Take the 2-minute tour ×
Server Fault is a question and answer site for professional system and network administrators. It's 100% free, no registration required.

I have a LAN of windows machine some running XP some running 2000, my broadcast ping times out all the time.

is it due to firewall? or some other setting in registry?

share|improve this question

closed as too localized by Chris S Jun 18 '13 at 15:50

This question is unlikely to help any future visitors; it is only relevant to a small geographic area, a specific moment in time, or an extraordinarily narrow situation that is not generally applicable to the worldwide audience of the internet. For help making this question more broadly applicable, visit the help center.If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

    
What do you mean "broadcast ping" Are you pinging the network broadcast address for the subnet? –  joeqwerty Feb 8 '10 at 20:31
add comment

1 Answer 1

Windows boxes don't respond to broadcast pings and depending on the distro quite a few Linux boxes don't either. IIRC the same applies to BSD server defaults. It's not something you generally want systems to do, certainly not recently. The problem is not with the system you are sending the broadcast out from but from the remote systems ignoring it.

There may well be a registry key that can modify this (EnableBcastArpReply under the TCPIP service key looks like a likely suspect) but it would need to be changed on all the targets which makes the exercise a bit pointless if you are using the broadcast to discover systems.

share|improve this answer
    
+1; the RFC (1122) actually permits broadcast pings to be silently discarded. –  Jimmy Shelter Feb 8 '10 at 21:01
    
surpisingly i did not find the value in winxp registery, so i created one, but had no effect, my machine still does not respond to broadcast ping –  Kazoom Feb 9 '10 at 0:04
    
Digging deeper into that key it seems that it is specifically there to support NLB clustering and not to reverse this behaviour. I can't see anything obvious that would turn it on, but then again it's not something that is going to be a feature that's much in demand. As mh pointed out the behaviour is RFC compliant and helpful for the most part given the potential for malware to abuse it. –  Helvick Feb 9 '10 at 0:27
add comment

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.