Accessing SQL 2000 servers from 2005 Management Studio

Hi,
I have seen many post on this problem, but I have not seen a concise
answer.
I have 2 servers running SQL 2000. I have a fresh installation of XP
and SQL 2005 on my laptop (No Firewall). I cannot register the 2000
servers using the SQL 2005 Management studio by Named Pipes or by
TCPIP. Names Pipes throws the error 40 error, and TCP throws the error
0, connection refused error.
the 2000 severs can regsiter each other and a 4th machine with EM on it
can register them, so I know this isn't a firewall or connection issue
on the 2000 servers.
Can anyone shed some light on how to open up my SQL 20005 installation
to allow it to communicate with the 2000 servers.
Thanks
Pepper FlemingHi
Do you configure SQL Server 2005 remote connection to be enabled?
Can you show an exact error you are getting?
<PepperFleming@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1150642596.033192.219160@.u72g2000cwu.googlegroups.com...
> Hi,
> I have seen many post on this problem, but I have not seen a concise
> answer.
> I have 2 servers running SQL 2000. I have a fresh installation of XP
> and SQL 2005 on my laptop (No Firewall). I cannot register the 2000
> servers using the SQL 2005 Management studio by Named Pipes or by
> TCPIP. Names Pipes throws the error 40 error, and TCP throws the error
> 0, connection refused error.
> the 2000 severs can regsiter each other and a 4th machine with EM on it
> can register them, so I know this isn't a firewall or connection issue
> on the 2000 servers.
> Can anyone shed some light on how to open up my SQL 20005 installation
> to allow it to communicate with the 2000 servers.
> Thanks
> Pepper Fleming
>|||Hi Uri,
Thanks so much for responding. The message I am getting through the
Management studio when trying to connect to the server running SQL 2000
is:
An error has occurred while establishing a connection to the server.
When connecting to SQL Server 2005, this failure may be caused by the
fact that under the default settings SQL Server does not allow remote
connections. (provider: Named Pipes Provider, error: 40 - Could not
open a connection to SQL Server) (Microsoft SQL Server, Error: 1326)
I have named pipes enabled on my laptop under the SQL Server
Configuration manager.
The message looks a little misleading to me, because the way I read it,
the studio thinks it is connecting to a SQL Server 2005 instance.
Thanks,
Pepper|||One more piece of information if it helps, I can connect to other SQL
2005 servers remotely, this seems specific to SQL 2000 servers.
Pepper|||These may help. Using portqry you should get similar output as below.
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?familyid=89811747-C74B-4638-A2D5-AC828BDC6983&displaylang=en
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;287932
F:\PortQryV2>
*** User Input***
F:\PortQryV2>portqry -i
PortQry Interactive Mode
Type 'help' for a list of commands
Default Node: 127.0.0.1
Current option values:
end port= 80
protocol= TCP
source port= 0 (ephemeral)
*** User Input***
> node 192.168.1.98
Default Node: 192.168.1.98
>
*** User Input***
> q sql
resolving service name using local services file...
TCP port resolved to the 'ms-sql-s' service
IP address resolved to pe1600.dspatrick.local.com
querying...
TCP port 1433 (ms-sql-s service): LISTENING
>
resolving service name using local services file...
UDP port resolved to the 'ms-sql-m' service
IP address resolved to pe1600.dspatrick.local.com
querying...
UDP port 1434 (ms-sql-m service): LISTENING or FILTERED
Sending SQL Server query to UDP port 1434...
Server's response:
ServerName PE1600
InstanceName MSSQLSERVER
IsClustered No
Version 9.00.1399.06
tcp 1433
F
==== End of SQL Server query response ====UDP port 1434 is LISTENING
*** User Input***
> exit
exiting PortQry Interactive Mode...
F:\PortQryV2>
--
Regards,
Dave Patrick ...Please no email replies - reply in newsgroup.
Microsoft Certified Professional
Microsoft MVP [Windows]
http://www.microsoft.com/protect
<PepperFleming@.gmail.com> wrote:
| One more piece of information if it helps, I can connect to other SQL
| 2005 servers remotely, this seems specific to SQL 2000 servers.
|
| Pepper
||||Thanks Dave,
I will run this, but does anyone know if my problem is unusual or is
this a configuration issue common with a standard SQL Server 2005
installation.
Can you manage SQL 2000 servers from the 2005 Management studio out of
the box?
Pepper|||1.) Yes, unusual.
2.) Yes, you can.
--
Regards,
Dave Patrick ...Please no email replies - reply in newsgroup.
Microsoft Certified Professional
Microsoft MVP [Windows]
http://www.microsoft.com/protect
<PepperFleming@.gmail.com> wrote:
| Thanks Dave,
|
| I will run this, but does anyone know if my problem is unusual or is
| this a configuration issue common with a standard SQL Server 2005
| installation.
|
| Can you manage SQL 2000 servers from the 2005 Management studio out of
| the box?
|
| Pepper
||||Hey Dave,
Thanks for the link to the tool. That did the trick.
If anyone is interested, I noticed in the event log that the TCP / UDP
protocols had been disabled due to incompatability with windows 2003.
There are 2 things interesting about this. First, the entry wasnt' an
error, nor an alert but an information entry. the second, is that the
server is running SP 4a. A port scan did confirm that 1433 was not
open, and a reinstall of 4a did re-enable the port again.
I can only conclude that something I had done had rolled-back or over
wrote something critical for Windows 2003 to identify the service pack
level of SQL server and cause the ports to be disabled.
Thanks to all that responded, I appreciate the help.
Pepper|||Glad to hear it. You're welcome.
--
Regards,
Dave Patrick ...Please no email replies - reply in newsgroup.
Microsoft Certified Professional
Microsoft MVP [Windows]
http://www.microsoft.com/protect
<PepperFleming@.gmail.com> wrote:
| Hey Dave,
|
| Thanks for the link to the tool. That did the trick.
|
| If anyone is interested, I noticed in the event log that the TCP / UDP
| protocols had been disabled due to incompatability with windows 2003.
| There are 2 things interesting about this. First, the entry wasnt' an
| error, nor an alert but an information entry. the second, is that the
| server is running SP 4a. A port scan did confirm that 1433 was not
| open, and a reinstall of 4a did re-enable the port again.
|
| I can only conclude that something I had done had rolled-back or over
| wrote something critical for Windows 2003 to identify the service pack
| level of SQL server and cause the ports to be disabled.
|
| Thanks to all that responded, I appreciate the help.
|
| Pepper
|