Hi,
This was Barry McGugan's reply to Brandon.

Brandon,
The case was archived so that it would not keep attracting negative attention because of the age of it, however an archive is not a closure and is not supposed to generate a survey. I am working it off and on with DEV and right now and we are exploring oplock behavior for SMB2 trying to determine if what is being seen is a problem with FoxPro handling oplock breaks or SMB2 handling of near simultaneous oplock requests.


Barry McGugan, Senior Support Escalation Engineer
Commercial Technical Support
Platforms Networking Team
E-Mail: barrymcg@microsoft.com
Phone: (980) 776-9512 x69512
My working hours are Mon – Fr 9:00am – 6:00pm ET
Networking Team Blog: http://blogs.technet.com/networking


>I don't recall seeing that, exactly. It's been a while but from what I recall:
>
>- someone at MS figured out what was going wrong
>- I *gathered* the fix is not trivial and MS decided to not fix it for that reason
>- and as you say, they therefore closed Brandon's case
>
>>There is another thread on UT from Brandon where MS had closed his case, and when he queried why, as the problem still existed, he was told they had to as it was embarrassing because they could fix it.
>>
>>>Running that code, or is that just what you've seen in regular production?
>>>
>>>>Hook 10 workstations up to a 2008 or 2011 server and load it up, you will get the error.
>>>>
>>>>>I tried running that code between 2 Win7 computers, couldn't get the error to come up. Stock network configuration, SMB2 not disabled on either machine.
>>>>>
>>>>>That was a while back, haven't had time to really look into it deeply.
>>>>>
>>>>>>See Message ID 1430067
>>>>>>>>Hi,
>>>>>>>>It does lessen the corruption, but it doesn't totally stop it.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Just an fyi - found this page on MS Support which explains the SMB2 corruption issue and provides a fix for it and a workaround option.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>http://support.microsoft.com/kb/2028965/en-us
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>do you have reproducible code showing the error even after hotfix and workaround ?
>>>>>>>might make sense to add to individual testing at clients site...