I found this online and thought you might find it interesting:
Server Message Block 2.0
Server Message Block (SMB), also known as the Common Internet File System
(CIFS), is the file sharing protocol used by default on Windows-based
computers. Windows includes an SMB client (the Client for Microsoft Windows
component installed through the properties of a network connection) and an
SMB server (the File and Printer Sharing for Microsoft Windows component
installed through the properties of a network connection). SMB in versions
of Windows prior to Windows Server "Longhorn" and Windows Vista, known as
SMB 1.0, was originally designed 15 years ago for early Windows-based
network operating systems such as Microsoft LAN Manager and Windows for
Workgroups and carries with it the limitations of its initial design.
SMB in Windows Server "Longhorn" and Windows Vista also supports SMB 2.0; a
new version of SMB that has been redesigned for today's networking
environments and the needs of the next generation of file servers. SMB 2.0
has the following enhancements:
.. Supports sending multiple SMB commands within the same packet. This
reduces the number of packets sent between an SMB client and server, a
common complaint against SMB 1.0.
.. Supports much larger buffer sizes compared to SMB 1.0.
.. Increases the restrictive constants within the protocol design to allow
for scalability. Examples include an increase in the number of concurrent
open file handles on the server and the number of file shares that a server
can have.
.. Supports durable handles that can withstand short interruptions in network
availability.
.. Supports symbolic links.
Computers running Windows Server "Longhorn" or Windows Vista support both
SMB 1.0 and SMB 2.0. The version of SMB that is used for file sharing
operations is determined during the SMB session negotiation. The following
table shows which version of SMB that is used for various combinations of
client and server computers.
Client Server Version of SMB used
Windows Server "Longhorn" or Windows Vista -> Windows Server "Longhorn" or
Windows Vista
SMB 2.0
Windows Server "Longhorn" or Windows Vista -> Windows XP, Windows Server
2003, or Windows 2000
SMB 1.0
Windows XP, Windows Server 2003, or Windows 2000 -> Windows Server
"Longhorn" or Windows Vista
SMB 1.0
Windows XP, Windows Server 2003, or Windows 2000 -> Windows XP, Windows
Server 2003, or Windows 2000
SMB 1.0
Hope this helps...
Jeff
"boe" <boe_d@nospam.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23HNOHCOYHHA.4264@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> Thanks for the info.
>
> "Jeffrey S. Sparks" <jssparks@spam.bccinfo.com> wrote in message
> news:72C7D378-AD24-47FB-A9D3-155AE64FC8CA@microsoft.com...
>> He didn't know, he just announced it to everyone at a "Across America"
>> launch event.
>>
>> Jeff
>>
>> "boe" <boe_d@nospam.hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:eSxWhlNYHHA.2640@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>>> Did your rep say anything about a patch for our current 2003 servers to
>>> support SMB v2?
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>>
>>> "Jeffrey S. Sparks" <jssparks@spam.bccinfo.com> wrote in message
>>> news:18D0E429-5B23-4C7C-A240-4AB8472AD30C@microsoft.com...
>>>>I believe this is because Vista is using an updated version of SMB (the
>>>>protocol windows uses to transfer files via network). My guess is, it
>>>>is trying to use v2 and times out and has to go back to v1. This is
>>>>just a guess though. I was told at a launch event by a microsoft rep
>>>>about vista and the next generation of servers being upgraded to SMB v2
>>>>(although I hadn't noticed any speed problems with Vista yet) and that
>>>>it would allow faster transfers and a variety of other things. Would be
>>>>interesting to hear someone from Microsoft about this though.
>>>>
>>>> Jeff
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "Tom Allen" <TomAllen@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:842B1BEF-47FF-4A74-833A-626378CFEB12@microsoft.com...
>>>>> Seems this is Windows Explorer related as Acronis True Image can
>>>>> backup a
>>>>> folder to the NAS in less than twenty seconds whereas a drag and drop
>>>>> copy of
>>>>> the same folder within Windows Explorer takes twenty minutes.
>>>>>
>>>>> I've tried setting TCP 'autotuning' to disabled but that had no
>>>>> effect.
>>>>>
>>>>> "Tom Allen" wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Folks,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I have a network of one Vista PC, one XP PC, a Buffalo NAS and a
>>>>>> E'net-switch/router.
>>>>>> Everything works in that all the shares are visible from both PCs and
>>>>>> all
>>>>>> required access is available.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The problem is the anomalously slow transfers when pushing files from
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> Vista PC to the XP PC and to the NAS.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The Vista PC can pull files from the other two at good speeds, around
>>>>>> 6
>>>>>> MEGABytes/second , but the speed when PUSHING to the other two drops
>>>>>> to
>>>>>> anything from 50 KILOBytes/second to 500 KILOBytes/second. The
>>>>>> flashing light
>>>>>> on the router show a very 'pulsed' pattern of activity during these
>>>>>> push
>>>>>> operations, longer pauses than data bursts.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The XP PC can push files to and pull files from the other two at good
>>>>>> speeds, around 4 MEGABytes/second (calculated) and upwards.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> To copy any heavy files from the Vista PC to the Buffalo it is
>>>>>> quicker for
>>>>>> me to pull the file to the XP PC and then copy it to the Buffalo from
>>>>>> there.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I have tweaked various settings on the integrated E'net controller on
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> Vista PC, switched out IP V6 and QOS, restarted the router etc. but
>>>>>> to no
>>>>>> avail. Does anyone have advice on where to tickle my setup to improve
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> speed for push copying from the Vista machine ?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The Vista PC is new and replaced an old W98 PC which copied at high
>>>>>> speed,
>>>>>> both push and pull.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Del Dimension 8250 XP SP2. Dell Dimension 9200 Vista Home Premium -
>>>>>> Intel
>>>>>> 6600 Dual core 2.4 GHz, 4GB RAM. Netgear DG834 router. Cable network
>>>>>> with
>>>>>> structured Cat5e UTP.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Regards
>>>>>> Tom Allen
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>