Search Results

Search found 467 results on 19 pages for 'outbound'.

Page 1/19 | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

• Allowing outbound traffic with APF/iptables for OpenVZ container

  - by David

  I have apf installed on a OpenVZ container (proxmox 2.1). The config is pretty much vanilla and things are working. My external services like ssh and http are working. My problem is that all outbound traffic on http/https is blocked. How do I allow all outbound traffic for http/https. If I change EGF to 1 like this, all inbound and outbound traffic gets blocked EGF="1" EG_TCP_CPORTS="21,25,80,443,43,53" EG_UDP_CPORTS="20,21,53" EG_ICMP_TYPES="all" I opened a single outbound rule with the following # /usr/local/sbin/apf -a downloads.wordpress.org How do I allow all outbound traffic on http/https without blocking all traffic? Why would I allow all inbound ssh/http traffic and block all outbound traffic?

  Read the article

• What Are Outbound Links?

  Outbound links are links that exist or are put in a particular website's article or blog for an external source. Though a feature that has many advantages, in recent times many search engines have acknowledged outbound links to decrease a site's rankings on a search engine directory.

  Read the article

• Why Outbound Linking in SEO

  The liking of the web-masters for the outbound links vary a lot. Some of them freely use the outbound links thinking that it actually boosts the value of the site and increase the chances of getting increasing visitors.

  Read the article

• Things You Should Know About Outbound Links

  Outbound links are the links placed on your website to a third party website or blog. If you have a website A and you create a link to another site B, it's an inbound link for site B and outbound link for site A.

  Read the article

• Soft 404 error on redirected outbound links

  - by Techlands

  I have a redirect script on my site which sends visitors to an affiliate site. However in the last month I've noticed that Google webmaster tools is reporting my outbound links as a 404 error. Here is the breakdown on how its setup: My outbound links are coded like this: <a href="/f/c123" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Link Title</a> My redirect script will then perform a 302 redirect to the affiliate link Originally I had the affiliate links (CJ) directly in the HTML, however I noticed over time that this had some impact on my sites traffic. So I changed them to a redirect script and my traffic returned. This seemed to work with no issues for over 1 year but now I'm getting soft 404 errors in Google webmaster tools. I did try adding a rule in my robots.txt to block any links starting with /f/ but I'm not sure if this will help or Google will still report soft 404 errors. I am considering as possible options to change the a tag to a button tag and use an onclick event to load the link.

  Read the article

• Why Would Outbound Links Hold Search Engine Power

  Why would an outbound link on a search engine tempt them to send you more visitors? Could these be a secret of search engine optimisation, or a way to leach you page rank?

  Read the article

• Do Outbound Links Hold Search Engine Power?

  Now, I do not know if this applies to just when the link points to pages on your own site or any outbound links, but time and time again I see before me the evidence that this could just be the case. Last night I was comparing 2 of my own websites. The first, with Page Rank 3 and lots of SEO work against the second, Page Rank 0 and ignored.

  Read the article

• cant make outbound calls - asterisk

  - by deanvz

  I have a basic Atcom IP01 with the following config Registered Voip (SIP) Trunk Registered Voip Phone - ext Dial Plan Outbound Call rule I made use of this manual that the manufacturer supplies: http://www.atcom.cn/cn/download/pbx/ip01/ATCOM%20IP01-User%20Manual-V1.0-EN.pdf Whenever I try and make a call, it seems that the outbound call rule that i defined does not get regarded as the default rule even though the dial plan lists this as the only outbound call rule. When dialling I see in the log file the following [Jan 1 09:10:07] NOTICE[176]: chan_sip.c:14377 handle_request_invite: Call from '6001' to extension '00765243679' rejected because extension not found. The 00765243679 is a cellular number. Am I missing a configuration in order to make outbound calls? Land line, other Voip numbers and cellular calls have been tried

  Read the article

• Disable outbound links without letting others know that

  - by tadoman

  Is there a way I can tell google not to follow external links ( pointing to other sites) without letting other know. I know you can disable outbound links by putting rel=nofollow or something in robots.txt. But that's something others can see as well. I'm just wondering if there's a way to tell google not to follow those links without letting others know that... like a setting in webmaster tools or something similar ( there's definetly one way. I could set an exception in my conf file for my server to check the user agent to be "googlebot" and then serve a different version of robots.txt. So that when a different user would check that link it would return a different robots.txt thant the one served to googlebot. However I'm not too sure google would be too happy about this) Thank you

  Read the article

• Loadbalancing outbound traffic while using openbgpd on freebsd

  - by Rajkumar S

  Hi, I am using openbgpd in freeBSD with 2 ISP connections. I have my own AS number and a /22 network. Currently I am advertising entire /22 to both networks. Inbound traffic comes in But my outbound traffic goes via a single link. I would like to either distribute my outbound traffic via both links so that outbound traffic is also load balanced. How to configure this using openbgpd in freebsd? My current openbgpd config is attached for reference. AS 00my-as listen on xx.xx.xx.x router-id xx.xx.xx.x network aa.aa.aa.0/22 group "ISP1" { remote-as 11remoteas-1 neighbor bb.bb.bb.1 { descr "ISP1" announce all } } group "ISP2" { remote-as 22remoteas-2 neighbor cc.cc.cc.37 { descr "ISP2" announce all } } deny from any deny to any allow from bb.bb.bb.1 allow to bb.bb.bb.1 allow from cc.cc.cc.37 allow to cc.cc.cc.37

  Read the article

• SSH tunnels with multiple outbound IPs

  - by Peter Johansson

  I have a VPS with multiple IP addresses allocated to it (we can use debian, centos or ubuntu). I can ssh into the server using any of the IP addresses. However, any ssh tunnel I set up always uses just one of the IP addresses as its origination IP. How do I configure the server so that when I ssh tunnel into IP1, its outbound IP is IP1. And when I ssh tunnel into IP2, its outbound IP is IP2?

  Read the article

• Excessive Outbound DNS Traffic

  - by user1318414

  I have a VPS system which I have had for 3 years on one host without issue. Recently, the host started sending an extreme amount of outbound DNS traffic to 31.193.132.138. Due to the way that Linode responded to this, I have recently left Linode and moved to 6sync. The server was completely rebuilt on 6sync with the exception of postfix mail configurations. Currently, the daemons run are as follows: sshd nginx postfix dovecot php5-fpm (localhost only) spampd (localhost only) clamsmtpd (localhost only) Given that the server was 100% rebuilt, I can't find any serious exploits against the above stated daemons, passwords have changed, ssh keys don't even exist on the rebuild yet, etc... it seems extremely unlikely that this is a compromise which is being used to DoS the address. The provided IP is noted online as a known SPAM source. My initial assumption was that it was attempting to use my postfix server as a relay, and the bogus addresses it was providing were domains with that IP registered as their nameservers. I would imagine given my postfix configuration that DNS queries for things such as SPF information would come in with equal or greater amount than the number of attempted spam e-mails sent. Both Linode and 6Sync have said that the outbound traffic is extremely disproportionate. The following is all the information I received from Linode regarding the outbound traffic: 21:28:28.647263 IP 97.107.134.33.32775 > 31.193.132.138.53: 28720 op8+% [b2&3=0x4134] [17267a] [30550q] [28773n] [14673au][|domain] 21:28:28.647264 IP 97.107.134.33 > 31.193.132.138: udp 21:28:28.647264 IP 97.107.134.33.32775 > 31.193.132.138.53: 28720 op8+% [b2&3=0x4134] [17267a] [30550q] [28773n] [14673au][|domain] 21:28:28.647265 IP 97.107.134.33 > 31.193.132.138: udp 21:28:28.647265 IP 97.107.134.33.32775 > 31.193.132.138.53: 28720 op8+% [b2&3=0x4134] [17267a] [30550q] [28773n] [14673au][|domain] 21:28:28.647266 IP 97.107.134.33 > 31.193.132.138: udp 6sync cannot confirm whether or not the recent spike in outbound traffic was to the same IP or over DNS, but I have presumed as such. For now my server is blocking the entire 31.0.0.0/8 subnet to help deter this while I figure it out. Anyone have any idea what is going on?

  Read the article

• outbound ftp on server 2008 r2 stalls

  - by Scott Kramer

  the built in command line ftp client in server 2008 does not support passive mode so I've used these commands to allow outbound ftp (it stalls without this) 1) Open port 21 on the firewall netsh advfirewall firewall add rule name="FTP (no SSL)" action=allow protocol=TCP dir=in localport=21 2) Activate firewall application filter for FTP (aka Stateful FTP) that will dynamically open ports for data connections netsh advfirewall set global StatefulFtp enable however in server 2008 r2, these commands seem to work, but it does not affect the outbound ftp, it stalls I do not want to use an alt client

  Read the article

• How can I retrieve the details of the file from an outbound operation in BPEL 11g

  - by [email protected]

  Several times, we come across requirements where we need to capture the details of the file that got written out as a part of a BPEL process invoking a File/Ftp Adapter. Consider a case where we're using FileNamingConvention as "PurchaseOrder_%SEQ%.txt" and we need to do some post processing based on the filename (please remember that we wouldn't know the filename until the adapter invocation completes) In order to achieve this, we need to manually tweak the WSDL so that the File/Ftp Adapter can return the metadata of the file that was written out. In general, the File/Ftp Write/Put WSDL operations are one way as shown below:         The File/Ftp Adapters are designed to return the metadata back if this WSDL is tweaked into a two-way WSDL. In addition, the <wsdl:output/> must import the fileread.xsd schema (see below). You will need to copy fileread.xsd from  here into the xsd folder of your composite.       Finally, we will need to tweak the  WSDL. (highlighted below)           Finally, the BPEL <invoke> would look as shown below. Please note that the file metadata would be returned as a part of the BPEL output variable:

  Read the article

• Mail Hosting That Will Allow Outbound Bulk Mail?

  - by user249493

  No, I'm not a spammer! I do volunteer work for a non-profit social services agency. They send out daily email with several hundred recipients on each message. Their web hosting company has been flagging the email as spam due to the volume. So I'm looking for an email hosting provider that won't do that. (I can separate out the web hosting function; we just need mail hosting right now.) They can't use something like MailChimp, Constant Contact, or Vertical Response because some of the mail is just inbound emails they aggregate and send out, and they don't want the overhead of "rebuilding" it in a "newsletter" service. I think that Google Apps for Business might be a good solution, but the pricing is just too high for this under-funded non-profit. I've applied for the non-profit discount but haven't heard back yet. Is there mail hosting service that might fit their needs? Thanks in advance.

  Read the article

• Do Outbound Links Help in Search Engine Optimization

  A professional SEO Company can help Web sites gain popularity and improve page ranking. There are several ways to achieve good page ranking, and link popularity is one among them. There are two ways ... [Author: John Anthony - Web Design and Development - June 04, 2010]

  Read the article

• What to Avoid in Outbound Linking

  Does linking out to other sites bring you any benefit, or is it a waste of time, even possibly detrimental to your own site? The short answer is that it all depends. One of the main factors is the type of site you are linking out to.

  Read the article

• ScreenOS MIP selection for outbound connections

  - by David Mackintosh

  Given a ScreenOS 6.3.0 firewall with this configuration: unset flow reverse-route clear-text set interface "ethernet0/0" zone "Trust" set interface ethernet0/0 ip 192.168.1.1/24 set interface ethernet0/2 ip 10.0.0.1/24 set interface ethernet0/2 mip 10.9.9.10 host 192.168.1.10 netmask 255.255.255.255 vr trust-vr set interface ethernet0/2 mip 10.8.8.10 host 192.168.1.10 netmask 255.255.255.255 vr trust-vr set route 0.0.0.0/0 interface ethernet0/2 gateway 10.0.0.254 ... (and assuming appropriate policies) is there a way to control which MIP the firewall selects for outbound connections initiated by 192.168.1.10? (presumably because I want the upstream 10.0.0.254 to do different things with the packet depending on what its source IP is). Update: OK, my scenario is this: I have two ISP uplinks, each giving me a different IP space. Each ISP will only route the IP space they have assigned me. So in order for the server to be reachable by both ISPs, I need two MIPs for the same server, one on each interface. Inbound traffic will work fine with the 'unset flow reverse-route clear-text' option in use. But for outbound (think an email server sending a message) I need a way to select an appropriate MIP depending on which outbound link I want the system to use, and I want this to be resiliant so that if the link the firewall prefers goes down overnight I don't have to manually flip something to keep the mail flowing. Basically I'm trying to avoid having to buy a link-balancer appliance (or two since I'll need a cluster). Is there a way to do this?

  Read the article

• Asterisk terminating outbound call when picked up, sends 'BYE' message

  - by vo

  I'm running Asterisk 1.6.1.10 / FreePBX 2.5.2.2 and I've got an outbound trunk setup. Everything use to work fine until recently (perhaps due to upgrade to FC12 or other things I'm not sure). Anyway the setup does not appear to have issues registering and setting up the call, RTP packets go both ways and you can hear the ringing from the other side. However it appears that when the call is picked up or thereabouts, the incoming RTP packets cease. Upon closer inspection with Wireshark, there are these particular packets that seem to be the cause: trunk->asterisk SIP/SD Status: 200 OK, with session description asterisk->trunk SIP Request: ACK sip:<phone>@trunk:6889 asterisk->trunk SIP Request: BYE sip:<phone>@trunk:6889 [..about a dozzen RTP packets in/outbound..] trunk->asterisk SIP Status: 200 OK, CSeq: 104 Bye [..outbound RTP continues, phone is silent..] Then the inbound RTP packets cease, however the asterisk logs dont show any activity at this point. The last entry reads 'SIP/ is answered SIP/'. Then when you hangup the extension, you get asterisk->trunk SIP Request: BYE sip:<phone>@trunk:6889 trunk->asterisk SIP Status: 481 Call Leg/Transaction does not exist My trunk peer settings in FreePBX are: username=<user> fromuser=<user> canreinvite=no type=friend secret=<pass> qualify=no [qualify yes produces 401/forbidden messages] nat=yes insecure=very host=<sip trunk gateway> fromdomain=<sip trunk gateway> disallow=all context=from-pstn allow=ulaw dtmfmode=inband Under sip_general_custom.conf i have stunaddr=stun.xten.com externrefresh=120 localnet=192.168.1.1/255.255.255.0 nat=yes Whats causing Asterisk to prematurely end the call and still think the call is in progress? I have no idea where to look next.

  Read the article

• CentOS 6.3 Virtual under OpenVZ cannot ping, host lookups, outbound connections while postfix running

  - by Paul Cravey

  My best theory is that some kernel limit is being hit preventing outbound connections. We have tried basically everything from tcpdumps to provisioning an entirely new virtual server (we do not have this problem on any other virtuals), however the problem somehow carried over, even with new postfix build (working). Emails work, and outbound connections work, so long as postfix does not have too much going on. /proc/user_beancounters shows no limits being hit (show below). Nevertheless, pings fail even to IP addresses. TCP stack appears healthy. Load is low. No iowait. Flushed iptables already. Has anyone experienced anything like this? uid resource held maxheld barrier limit failcnt 3: kmemsize 166216365 170262528 9223372036854775807 9223372036854775807 0 lockedpages 0 0 9223372036854775807 9223372036854775807 0 privvmpages 285727 351885 9223372036854775807 9223372036854775807 0 shmpages 16933 17605 9223372036854775807 9223372036854775807 0 dummy 0 0 0 0 0 numproc 150 303 9223372036854775807 9223372036854775807 0 physpages 314156 326191 0 1280000 0 vmguarpages 0 0 9223372036854775807 9223372036854775807 0 oomguarpages 165355 165355 9223372036854775807 9223372036854775807 0 numtcpsock 89 172 9223372036854775807 9223372036854775807 0 numflock 22 76 9223372036854775807 9223372036854775807 0 numpty 1 2 9223372036854775807 9223372036854775807 0 numsiginfo 0 75 9223372036854775807 9223372036854775807 0 tcpsndbuf 2733472 4371752 9223372036854775807 9223372036854775807 0 tcprcvbuf 1798336 5427296 9223372036854775807 9223372036854775807 0 othersockbuf 491120 1000760 9223372036854775807 9223372036854775807 0 dgramrcvbuf 0 238728 9223372036854775807 9223372036854775807 0 numothersock 361 505 9223372036854775807 9223372036854775807 0 dcachesize 135941831 136114679 9223372036854775807 9223372036854775807 0 numfile 2905 4990 9223372036854775807 9223372036854775807 0 dummy 0 0 0 0 0 dummy 0 0 0 0 0 dummy 0 0 0 0 0 numiptent 8 9 9223372036854775807 9223372036854775807 0 [root@bni /]# ping 4.2.2.1 PING 4.2.2.1 (4.2.2.1) 56(84) bytes of data. --- 4.2.2.1 ping statistics --- 9 packets transmitted, 0 received, 100% packet loss, time 8493ms [root@bni /]# service postfix stop [root@bni /]# ping 4.2.2.1 PING 4.2.2.1 (4.2.2.1) 56(84) bytes of data. 64 bytes from 4.2.2.1: icmp_seq=1 ttl=53 time=8.63 ms 64 bytes from 4.2.2.1: icmp_seq=2 ttl=53 time=8.62 ms 64 bytes from 4.2.2.1: icmp_seq=3 ttl=53 time=8.63 ms 64 bytes from 4.2.2.1: icmp_seq=4 ttl=53 time=8.66 ms Outbound connections of all sorts fail when postfix is running.

  Read the article

• Specifying a Postfix Instance to send outbound email

  - by Catherine Jefferson

  I have a CentOS 6.5 server running Postfix 2.6x (the default distribution) with five public IPv4 IPs bound to it. Each IP has DNS and rDNS set separately. Each uses a different hostname at a different domain. I have five Postfix instances, one bound to each IP, like this example: 192.168.34.104 red.example.com /etc/postfix 192.168.36.48 green.example.net /etc/postfix-green 192.168.36.49 pink.example.org /etc/postfix-pink 192.168.36.50 orange.example.info /etc/postfix-orange 192.168.36.51 blue.example.us /etc/postfix-blue I've tested each IP by telneting to port 25. Postfix answers and banners properly with the correct hostname. Email is received on all of these instances with no problems and is routed to the correct place. This setup, minus the final instance, has existed for a couple of years and works. I never bothered to set up outbound email to go through any but the main instance, however; there was no need. Now I need to send email from blue.example.us that actually leaves from that interface and IP, such that the Received headers show blue.example.us as the sending mailhost, so that SPF and DKIM validate, etc etc. The email that will be sent from blue.example.com is a feedback loop sent by a single shell account on the server (account5), an account that is dedicated to sending this email. The account receives the feedback loop emails from servers on other networks, saves the bodies of those emails, and then generates a new outbound email header, appends the saved body, and sends the email. It's sending by piping each email to sendmail -oi -t. We're doing it this way to mask the identities of the initial servers. The procmail script that processes these emails works correctly. However, I cannot configure this account to send email through the proper Postfix instance/IP/interface. The exact same account and script sends email through the main Postfix instance /etc/postfix without any issues. When I change MAIL_CONFIG to point to /etc/postfix-blue in either .bash_profile or the Procmail script that handles this email, though, I get this error: sendmail: fatal: User account5(###) is not allowed to submit mail I've read the manuals on Postfix.org, searched Google, and tried the suggestions in three previous answers here on ServerFault.com: Postfix - specify interface to deliver outbound mail on Postfix user is not allowed to submit mail Postfix rejects php mails I have been careful to stop and restart Postfix after each configuration change, and tested the results. Nothing has worked. The main postfix instance happily accepts outbound email from account5. The postfix-blue instance continues to reject email from account5 with the sendmail error above. As tempting as it is to blame machine hostility, I know that I must be missing something or doing something wrong. Does anybody have any suggestions as to what it might be? Please feel free to ask for further information about my setup if you need it. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= At the request of the responder, here are main.cf and master.cf for a) the main postfix instance ("red.example.com") and b) the FBL instance ("blue.example.us") [NOTE: All parameters not specified below were left at the default Postfix 2.6 settings] MAIN: master.cf smtp inet n - n - - smtpd main.cf myhostname = red.example.com mydomain = example.com inet_interfaces = $myhostname, localhost inet_protocols = all lmtp_host_lookup = native smtp_host_lookup = native ignore_mx_lookup_error = yes mydestination = $myhostname, localhost.$mydomain, localhost local_recipient_maps = mynetworks = 192.168.34.104/32 relay_domains = example.com, example.info, example.net, example.org, example.us relayhost = [192.168.34.102] # Separate physical server, main mailserver. relay_recipient_maps = hash:/etc/postfix/relay_recipients alias_maps = hash:/etc/aliases alias_database = hash:/etc/aliases smtpd_banner = $myhostname ESMTP $mail_name multi_instance_wrapper = ${command_directory}/postmulti -p -- multi_instance_enable = yes multi_instance_directories = /etc/postfix-green /etc/postfix-pink /etc/postfix-orange /etc/postfix-blue FBL: master.cf 184.173.119.103:25 inet n - n - - smtpd main.cf myhostname = blue.example.us mydomain = blue.example.us <= Deliberately set to subdomain only. myorigin = $mydomain inet_interfaces = $myhostname lmtp_host_lookup = native smtp_host_lookup = native ignore_mx_lookup_error = yes mydestination = $myhostname local_recipient_maps = unix:passwd.byname $alias_maps $virtual_alias_maps mynetworks = 192.168.36.51/32, 192.168.35.20/31 <= Second IP is backup MX servers relay_domains = $mydestination recipient_canonical_maps = hash:/etc/postfix-blue/canonical virtual_alias_maps = hash:/etc/postfix-fbl/virtual alias_maps = hash:/etc/aliases, hash:/etc/postfix-blue/canonical alias_maps = hash:/etc/aliases, hash:/etc/postfix-blue/canonical mailbox_command = /usr/bin/procmail -a "$EXTENSION" DEFAULT=$HOME/Mail/ MAILDIR=$HOME/Mail smtpd_banner = $myhostname ESMTP $mail_name authorized_submit_users = multi_instance_name = postfix-blue multi_instance_enable = yes

  Read the article

• Salesforce: Fire a SOAP Outbound Message using Apex

  - by codeulike

  I have an existing Workflow Rule that fires of a (SOAP) Outbound Message when a certain type of object is created or updated. That works fine. I want to extend it so that a similar Outbound Message is also sent when the objects are deleted. According to this discussion, Workflow Rules cannot be made to fire based on object deletions, so I have to write an Apex Trigger instead. So the question is, how do I kick off a SOAP Outbound Message from within Apex?

  Read the article

• Big IP F5 outbound HTTP issues

  - by mbuk2k

  We've tried upgrading from 9.x to 10.2 on our F5 Big IP 3400 and everything went over fine apart from one thing. We're unable to establish any outbound HTTP (80) connections from any servers that are assigned to a virtual server. This is something that worked before and is required for certain calls our servers need to make. Interestingly HTTPS (443) connections work fine, it's literally just anything outbound over port 80 seems to fail. Does anyone know if anything has changed between 9.4 and 10.2 that would mean additional config would need to be made to allow for external HTTP connections? Any advice would be appreciated, thank you

  Read the article

• Postfix Inbound/Outbound Gateway for Google Apps

  - by geofflee

  I currently have a Postfix/Dovecot setup, but our server is hitting capacity, so we decided to switch to Google Apps. However, we have certain web applications that need to send and receive e-mail directly (for example, e-mail being redirected to a script). What I want to do is host certain e-mail accounts with Google Apps, while my current server continues to manage other e-mail accounts. I assume this means that I would use my current server as an Inbound/Outbound Gateway, so my questions are: 1) How do I setup Postfix as an Outbound Gateway without making it an (insecure) open relay? 2) How do I setup Postfix as an Inbound Gateway so that only certain e-mail addresses are forwarded to Google Apps? Thank you!

  Read the article

• Windows Server 2008 constantly spamming external IP's on outbound TCP port 445

  - by RSXAdmin

  Hi Server Fault, I have a Windows Server 2008 box running as a Domain Controller. I have noticed in my Cisco ASA firewall logs that this box is continuously sending out (like a thousand requests a second) requests on TCP port 445 to external hosts. I have made an effort to deny this outbound traffic from getting on the internet (using the ASA), however I would like these requests to stop from even occurring at all. I have tried disabling TCP/IP over NetBIOS. I have even turned on Windows Advanced Firewall on the box itself to block outbound 445 but the ASA still detects this particular traffic hitting it. I have other DC's and similar type boxes which are not behaving the same way as this box. Is this normal? Is there a way to stop this spamming? Have I been infected? Thank you universe.

  Read the article

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >