Show all posts by user
Re: WoL Manager and backwards broadcast addresses
7 years ago, by rseiler in Network Scanner Forum
It was as simple as that, thanks again. And you're right, this system has seen many, many version upgrades.
WoL Manager and backwards broadcast addresses
7 years ago, by rseiler in Network Scanner Forum
I'm using 6.1.9 but don't know if this happened before. I think not, though. When using "Save MAC to WoL Manager" or actually in the Manager and using Add IPv4 Target, the broadcast address is backwards! If you're using 255.255.255.255, this won't be noticed, of course, but: https://s21.postimg.org/5d4tfcsnb/Capture.jpg Interestingly, even when you use Advanced to correct it, i
Re: Current version and CPU load on Windows 10 x64 (1511)
8 years ago, by rseiler in NetWorx Forum
There must be other variables, as I've used it with every 10 beta and haven't had that problem. One possible variable: I'm using Winpcap, not the built-in driver. But it could be any number of other things.
Re: Windows 10 upgrade and support
8 years ago, by rseiler in NetWorx Forum
It's only a beta build of Windows, and it may only be me, but I've noticed a change with 10525. For the first time since this: https://www.softperfect.com/board/read.php?8,17897 I've noticed the "zero" problem (zero when hovering over the tray icon, and no further updating in the usage reporting UI), or at least something very similar to it (I should add: still randomly and infrequent
Re: Beta-testers needed to test a new feature
8 years ago, by rseiler in NetWorx Forum
What's really the last report of the month (but which is technically sent in the first minute of the new month) shows the "This month" total for the current month instead of the final tally for the last month.
Re: Beta-testers needed to test a new feature
8 years ago, by rseiler in NetWorx Forum
This is uber-picky, and I don't even normally use Gmail so it was just accidental that I even saw this, but since it's still in beta (didn't test if it happened in the released Networx version) I noticed that Gmail has a problem in that it adds "   " (http://www.sightspecific.com/~mosh/www_faq/nbsp.html) into what would normally be the blank area on the 2nd row. It shows
Re: Beta-testers needed to test a new feature
8 years ago, by rseiler in NetWorx Forum
It works! Thanks for solving the puzzle. Why did any clients have a problem with such basic HTML?
Re: Beta-testers needed to test a new feature
8 years ago, by rseiler in NetWorx Forum
It looks great, thanks! I don't know how many people still use Outlook anymore, but I noticed with this version that both Outlook 2010 and 2013 strip out the majority of the HTML message, leaving only a plain-text report that looks like this: Quote"NetWorx Reports Daily Computer Name" Interestingly, Outlook did not have a problem displaying the .htm file attachment (in the prev
Re: Beta-testers needed to test a new feature
8 years ago, by rseiler in NetWorx Forum
Yes, I was talking about the daily report, which I should have mentioned. I wasn't thinking of off-site scenarios, though. What I was thinking was this: anyone who enables daily email reports is probably someone who want to keep on top of bandwidth usage that way primarily (as opposed to the UI--push vs pull, we're lazy). If someone is interested in the daily figure, it's probably because they
Re: Beta-testers needed to test a new feature
8 years ago, by rseiler in NetWorx Forum
One other thought on the report, which has been working well: an additional line that shows your monthly usage so far for the given month.
Re: Beta-testers needed to test a new feature
9 years ago, by rseiler in NetWorx Forum
I just became aware of this terrific feature as of the new release. A test email worked fine, though it was made easier by my being able to use port 25 and not needing to figure out how to light up the section requiring OpenSSL (I'm guessing that "Win32 OpenSSL v1.0.2a Light" would be enough?). My first timed event will go off tonight. Question: I notice that it sends an attachment.
Re: Incorrect NIC name for "Ignore local traffic within the LAN"
9 years ago, by rseiler in NetWorx Forum
Yes, that's a very good idea: according to Wireshark, that same oddball interface is the only one available to it. But it's more specific, revealing that it's actually my Bluetooth one. That explains why there's little or no traffic on it. So, I'll work on it from the Winpcap side. Thanks.
Incorrect NIC name for "Ignore local traffic within the LAN"
9 years ago, by rseiler in NetWorx Forum
Is there a way of correcting the name shown here (Ignore line) on the theory that's the problem? It used to be correct and worked fine, but it changed to a strange name after a series of Windows Updates recently, and now traffic isn't recorded at all (or the numbers are just super-low and static) when it's chosen. For now, I'm just using the one that does work, the Intel one beneath it, but of
Re: Friendly names in 6.04/6.05
9 years ago, by rseiler in Network Scanner Forum
Yes, that works. Thanks.
9 years ago, by rseiler in Network Scanner Forum
Hi. I happened to upgrade to 6.04 x64 last week and only had reason to use it today. I noted that my existing Friendly names weren't displaying in a scan, even though they always did (and the list is still present, I checked). So I looked at the download page today and saw 6.05 with this note: "Fixed an issue with MAC-based friendly names during rescanning and adding new names." I fig
Re: Current Transfer Rate randomly shows all zeroes
9 years ago, by rseiler in NetWorx Forum
I looked in on it numerous times today and never once saw it at zeros, so this looks like it did the trick! I wish now that I'd thought to come back to this thread a lot sooner. Thanks.
Re: Current Transfer Rate randomly shows all zeroes
9 years ago, by rseiler in NetWorx Forum
That's great. I'm trying it now and will report back.
Re: Current Transfer Rate randomly shows all zeroes
9 years ago, by rseiler in NetWorx Forum
This still happens, so what about this idea: is it possible to learn what Networx does when enacting the workaround I described above? I don't think you really even need to choose another entry temporarily, you can just choose the same one and "Apply," which to me is the same as doing nothing but it's obviously doing something. If I knew what Networx was doing behind-the-scenes when
9 years ago, by rseiler in NetWorx Forum
Just following up on your last response, Andrew, the Applications tab feature still isn't meant to work if you're using WinPCap's "Ignore LAN traffic" option (as opposed to the native driver's), right? This is despite the per-process bandwidth showing up in Netstat (assuming "Keep track of TCP/UDP connections" isn't on false).
Re: Current Transfer Rate randomly shows all zeroes
10 years ago, by rseiler in NetWorx Forum
Yes, I've had that version since not long after it came out in the early part of the year. Unfortunately, I can't recall if that's when this problem started.
Current Transfer Rate randomly shows all zeroes
10 years ago, by rseiler in NetWorx Forum
This is something that I've seen over many months, first with Win8 and now Win81. All recent versions up through 5.2.11 (64). WinPCap. "Ignore local traffic within the LAN: Intel(R) 85279V Gigabit network Connection" selected in Monitored interfaces. What happens is that hovering over the tray icon shows zero traffic even when there's plenty of traffic and the correct NIC is chosen
10 years ago, by rseiler in NetWorx Forum
It wasn't clear but ambiguous, since you just said "no way to make it start with window." That could have meant several things. I know I should know this already, but are you using 8.1 x86 or x64? And what version and flavor of Networx are you using? And do you see Networx in Autoruns (Startup)? HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Run "C:\Program Fi
10 years ago, by rseiler in NetWorx Forum
What do you mean? That the option isn't there, or that it is but doesn't work? It should work. If you use Autoruns, do you see it on the Startup tab as checked?
10 years ago, by rseiler in NetWorx Forum
The other way: checking neither driver in Setup and instead using the 3rd-party WinPCap driver, which has the benefit of working with some other programs too, such as Wireshark.
10 years ago, by rseiler in NetWorx Forum
I don't know what you mean by part of that, but are you talking about this even with 5.2.11? And which of the three possible drivers for the program are you using?
10 years ago, by rseiler in NetWorx Forum
I guess I'll consider myself lucky then, since with the latest version of WinPCap (not released all that recently), I never did encounter a BSOD on 8.0 or 8.1 (installed about 6 weeks ago) and 5.2.9 (but mainly 5.2.10).
11 years ago, by rseiler in NetWorx Forum
Many people already have it from other programs, such as Wireshark, so in that case it's smart to use (also, for a while, the home-grown one was a little unstable). Neither driver is needed if you don't care about excluding local traffic.
11 years ago, by rseiler in NetWorx Forum
I didn't have the above problem, but thought I'd post somewhere that a new WinPCap is out for the first time in a long time: http://www.winpcap.org/misc/changelog.htm#changelog_4_1_3