IPX/SPX networking protocol

I noticed there is no IPX/SPX protocol in the network. Where and how can I
download it for Vista Home Premium 32. I am having problems playing games on
LAN or internet that require that protocol--
AR_MEDIC (Mike)

IPX/SPX is completely removed from Vista. If you need Netware support,
please check with them -- they might have released a Vista-compatible
protocol stack by now.

--
Steve Riley
steve.riley@microsoft.com
http://blogs.technet.com/steriley
http://www.protectyourwindowsnetwork.com


"AR_MEDIC" <ARMEDIC@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:BA97E846-4D1A-4CDC-AB1A-0F023504B602@microsoft.com...

> I noticed there is no IPX/SPX protocol in the network. Where and how can I
> download it for Vista Home Premium 32. I am having problems playing games
> on
> LAN or internet that require that protocol--
> AR_MEDIC (Mike)

Oh Microsoft! This is not helpful at all, the Vista Clent produced by Novell
does not have an IPX.SPX core.

In XP we could bind the MS Client to IPX only. This made for a much more
secure Workgroup when the private network was connected to the internet.

Not to mention all the gamers who are going to be p****d their IPX games
won't work.

I think not providing this "non-routeable" protocol within Vista is a big
mistake.

Sorry guys, no way will I upgrade to Vista while IPX remmains off the menu.

Stuart Larson
stuart_larson@hotmail.com

If even Novell the developer of IPX/SPX has quit supporting it why would a
3rd party (Microsoft) support it.

--
Kerry Brown
Microsoft MVP - Shell/User
http://www.vistahelp.ca


"Stu Larson" <Stu Larson@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:8ABD082B-FF31-4909-8C53-08D59011EF4B@microsoft.com...

> Oh Microsoft! This is not helpful at all, the Vista Clent produced by
> Novell
> does not have an IPX.SPX core.
>
> In XP we could bind the MS Client to IPX only. This made for a much more
> secure Workgroup when the private network was connected to the internet.
>
> Not to mention all the gamers who are going to be p****d their IPX games
> won't work.
>
> I think not providing this "non-routeable" protocol within Vista is a big
> mistake.
>
> Sorry guys, no way will I upgrade to Vista while IPX remmains off the
> menu.
>
> Stuart Larson
> stuart_larson@hotmail.com

Stu Larson;500342 Wrote:

> Oh Microsoft! This is not helpful at all, the Vista Clent produced by
> Novell
> does not have an IPX.SPX core.
>
> In XP we could bind the MS Client to IPX only. This made for a much
> more
> secure Workgroup when the private network was connected to the
> internet.
>
> Not to mention all the gamers who are going to be p****d their IPX
> games
> won't work.
>
> I think not providing this "non-routeable" protocol within Vista is a
> big
> mistake.
>
> Sorry guys, no way will I upgrade to Vista while IPX remmains off the
> menu.
>
> Stuart Larson
> stuart_larson@xxxxxx

Why would you want to use a non-routable protocol to begin with?
IPX/SPX is dead.


--
dzomlija

____________________________________
Peter Alexander Dzomlija
Do you hear, huh? The Alpha and The Omega? Death and Rebirth? And as
you die, so shall I be Reborn...

- ASUS A8N32-SLi-Deluxe
- AMD Atlon 64 Dual-Core 4800+
- 4GB DDR400
- ASUS nVidia 6600
- Thermaltake Tai-Chi Watercooled Chassis
- 1207GB Total Formatted Storage
- Vista Ultimate x64
- CodeGear Delphi 2007

Hi Kerry

SIMPLE - Not everyone wants an Internet routable protocol permanently active
on their private network. I can block IP trafic with Norton and my IPX
network continues to provide MS File and Print services just fine.

Interestingly, I was able to unbind the MS Client from IP until just
recently. I can't now, something to do with installing a Windows Mobile
device I suspect.

Simple is good, simple works. OK I'm a simple Novell CNE!

Regards

Stuart

"Kerry Brown" wrote:

> If even Novell the developer of IPX/SPX has quit supporting it why would a
> 3rd party (Microsoft) support it.
>
> --
> Kerry Brown
> Microsoft MVP - Shell/User
> http://www.vistahelp.ca
>
>
> "Stu Larson" <Stu Larson@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:8ABD082B-FF31-4909-8C53-08D59011EF4B@microsoft.com...

>

Doh! IPX can support MS File and Print Services without the risk of IP, which
is easily blocked/unblocked by Norton when you need it. My whole network
functions securely on IPX, keeping it well away from the outside world.

Is your network/PC available to hackers 24/7?

Regards
Stu

"dzomlija" wrote:

> Why would you want to use a non-routable protocol to begin with?
> IPX/SPX is dead.

> dzomlija
>
> ____________________________________
> Peter Alexander Dzomlija
> Do you hear, huh? The Alpha and The Omega? Death and Rebirth? And as
> you die, so shall I be Reborn...
>
> - ASUS A8N32-SLi-Deluxe
> - AMD Atlon 64 Dual-Core 4800+
> - 4GB DDR400
> - ASUS nVidia 6600
> - Thermaltake Tai-Chi Watercooled Chassis
> - 1207GB Total Formatted Storage
> - Vista Ultimate x64
> - CodeGear Delphi 2007
>

On Wed, 31 Oct 2007 21:33:02 -0700, Stu Larson <Stu
Larson@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:

>Oh Microsoft! This is not helpful at all, the Vista Clent produced by Novell
>does not have an IPX.SPX core.
>
>In XP we could bind the MS Client to IPX only. This made for a much more
>secure Workgroup when the private network was connected to the internet.
>
>Not to mention all the gamers who are going to be p****d their IPX games
>won't work.
>
>I think not providing this "non-routeable" protocol within Vista is a big
>mistake.
>
>Sorry guys, no way will I upgrade to Vista while IPX remmains off the menu.

Stu,

Sorry, you're pissing in the wind. (See, you CAN say "piss" here).

The world is going to routable protocols, and simplifying the protocol stack on
their computers. You won't be able to stay on Windows XP forever.

If you can support yourself on your own, fine, then stay with Windows XP and
earlier. But as soon as the bad guys develop an attack that involves IPX/SPX in
any way, you'll really be on your own. No experts to help you sort your
problems.

Are your computers anywhere connected to the Internet, or are they in a sealed
room somewhere? If any computers need Internet access for any reasons, you'll
need a proxy server that uses IPX/SPX on the client side. Or you'll be using
dual protocol stacks on your computers, and you'll still be at risk.

--
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.

Hi Chuck

I take your point about IPX/SPX attacks. I know it’s possible to ‘tunnel’
IPX on the Internet inside IP. However since I block IP 99% of the time a
tunnel attack is pointless.

Perhaps it would help to explain that while I use my private IPX network
heavily, I only use the Internet for a few minutes a day. Reducing exposure
is a simple way of reducing risk.

What works for me is a nightmare for others but we’re not all the same.

Thanks for your candour

Regards

Stu

Ps… Piss… there… I feel liberated!

> Sorry, you're pissing in the wind. (See, you CAN say "piss" here).
>
> The world is going to routable protocols, and simplifying the protocol stack on
> their computers. You won't be able to stay on Windows XP forever.
>
> If you can support yourself on your own, fine, then stay with Windows XP and
> earlier. But as soon as the bad guys develop an attack that involves IPX/SPX in
> any way, you'll really be on your own. No experts to help you sort your
> problems.
>
> Are your computers anywhere connected to the Internet, or are they in a sealed
> room somewhere? If any computers need Internet access for any reasons, you'll
> need a proxy server that uses IPX/SPX on the client side. Or you'll be using
> dual protocol stacks on your computers, and you'll still be at risk.
>
> --
> 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, 7 Nov 2007 14:53:06 -0800, Stu Larson
<StuLarson@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:

>Hi Chuck
>
>I take your point about IPX/SPX attacks. I know it’s possible to ‘tunnel’
>IPX on the Internet inside IP. However since I block IP 99% of the time a
>tunnel attack is pointless.
>
>Perhaps it would help to explain that while I use my private IPX network
>heavily, I only use the Internet for a few minutes a day. Reducing exposure
>is a simple way of reducing risk.
>
>What works for me is a nightmare for others but we’re not all the same.
>
>Thanks for your candour
>
>Regards
>
>Stu
>
>Ps… Piss… there… I feel liberated!

We piss and moan here a lot, Stu. And I feel your pain. I have one guy asking
me for an IPX based proxy solution, but adding the IP services that he thinks he
needs, and tunneling them through IPX, will be a nightmare.

So I have to convince him that a solid, secure, IP system will be better in the
long run. He uses the Internet a lot more than a few minutes a day, too. Some
days a LOT more. But he's convinced that IPX keeps him safer.

I could sell him something crappy, and move on, but I won't. So I'm in the
fight. Maybe he'll retire before I do.

With Vista coming into the marketplace, and with no IPX/SPX in Vista, support
for IPX/SPX is going to drop dramatically. You have to prepare for the future.
Any security plan, that depends upon unsupported components, has no future. And
security without a future isn't security.

--
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.