turn to go on the list.....

    I get about a third of the way copying a 1 gig file, everything stops for a minute or so, and I get "can not copy (file): the specified network name is no longer available."

    At first I thought this was my RocketRAID454 PCI RAID card going flaky on me (I added it to the server immediately before this started).  But I removed it and replaced it with a plain jane Promise PCI IDE card, and I'm still getting the problem.

    Looking at this thread, it seems to be a WHS issue, and not the hardware itself.  I'll go vote i the other thread mentioned here.....


    Thursday, July 5, 2007 5:12 PM
  • Update:  It's not a hardware issue, but definitely has something to do with adding more hard drive controllers.

    In the console, I removed the drives that were attached to the PCI controllers, (went back to only using the four IDE drives connected directly to the mobo), and magically the "network name no longer available" problem disappeared.  I can copy files to WHS again, even though the drives and controllers are not *physically* removed from the system.

    Unfortunately this also means my WHS server is almost full again.  Sad
      I hope this issue gets fixed soon!


    Friday, July 6, 2007 12:41 PM
  • Same problem here,

     

    It started AFTER I added a new harddrive to the server and started duplicating some folders. Maybe it's not related, but I also had an error with a file that would duplicate. The error had something to do with the file system according to WHS. After I deleted the file and restarted WHS the error was gone, but file copy is still not working properly.

    Sunday, July 8, 2007 2:26 PM
  • I've removed the second drive with the Wizard supplied with the WHS console. The problem described above is gone. The shares are all accessible again, without even having to reboot the server. It seems to me the probleem is with the duplication process.

     

    Can anybody comment on that?

    Sunday, July 8, 2007 2:27 PM
  • Nope, it's not because of duplication. I have NO duplication enabled whatsoever and I still get the error message.

    Or should I say... still GOT the error message (past tense).

    I seem to have solved it in my own situation. Hope fully this can help others here.

    WHS ran fine with 4 750 gig drives in a CoolerMaster Stacker case, all connected to the mobo's IDE controllers and residing in a CM 4-in-3 drive cage. My problem started when I added a fifth 750 gig drive connected to a RocketRaid 454 IDE controller card and residing in a Vigor single heatsink/fan/5-inch bay adapter. The IDE connector from the power supply went into the Vigor fan and the Vigor had a second connector for the hard drive it was cooling. That's when the "network name no longer available" message started showing up while copying files to WHS.

    At first I figured it was the RocketRaid card going flaky on me. So I removed the drive in WHS console, shut the server down, removed the RocketRaid card, installed two plain jane Promise IDE controller cards, and rebooted.

    Didn't help. Obviously the RocketRaid card was not the problem. I removed the drive entirely and the problem went away completely. But I still couldn't copy too many more files because the original 4 drives were full.

    I took that fifth drive to the client PC, hooked up a USB adapter to it, and started using it as an external drive. Guess what.... when copying files to it, I got a "drive is no longer available" error message!

    At that point, I disconnected the Vigor's fan (still left the drive itself in the Vigor for its heatsink properties) and connected the power cables to the drive itself instead of going through the Vigor first.

    Voila! End of problem.

    I am now copying files again with no trouble whatsoever.

    Hope this helps others with this issue................


    Monday, July 16, 2007 4:04 PM
  •  

    I too had this issue.

    Mine would actually display different error messages though. Sometimes the file no longer availalble, sometimes i did not have acccess. For me, the time line of events was (short version):

     

    HWS up and running with 3 pc's and 3 users. all had access to everything and no issues

     

    added another 300gb h/d and 2 pc's and also 4 new shared folders

     

    the new users could not access anything and the existing users could not access the new folders. I kept getting the same messages - directy access error, no longer available, no authorisation etc

     

    the access for the shared folders through the consoles was fine, i reinstalled the console program on the pcs, deleted the files and created new ones and test ones etc and still had the same issue. In the end....

     

    I logged into the server (remotely for me as it is headless) -

    opened the 'Shared Folders' and right clicked on each of the shared folders, went to properties and security and then added my users (check name etc - SERVER/JoeBloe) and gave them 'Full Rights' for each file.

     

    exited remote desktop and issue solved on all pc's folders and users without even having to reboot the server. Not sure whether this will help everyone or why it worked when i had enabled full access through console anyways... but meh...

     

    EDIT: Also - i noticed in another post and verified on my machine that this can happen. When you are copying large amounts of data onto a file on the server or if uTorrent is downloading  - it may cause the file(s) to become 'unavailable' - if you get the message- try again after stopping uTorrent or copying data over.

    Wednesday, July 18, 2007 5:11 AM
  • I tried adding just a second drive, without setting duplication on the folders. I immediately found myself having the same problems again. Removed the second drive again and the problems were gone.

     

    I think this is a serious problem, but I can't quite relate it to something malfunctioning. It's not the disk, that's for sure. Maybe it's the controller? It's an old board, an Asus A7V333 with a Via IDE chipset and a Promise RAID controller. Or is it a configuration problem? I already removed the uTorrent add-in and disabled the auto start feature of uTorrent.

     

    Is there anybody from Microsoft looking at this problem, or am I the only one who's getting a little frustrated that simply adding a second drive messes up the file sharing? I'd love to give some more information about my system and/or configuration if this can help the developers solve the problem.

    Monday, July 30, 2007 7:46 PM
  • I am also getting this error at home now... Its driving me crazy P4 2.8Ghz / 1GB / DLink Gigabit adaptor (tried both onboard and PCI nic card, same result) 2 x 500 GB Seagate HDs  Anyone found a workable solution?  The location I am copying to does have mirroring disabled.  I had previously had a couple of USB HDs attached to move files back onto the new 500GB drives... could this be causing an issue? 
    Monday, August 13, 2007 2:24 PM
  •  

    I am getting this problem also and it was an occasional thing and now has grown to a problem that happens every flippin time I tried to copy a file. The sad thing is that Ken Warren and other MS gurus have faild to drop a thought off on this thread. Perhaps I'll see if there are other threads on this as well. A couple weeks ago I posted the improvements of going from 100 to 1000 Nics and switch. And nothing has changed on the server physically but now I get this error.

     

    And to think the WHS units will be coming out in retail soon.
    Monday, August 27, 2007 2:04 PM
  • I've seen this thread, but didn't really have much to contribute at the time. Since you ask specifically, I would say that the most likely cause is a hardware or driver issue with your network connection.

    I would start by seeing what kind of packet losses you're seeing with large packets:

    Code Snippet

    ping [my_server_ip] -n 25 -l 65500


    In a home environment, with a wired connection, I would normally expect to see 0% loss. Anything more is a red flag that you've got a hardware or driver issue on one or the other side.

    Let us know the results, and we'll see where we can go from there.

    If you have a wireless connection now, try switching to a wired connection and see if your problems go away.
    Monday, August 27, 2007 3:30 PM
    Moderator
  • Ken,

     

    Tried your suggestion in my single drive, thus working, environment. A ping that big isn't supported in my network, I think it's actually a restriction in Windows. I managed to squeeze 40k through though. The results are as follows:

     

    C:\Users\Lex>ping 10.20.6.20 -n 25 -l 40000

    Pinging 10.20.6.20 with 40000 bytes of data:

    Reply from 10.20.6.20: bytes=40000 time=7ms TTL=128
    Reply from 10.20.6.20: bytes=40000 time=7ms TTL=128
    Reply from 10.20.6.20: bytes=40000 time=7ms TTL=128
    Reply from 10.20.6.20: bytes=40000 time=7ms TTL=128
    Reply from 10.20.6.20: bytes=40000 time=15ms TTL=128
    Reply from 10.20.6.20: bytes=40000 time=7ms TTL=128
    Reply from 10.20.6.20: bytes=40000 time=7ms TTL=128
    Reply from 10.20.6.20: bytes=40000 time=7ms TTL=128
    Reply from 10.20.6.20: bytes=40000 time=7ms TTL=128
    Reply from 10.20.6.20: bytes=40000 time=7ms TTL=128
    Reply from 10.20.6.20: bytes=40000 time=7ms TTL=128
    Reply from 10.20.6.20: bytes=40000 time=7ms TTL=128
    Reply from 10.20.6.20: bytes=40000 time=7ms TTL=128
    Reply from 10.20.6.20: bytes=40000 time=7ms TTL=128
    Reply from 10.20.6.20: bytes=40000 time=7ms TTL=128
    Reply from 10.20.6.20: bytes=40000 time=7ms TTL=128
    Reply from 10.20.6.20: bytes=40000 time=7ms TTL=128
    Reply from 10.20.6.20: bytes=40000 time=7ms TTL=128
    Reply from 10.20.6.20: bytes=40000 time=7ms TTL=128
    Reply from 10.20.6.20: bytes=40000 time=7ms TTL=128
    Reply from 10.20.6.20: bytes=40000 time=7ms TTL=128
    Reply from 10.20.6.20: bytes=40000 time=9ms TTL=128
    Reply from 10.20.6.20: bytes=40000 time=7ms TTL=128
    Reply from 10.20.6.20: bytes=40000 time=7ms TTL=128
    Reply from 10.20.6.20: bytes=40000 time=7ms TTL=128

    Ping statistics for 10.20.6.20:
        Packets: Sent = 25, Received = 25, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
    Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
        Minimum = 7ms, Maximum = 15ms, Average = 7ms

     

    Without the second hard-drive everything is performing normal. Just adding a second drive messes things up. Removing the drive solves the problem again.

     

    Just for the record. I've got an Asus A7V333 mobo with a Athlon 2500+ processor and I think I'm using the standard IDE controller, not the RAID enabled ones.

     

    Monday, August 27, 2007 4:48 PM
  • I'm still getting this issue. It has happened only since i added my third IDE drive. Nothing changed before or after that - all i did was add the drive and since i have been getting the issue.

     

    I had thought that the problem was resolved by adding my user under the permissions tab on the files i wanted to copy from and too. sometimes this works and other times it does not. interestingly the permissions seem to revert back to default after an unkown period of time, because when i go back in several days later when the issue occurs again the changes are not there.  

     

    i can't seem to pin the problem on one particular thing, it's very annoying though! Nothing else on the network has any issues copying any amounts of data back and forth, only when through the server and only since i added the third drive. When i remove the drive the problem seems to go away - although i have not removed it for long enough to know for sure.

     

    Tuesday, August 28, 2007 1:03 AM
  • Not sure if anyone here is still having the problem, but I found a solution for my situation which might be beneficial to others.  I posted this in a Bug Feedback area but was not sure if it would filter through to the forum so here it is:

     

    First, my hardware in question is a home-brew Home Server with a SATA 150 Promise PCI Controller with (2) SATA 320GB and (2) PATA 250GB drives attached and a Promise Ultra TX2 PCI Controller with (2) PATA 120GB drives attached.

     

    I started the build-out by only using the SATA 150 card and the four attached drives but would end up with the error in question everytime I tried to do a large file copy.  I tried so many different things and nothing seemed to work.  While looking at the driver disk for the SATA 150 controller, I noticed a program called 'Cache Config.exe'.  Upon launching it, I discovered it allowed me to set the cache for each individual drive to ON/OFF with Write-Back or Write-Through caching.  If I set it to OFF or ON w/ Write-Back (the default), I continued to see the errors.  But as soon as I set all drives to Write-Through cache and rebooted, the problem disappeared.

     

    So now I was feeling good and decided to throw my extra 120GB drives into the mix with the second Promise controller.  But as soon as I added them, the error came back.  So I tried launching the 'Cache Config.exe' program but much to my dismay, it came back with an error message stating it does not support multiple controllers.  And a quick look in Device Manager would show all cache options for the drives greyed out.  Hmmm....

     

    Given the fix for the first controller I thought there must be a way to set the cache to Write-Through for the (2) 120GB drives.  While poking around the registry, I decided to look at my Run list and noticed a strange entry: 'PtivPbmd REG_SZ Rundll32.exe ptipbm.dll,SetWriteBack'.  A quick Google search later and sure enough, the entry was made by the Promise drivers I installed for the second controller.  And as the text would appear to indicate, it was installed to turn on Write-Back cache settings for all attached drives.  I have no idea if it turned on Write-Back cache settings for all controllers and all drives but guess what happened when I removed the entry and rebooted?  Back working smooth as silk with all drives and both controllers.  And yes, I have duplication turned on for almost all folders and my primary hard drive is the largest and fastest one (<--VERY IMPORTANT).

     

    Besides fixing the file copy error, there has been a definite increase in the file copy speed (or at least a much more consistent flow).  It used to transfer for the first few minutes looking great and then the Time Remaining would start bouncing all over the place and overall throughput would become painfully slow before erroring out.

     

    My theory is that the Drive Extender Service (demigrator.exe) runs into a timing error when a transmission error occurs and hard drive Write-Back caching is turned on.  More than likely due to the delay created when Write-Back caching recovers from a transmission error but I won't get into that now.

     

    Hopefully this will help others in the same situation.  If you have any other questions or comments, please let me know.

     

    Now if MS will just fix the corruption issues and Offline Files problem, Home Server might finally live up to all it's promises.  ;-)

     

    -PipeStanK

    Saturday, January 26, 2008 6:40 PM
  • Still an issue here.

     

    I'm transferring data to the new server and this error occurs after a couple of gb transfer.  Then says that I'm no longer connected to the server.

     

    After looking at the serving it now has "Health" issues and says I have problems with the UPnP on the router.  I reboot the server and NO ERRORS.  I just have not figured out yet how to get my PC back online with the server.  After a while it shows up on my computer with no health issues and I can continue copying data.

     

    New machine install: 1tb drive and 360 gb.  Turned off copy feature, any media sharing.  Copying JPG photo library.

     

    Also have tried other software to copy and that has not made a difference.

    Thursday, January 31, 2008 5:03 PM
  • OK I'm seeing this now to and it's really urking me.. I have a project to complete and it's throwing me an error.
    Friday, February 1, 2008 1:39 AM
  • I constantly see this same error whenever I am copying large files or ripping DVDs to the home server.  Have there been any developments or fixes for this?  I am running Vista (not SP1) on the PCs where I start the copies to the WHS shared drives.  Just wondering if anyone has tried SP1 and if the new file copying code might have helped things at all...  I doubt it...  I am also going to check out the write-back/write-through caching idea that someone posted about before...

     

    -Dan

     

     

    Tuesday, April 15, 2008 5:58 AM
  • I had the same problem, first I thought it was my AV (AVG) that was messing things up, but uninstalling it did no good. I was also having issues with speed so I did go to the computer management console and turn on write cache for all drives ( 6 of them). After this I have not seen this problem at all.
    Tuesday, April 15, 2008 10:34 AM
  • tnslocum,

     

    I was having a similar problem in that anytime I kicked off a copy, it would fail anywhere from 10 minutes to an hour into the copy.  Had the hardest time figuring out what was happening as I was actually having two separate issues that resulted in the same error.  I have posted earlier in this thread about my fix for the first issue.

     

    As for the second issue, I finally determined via packet sniffing that whenever a UPNP broadcast (an SSDP protocol broadcast to 239.255.255.250) was sent out from the HS, traffic back to my HS network adapter would be blocked for anywhere from 2-20 pings (usually 3-5) from all other computers.  This obviously would effectively kill any file transfer in progress to/from the HS.  After ruling out all computer components and using mutiple NIC's, I figured it had something to do with the chipset of the motherboard I was using.  So I disabled all the UPNP services on the HS and the problem went away.  My file transfers and streaming would now work flawlessly but at the expense of losing UPNP functionality.

     

    Not satisifed with this result, I decided to build out HS on a completely different platform but had the exact same problem.  Knowing that it was no longer directly related to the HS, I started looking at all my networking gear.  Turns out the problem all along was my D-Link DI-624 wireless router.  There is an option under Misc settings to allow Multicast Streaming which once turned off, alleviated the problem.  The strangest part of it all is that I am only using the DI-624 as a wireless access point so it should have no ability to block traffic back to my HS but it did!

     

    To check if you have a similar problem, start a constant ping to the HS from another computer using the '-t' option flag.  Start a large file transfer and wait for it to fail.  If the pings to your HS fail to reply at the same time the transfer fails, you might be experiencing something similar in nature.  If so, I would then take a look at all your router settings.

     

    -PipeStanK

    Tuesday, April 15, 2008 7:53 PM
  • I have the same problem and was hoping this would help me as well. Unfortunately, it didn't. I am unable make a full backup of my 64bit VIsta PC to a shared folder in the Home Server because it fails in the process with the "network path not found" error.

     

    I have two drives, both connected to the motherboard built-in sata controller. I found the SetWriteBack entry in the registry as you said, and removed it, rebooted, tried again, and failed with the same error.

     

    I don't know what else to try. The shared folder I am targeting has duplication turned off. Appreciate any more ideas. It's kind of frustrating to have a file server that you can't write files to.

     

     Nathan Drost wrote:

    Given the fix for the first controller I thought there must be a way to set the cache to Write-Through for the (2) 120GB drives.  While poking around the registry, I decided to look at my Run list and noticed a strange entry: 'PtivPbmd REG_SZ Rundll32.exe ptipbm.dll,SetWriteBack'.  A quick Google search later and sure enough, the entry was made by the Promise drivers I installed for the second controller.  And as the text would appear to indicate, it was installed to turn on Write-Back cache settings for all attached drives.  I have no idea if it turned on Write-Back cache settings for all controllers and all drives but guess what happened when I removed the entry and rebooted?  Back working smooth as silk with all drives and both controllers.  And yes, I have duplication turned on for almost all folders and my primary hard drive is the largest and fastest one (<--VERY IMPORTANT).

    Thursday, April 17, 2008 9:50 PM
  • BigCat400,

     

    I forgot to mention, the registry entry for the WriteBack cache was specific to my Promise Ultra 100 PCI card.  Usually you should be able to set the cache settings under Device Manager which I suppose you already tried.  If the options are greyed out or missing and you do not have a specific cache setting utility for your drives or controller, the only other option would be to use a hard drive utility like the Hitachi (IBM) Hard Disk Feature Tool.  I found that the Hitachi tool (a bootable DOS disk or CD) would allow me to make cache setting changes to all my drives even though none of them were Hitachi or IBM.  Drives connected to the motherboard took the cache settings but ones on my Promise controllers would not.  Give the tool a try and see if you can find a cache setting that works, even if you have to turn off both Write Through and Write Back.  You will incur a performance hit if you turn off cache completely but I would trade that for a file server that works.  ;-)

     

    PipeStanK

    Thursday, April 17, 2008 11:34 PM
  • PipeStanK,

     

    Under device manager, the option "Optimize for performance" is set and can't be changed (it's greyed out). Under "optimize for performance", two other options are available, enable write caching, and enable advance performance mode, or something like that. When I disable these two options, my file copy fails almost right away. With either one or both enabled, my copy lasts way much longer but fails anyway with the same error.

     

    I will look at the Hitachi tool.

     

    Thanks for the help.

     

     PipeStanK wrote:

    BigCat400,

     

    I forgot to mention, the registry entry for the WriteBack cache was specific to my Promise Ultra 100 PCI card.  Usually you should be able to set the cache settings under Device Manager which I suppose you already tried.  If the options are greyed out or missing and you do not have a specific cache setting utility for your drives or controller, the only other option would be to use a hard drive utility like the Hitachi (IBM) Hard Disk Feature Tool.  I found that the Hitachi tool (a bootable DOS disk or CD) would allow me to make cache setting changes to all my drives even though none of them were Hitachi or IBM.  Drives connected to the motherboard took the cache settings but ones on my Promise controllers would not.  Give the tool a try and see if you can find a cache setting that works, even if you have to turn off both Write Through and Write Back.  You will incur a performance hit if you turn off cache completely but I would trade that for a file server that works.  ;-)

     

    PipeStanK

    Friday, April 18, 2008 2:50 PM
  • I am seeing something very similar to what PipeStank is experiencing.  I was able to uncheck the "enable write caching" box for all of the drives that are directly connected to the motherboard (3 PATA and 2 SATA).  The other SATA drives are on separate PCI controllers and the options for "enable write caching" and "enable advanced performance" didn't even appear, and the "Optimize for performance" options were greyed out.

     

    Now, with write caching disabled for the motherboard attached disks, which includes the system drive (C: and DSmile, I am seeing the error much quicker and more frequently.  I can't even rip a single DVD with merged VOBs without getting the error.  With write caching turned on, I don't get the error unless I am ripping, copying, and doing a lot of stuff at the same time.

     

    I am fairly certain that I only have free space on the system drive and the last drive added to the pool.  The data is landing on the system drive (which has write caching disabled now) and then Drive Extender is moving the data to the last added disk (which may or may not have write caching since I didn't have the option to enable or disable it).

     

    This is getting frustrating...  I am going to reenable write caching for now since it at least allows me to work single threaded.  I just can't overwork the Home Server by doing a ton of I/O at once.  Also, I am not sure it matters, but the host PC doing most of the writing to the WHS is running Vista (not SP1).

     

    -Dan

     

    Friday, April 18, 2008 8:14 PM
  • I am getting really frustrated now...  I downloaded and used the Hitachi/IBM feature tool to turn off write caching on all of my drives.  Interestingly, it seemed to work on all of the drives except for my 3 Hitachi drives!  How is that for irony?  I rebooted the WHS and checked the drive settings under each PCI controller (each of the 3 PCI controllers have 4 drives attached, and I could see write caching was disabled by checking the parameteres for each bus and channel).  Write caching was off for all but the 3 Hitachi drives.

     

    Then I ran some tests of copying large (>4GB) files to the Home Server.  Not a single transfer completed successfully!  I am still getting the network name no longer available error anywhere from 30% - 75% through the transfer.  I started a ping -t during the tests to see if there was any network interruption and there didn't appear to be; 0% packet loss...

     

    Here is another interesting thing...  After all of the testing failed, I loaded up the Hitachi/IBM tool again to reenable the write caching.  To my surprise, it was already turned back on for most of the drives!  I don't know how that happened unless the IBM tool itself did it.  I also can't seem to enable write caching on one of my 1TB WD drives, and I don't know why (it says the setting was successful, but when I check it again either within the IBM tool or Device Manager, write caching is off).

     

    Right now, I am running the WHS Toolkit Server Storage Diagnostic to see if anything strange shows up.  Any other ideas?  I think I am going to try robocopy or some other network file copying tool for large file transfers for now, but I hate having to do that!

     

    Thanks,

    Dan

     

    Thursday, April 24, 2008 6:00 PM
  •  

    Give IP Manually ( Static IP )

    New copy the file

    If it is working , please send mail to me 

    e- mail:  msbabu84@hotmail.com

    Monday, April 28, 2008 5:08 AM
  • Give IP Manually ( Static IP )

    New copy the file

    If it is working , please send mail to me 

    e- mail:  msbabu84@hotmail.com

     

    Monday, April 28, 2008 5:09 AM
  • My WHS already has a static IP.  So, that isn't going to help...

     

    Tuesday, May 6, 2008 2:39 AM
  • Static ip did not help either here. I continue to get the "network name no longer available" error when trying to manually backup my 64bit Vista PC. So this, with no 64bit connector, I am unable to backup my pc at all to WHS. I am wondering if the connector will have the same error when it comes out. I am not sure what else to try right now.

     

     djsecrist wrote:
    My WHS already has a static IP.  So, that isn't going to help...

     

    Tuesday, May 6, 2008 11:32 AM
  • Having the same problem, and it's driving me nuts!  Come on MS, don't just writie the issue off as "non-reproducible"...

    Have stopped Utorrent service and unticked write caching on all the drives in the server - has made no difference.  Ping -t continues thought the transfer and subsequent lockout...

    I have a 4 drive WHS - System drive is IDE off the motherboard, then I have three supplementary drives with are sata and also off the motherboard.  No additional cards or controllers.
    Friday, May 30, 2008 7:32 AM
  • Saturday, May 31, 2008 2:42 PM
  •  

    I finally worked up enough courage to install the WHS Power Pack 1 Beta, and I am not having this issue anymore!  Hooray!!!  I have been doing all of the usual things that used to cause me grief and I haven't hit the "network name no longer available" problem once!  I am not 100% convinced that it is gone forever, but I am feeling really, really good about it!  Thank you, Microsoft!  I don't know if this was fixed intentionally, but whatever they did in Power Pack 1 seems to have done the trick.  I am also seeing much better network throughput, as things seem to copy to the WHS much faster than before.  No firm metrics to share, but from what I can remember the Vista copy progress window is showing transfer speeds >50% faster and it just feels much quicker.

     

    -Dan

     

    Monday, July 14, 2008 8:47 PM
  • http://www.xpmediacentre.com.au/community/windows-home-server/29997-whs-network-transfer-performance-some-storage-pool-observations-4.html , I hope the PP1 fix is universal, if you try the link above, the Australian WHS folks are also encountering a problem similar to this.

    Ben
    Monday, July 14, 2008 9:29 PM
  • I'm very late into this thread, but FWIW there was a similar speed/connectionloss issue on the ReadyNAS when using Vista. The guys at Infrant (now Linksys) developed a Vista stability patch for the ReadyNAS, but it was of limited benefit.
    Installing SP1 seems to have greatly helped the problem for VIsta users connecting to a ReadyNAS. It might help for the connection drop issue to WHS.
    Worth mentioning, even if just for background info.

    Tuesday, July 15, 2008 1:44 AM
  • A year later and with PP2 and this problem will just not go away.  Interestingly, I have the problem even if I use RDC and perform the file copying from the shared folders on the server desktop.  That should not pass any of the file transfer traffic thru the NIC as I am simply moving large files from one shared folder to another within the internal storage pool (four 1 TB drives)

    This is the only thread I could find describing this problem specifically.  Did anyone ever come up with a fix for this problem?
    Thursday, July 2, 2009 3:15 AM
  • Usually, when I see a network drop-out such as this thread describes, I look first to networking hardware and software, because that's usually where the problem lies. So checking cables, trying alternative ports on your switch, updating network drivers, etc. are all steps that should be taken early on in the debugging process.

    That said, can you start a new thread and tell us more about your server? ("Same error" does not always equal "same problem" especially after the passage of much time.) And finally, if you could file a bug on Connect, with logs from your server and client, that would be helpful. If you have not done so previously, you'll have to sign up with Connect, and then join the Windows Home Server "beta" program.
    I'm not on the WHS team, I just post a lot. :)
    Thursday, July 2, 2009 2:14 PM
    Moderator
  • Thanks, Ken.  I'll do that, but it may be a while.  It's summer vacation time now and all the grandkids in the world are about to desend upon me.
    Thursday, July 2, 2009 5:22 PM
  • I thought bugs like this would be corrected by mid 2010.  WHS is fully patched and has the latest drivers, including the network drivers. 

    I used to get the same message when copying from an XP box, but decided to test with copies between the D: drive to a share (ie both on the server) as it bypassed potential problems like router configurations etc.  It always fails after a couple of hundred GB. 

    This thread was invaluable.  Disabling UPNP and the write cache on the drive I was copying from allowed the copied to complete successfully. [and yes, it's odd that it's the Write cache, and I'm only Reading from that drive.]

    Anyway, I took Kens advice above and went to the Connect site to report the bug.  You can't report bugs on WHS 2003 any more - you can only report bugs on 'Vail', the new beta which is based on 2008 R2.

    It looks like it will never be corrected.

    Friday, June 11, 2010 10:56 PM
  • Q. Cannot copy %filename%, network name no longer available

     

    Whenever NAT is in place and a new connection is established to a server, the server check for previous connections from the same client IP address and deletes any previous connections. Because NAT acts as a proxy for the SMB protocol by using the same IP address from the two client connection requests, the earlier connection is terminated.

    To resolve this we have to ensure that SMB connection is established on port 139, to do that we have to set following registry key on server

    You also have to ensure that port 139 is opened on the Firewall

     

    1.

    Start Registry Editor.

    2.

    Locate and then click the following registry key:

    HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\System\CurrentControlSet\Services\NetBT\Parameters

    3.

    Add the following registry value:

    Value Name : SmbDeviceEnabled
    Type : REG_DWORD
    Value Data : 0

    The default setting is 1 (enabled)

     

    Wednesday, June 23, 2010 6:34 AM
  • I have been getting this error trying to copy files under a couple of scenarios.  However, I have narrowed down one to a definite "solution".  It seems that, if you have Sunbelt Personal Firewall (SPF) running, there are certain byte combinations that cause SPF to produce this (and other related) errors.  There are certain files that just won't copy.  I spent a bunch of time carving up files into smaller and smaller chunks.  I wound up with several 1K files that would fail every time.  (I attached them to an email that I sent to Sunbelt support.  They did not test them.)  I found that I had to disable SPF on both the source and the target machines for them to copy successfully.  I have done this successfully with several source machines and several target machines that would fail if SPF was enabled on either.  (Maybe if Sunbelt sees this message, they will do something about it.)

     

    >> I have since learned from Sunbelt that they have no intention of fixing this problem since they only are concerned with their new "Vipre" product.

    I have happily switched to Comodo's Firewall (only). <<

    • Proposed as answer by Ibrahim Kurhan Monday, September 20, 2010 9:21 PM
    • Edited by DirtySox Friday, October 1, 2010 1:48 PM
    Thursday, August 12, 2010 1:07 AM
  • I got the problem on remote desktop where I was trying to copy some files from file server to PCs. I tried all PCs and got always the same error. It took me two days to find the reason. It was a very simple reason that was blocking file copy as follows: RDP on server was set to connect the server drive as local resource. After I connect to the PC I was going directly to "My Network Places" to see the directory from where I wanted to copy files. However, the same drive was already connected as RDP local resource!!! That was the reason blocking me to copy files from the server to local PCs.

    Monday, September 20, 2010 9:32 PM
  • For me, the "Cannot copy ... network name no longer available" error was caused by a conflicting IP address. As Ken says above, "Same error" does not always equal "same problem."
    Monday, December 17, 2012 10:46 PM