Search Results

Search found 12925 results on 517 pages for 'email routing'.

Page 102/517 | < Previous Page | 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 | Next Page >

pfSense router on a LAN with two gateways

- by JohnCC

I have a LAN with an ADSL modem/router on it. We have just gained an alternative high-speed internet connection at our location, and I want to connect the LAN to it, eventually dropping the ADSL. I've chosen to use a small PFSense box to connect the LAN to the new WAN connection. Two servers on the LAN run services accessible to the outside via NAT using the single ADSL WAN IP. We have DNS records which point to this IP. I want to do the same via the new connection, using the WAN IP there. That connection permits multiple IPs, so I have configured pfSense using virtual IP's, 1:1 NAT and appropriate firewall rules. When I change the servers' default gateway settings to the pfSense box, I can access the services via the new WAN IPs without a problem. However, I can no longer access them via the old WAN IP. If I set the servers' default gateway back to the ADSL router, then the opposite is true - I can access the services via the ADSL IP, but not via the new one. In the first case, I believe this is because an incoming SYN packet arrives at the ADSL WAN IP, and is NAT'd and sent to the internal IP of the server. The server responds with a SYN/ACK which it sends via its default gateway, the pfSense box. The pfSense box sees a SYN/ACK that it saw no SYN for and drops the packet. Is there any sensible way around this? I would like the services to be accessible via both IPs for a short period at least, since once I change the DNS it will take a while before everyone picks up the new address.

Read the article
What kind of router do I need to handle multiple external I.P addresses?

- by user1308743

I have 3 dedicated I.P addresses going to a location with a few servers, and 1 RVS4000 router. Right now, only one I.P is being used. I would like a router that can use all 3 I.P addresses and I can make rules like this: IP1:80 goes to ServerA IP2:80 goes to ServerB What kind of router/device with what features do I need to handle this? I will need to set 30-40 rules to forward certain ports to certain servers. Only a couple ports will need to go to IP2 or IP3. Thanks

Read the article
Shared email acct - how to move sent mail from all users to shared "sent items"

- by grojo

Hi, I've set up a shared email account at Exchange, which several users have access to, as a secondary mailbox (along with their personal mailbox) I would like to know if the following is possible all replies and/or mail created when "in" the shared account, is sent from the shared account all sent mail end up in the sent mail folder of the shared account, not the individual users sent mail folders users can set custom signatures when sending mail from the shared account Is this possible to accomplish with Exchange 2007/Outlook, using server and/or clientside rules? Thanks for your help.

Read the article
Blocking ports on the public IP assigned to lo interface in GNU/Linux

- by nixnotwin

I have setup my Ubuntu server as a router and webserver by following the answer given here. My ISP facing interface eth0 has a private 172.16.x.x/30 ip and my lo interface has a public IP as mentioned in the answer to the question linked above. The setup is working well. The only snag I have experienced is that I could not find a way to block the ports exposed by the public IP on the lo interface. I tried doing iptables -A INPUT -i eth0 -j DROP, and my server lost connectivity to the public network (internet). I could not ping any public ips. What I want is a way to block ports that are exposed by the public ip on the lo interface. And also I require iptables rules that can expose ports like 80 or openvpn port to the public network.

Read the article
Private IP getting routed over Internet

- by WernerCD

We are setting up an internal program, on an internal server that uses the private 172.30.x.x subnet... when we ping the address 172.30.138.2, it routes across the internet: C:\>tracert 172.30.138.2 Tracing route to 172.30.138.2 over a maximum of 30 hops 1 6 ms 1 ms 1 ms xxxx.xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.org [192.168.28.1] 2 * * * Request timed out. 3 12 ms 13 ms 9 ms xxxxxxxxxxx.xxxxxx.xx.xxx.xxxxxxx.net [68.85.xx.xx] 4 15 ms 11 ms 55 ms te-7-3-ar01.salisbury.md.bad.comcast.net [68.87.xx.xx] 5 13 ms 14 ms 18 ms xe-11-0-3-0-ar04.capitolhghts.md.bad.comcast.net [68.85.xx.xx] 6 19 ms 18 ms 14 ms te-1-0-0-4-cr01.denver.co.ibone.comcast.net [68.86.xx.xx] 7 28 ms 30 ms 30 ms pos-4-12-0-0-cr01.atlanta.ga.ibone.comcast.net [68.86.xx.xx] 8 30 ms 43 ms 30 ms 68.86.xx.xx 9 30 ms 29 ms 31 ms 172.30.138.2 Trace complete. This has a number of us confused. If we had a VPN setup, it wouldn't show up as being routed across the internet. If it hit an internet server, Private IP's (such as 192.168) shouldn't get routed. What would let a private IP address get routed across servers? would the fact that it's all comcast mean that they have their routers setup wrong?

Read the article
pix 501, static route to d-link router (different subnet)

- by ra170

I have pix 501 cisco firewall with internal ip 192.168.10.1. I have connected d-link router (dir-655) to pix 501. The d-link router has internal ip 192.168.0.1 The picture would like something like that: |pix 501| has 192.168.10.1 ip |DIR-655| has 192.168.0.1 ip 1. |cable modem|----|pix 501|-------|DIR-655|-----PC 2. PC--------|pix 501|---------|DIR-655| | | |cable modem| When I'm on the wireless network (dir-655) with assigned ip of 192.168.0.x I can cross the subnet and connect to my firewall 192.168.10.1. (pic. 1) The problem is that if I'm on the 192.168.10.x network I can't connect to anything over at 192.168.0.x network. (pic.2) I've tried entering a static route like this: `route inside 192.168.0.0 255.255.255.0 192.168.10.1 1` I also tried assigning static ip to wan interface on DIR-655 to 192.168.10.30 and then tried this: route inside 192.168.0.0 255.255.255.0 192.168.10.30 1 But still, can't connect to 192.168.0.1 or anything on that subnet. Is there a way to setup a static route? Would adding a separate router between PIX 501 and DIR-655 help? I would think that static route like this should take care of it, but it doesn't. This is my route config and nat: (config)# sh route outside 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 (outside_IP) 1 DHCP static outside (outside_IP) 255.255.248.0 (outside_IP) 1 CONNECT static inside 192.168.0.0 255.255.255.0 192.168.10.1 1 OTHER static inside 192.168.10.0 255.255.255.0 192.168.10.1 1 CONNECT static or (route inside 192.168.0.0 255.255.255.0 192.168.10.30 1) (config)# sh nat nat (inside) 1 192.168.1.0 255.255.255.0 0 0 nat (inside) 1 192.168.10.0 255.255.255.0 0 0 nat (inside) 1 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 0 0 I ended up turning DIR-655 into an Access Point (turning off DHCP and pluging cable from PIX lan interface into one of the LAN interfaces on DIR-655, and leaving WAN port empty), that works as far as DIR-655 being on the same subnet now, and I can access every machine. However the question is, why can't I simply route between those two? would router between these two help? One of the reasons is, that the PIX 501 has only 10 licences, so now I'm using almost all of them. (I have few computers, iphones, ps3, print server, etc.) I would really appreciate some help! Thanks.

Read the article
Multi-WAN bonding across different media

- by Tom O'Connor

I've recently been thinking again about a product that Viprinet provide, basically they've got a pair of routers, one that lives in a datacentre, Their VPN Multichannel Hub and the on-site hardware, their VPN multichannel routers They've also got a bunch of interface cards (like HWICs) for 3G, UMTS, Ethernet, ADSL and ISDN adapters. Their main spiel seems to be bonding across different media. It's something that I'd really like to use for a couple of projects, but their pricing is really quite extreme, the hub is about 1-2k, the routers are 2-6k, and the interface modules are 200-600 each. So, what I'd like to know is, is it possible with a couple of stock Cisco routers, 28xx or 18xx series, to do something similar, and basically connect a bunch of different WAN ports, but have it all presented neatly as one channel back to the internet, with seamless (or nearly) failover if one of the WAN interfaces should fail. Basically, If i got 3x 3G to ethernet modems, and each on a different network, I'd like to be able to loadbalance/bond across all of them, without having to pay Viprinet for the privilege. Does anyone know how I'd go about configuring something for myself, based around standard protocols (or vendor specific ones), but without actually having to buy the Viprinet hardware?

Read the article
Blocking ICMP outgoing requests only in eth1

- by Raj

I am creating a NAT with iptables: Computer A: eth0 (dhcp) + eth1 (static ip 192.168.0.1 - gateway) Computer B: eth1 (static ip 192.168.0.2, using Computer A as gateway) I know how to block ICMP outgoing requests (-A OUTPUT -p icmp --icmp-type echo-request -j DROP), but that would block ICMP requests from Computer A, but not from Computer B (in fact, only for Computer A - Computer B can keep doing those). I tried with the same command, but adding -o eth1, but that does not block at all. Any idea?

Read the article
Outgoing mail from linux not being delivered

- by Jason

I can't seem to send mail through my php scripts or through the linux console on my Centos 5.5 LAMP server, when the email is addressed to go to a domain that is hosted by my box. I think it is something to do with the email routing internally, or the DNS servers that the box uses not reporting the correct MX records. Basically my box doesn't host any mail, it's all hosted on google apps. My name servers are hosted by a 3rd party provider and I am using webmin. Webmin doesn't recognise the settings on the 3rd party provider. I'm unsure how to fix this. Previously when I had this problem on a cpanel server, I would edit the remotedomains and localdomains files, moving domains from one file to another and it would fix the problem. What information do I need to provide for anyone to work out what the issue is? Thanks

Read the article
Linksys router with multiple external IP's

- by Adrian Mester

In an office I've got a network connection with 5 external IPs and a Linksys router (I'm not 100% percent sure of the model). I need 4 of those 5 IPs to be routed to a server, and the fifth to be shared between the other computers at the office. This can probably be done using a switch in front of the router. Connect the server and the router to the switch, and let the router handle the rest of the network. Is there a way to configure the router to route the 4 IPs to the server, and create an internal network the the other computers at the same time?

Read the article
Email hosting on home's Windows server 2003

- by klay

Hi guys, I am new to Server management, I have a static Ip address and I bought recently a domain name, I configure the domain name to target my Ip address. I am running windows server 2003 standard. what are the steps to host my email adresses? Do I need to buy anything else, or what I have is enough (static ip address, domain name, win server 2003, exchange server 2003) ?? thanks Guys

Read the article
centos 6.3 kvm external ip forwarding to guests

- by user1111702

I have a centos 6.3 server with kvm installed. The server has 4 external ips and one NIC. 176.9.xxx.xx1 176.9.xxx.xx2 176.9.xxx.xx3 176.9.xxx.xx4 I use the following configuration ifcfg-eth0 as slave to ifcfg-br0 the configuration in ifcfg-eth0 is DEVICE=eth0 ONBOOT=yes BRIDGE=br0 HWADDR=14:da:e9:b3:8b:99 and in the ifcfg-br0 DEVICE=br0 TYPE=Bridge BOOTPROTO=static BROADCAST=176.9.xxx.xxx IPADDR=176.9.xxx.xx1 NETMASK=255.255.255.0 SCOPE="peer 176.9.xxx.xxx" and I have 3 more aliases for br0 , br0:1 to get the trafic from the second external ip DEVICE=br0:1 IPADDR=176.9.xxx.xx2 NETMASK=255.255.255.248 ONBOOT=yes br0:2 to get the trafic from the third external ip DEVICE=br0:1 IPADDR=176.9.xxx.xx3 NETMASK=255.255.255.248 ONBOOT=yes br0:3 to get the trafic from the second external ip DEVICE=br0:1 IPADDR=176.9.xxx.xx4 NETMASK=255.255.255.248 ONBOOT=yes The above settings work fine and I recieve the trafic from all the external ips. My problem is that I want to pass the trafic from external ip to specific virtual guest on my server. ie trafic that comes from 176.9.xxx.xxx2 must pass to virtual machine 1 176.9.xxx.xxx3 must pass to virtual machine 2 176.9.xxx.xxx4 must pass to virtual machine 3 Can you please help me how to achieve this ? What are the settings on the host and what should I do to the guests. Thank you in advance

Read the article
Setting up mutt for gmail

- by highBandWidth

I am trying to set up mutt for gmail. I am following instructions at http://crunchbanglinux.org/wiki/howto/howto_setup_mutt_with_gmail_imap, however, after putting set from = "[email protected]" set realname = "Your Real Name" set imap_user = "[email protected]" set imap_pass = "yourpassword" (with my details, of course), I get $ mutt Error in $HOME/.muttrc, line 12: imap_user: unknown variable Error in $HOME/.muttrc, line 13: imap_pass: unknown variable source: errors in $HOME/.muttrc Press any key to continue... If I try to send an email, it doesn't work because instead of IMAP, it tries to send email directly from my localhost's mail system. Mutt says it is version Mutt 1.4.2.3i.

Read the article
Changing DNS - Forgot to change MX records for one month - Is there a way to retrieve emails that we

- by Chris Altman

We have our own domain. Our email is hosted by Google Apps. We switched web servers and name servers to a new provider. In the switch, I forgot to move the MX record. When people tried to send emails to our domain, there was no bounce back. We fixed the MX record and now receive email. Is there anyway to retrieve the emails that were sent in the month when there was no MX record? I doubt it because there was no MX record on our name server. Where would the emails have gone since they did not bounce back?

Read the article
Isolate clients on same subnet?

- by stefan.at.wpf

Given n (e.g. 200) clients in a /24 subnet and the following network structure: client 1 \ . \ . switch -- firewall . / client n / (in words: all clients connected to one switch and the switch connected to the firewall) Now by default, e.g. client 1 and client n can communicate directly using the switch, without any packets ever arriving the firewall. Therefore none of those packets could be filtered. However I would like to filter the packets between the clients, therefore I want to disallow any direct communication between the clients. I know this is possible using vlans, but then - according to my understanding - I would have to put all clients in their own network. However I don't even have that much IP addresses: I have about 200 clients, only a /24 subnet and all clients shall have public ip addresses, therefore I can't just create a private network for each of them (well, maybe using some NAT, but I'd like to avoid that). So, is there any way to tell the switch: Forward all packets to the firewall, don't allow direct communication between clients? Thanks for any hint!

Read the article
SharePoint 2007: Moving main site, to be a subsite - How can urls be redirected/changed?

- by program247365

The setup: SharePoint 2007 (MOSS Enterprise) on WINSVR03/IIS6 One site collection, with one access mapping (http://mainsite) currently I'm moving the main SharePoint site, in our one site collection, to be a subsite in a new site collection. I'm using SharePoint Content Deployment Wizard to complete this task (http://spdeploymentwizard.codeplex.com/). The Question So the main site http://mainsite being moved has many subsites, etc. I want to be sure that urls like this: http://mainsite/subsite/doclib/doc1.docx map to and redirect to the new url: http://newsite/mainsite/subsite/doclib/doc1.docx ? And furthermore: I'm aware of this - http://rdacollaboration.codeplex.com/releases/view/28073 , however is it IIS7 only? That'd wouldn't work for me. Looking at this question - http://serverfault.com/questions/107537/dealing-with-moved-documents-and-sites-in-sharepoint is the only one I see that is similar. Would an IIS redirect of http://mainsite to http://newsite/mainsite work only for the root url?

Read the article
hosts file for ip address

- by Jon Clegg

I would like to map ip address to specific localhost interfaces (e.g. 23.45.66.77 = 127.0.3.3). For named hosts I can use the hosts file. Naturally this doesn't work for IP address. This has to work in windows, the only option I've found so far is implementing a TAP/TUN driver like openvpn does. Are there any other options?

Read the article
Route an IP from WAN to a host on LAN on OpenWRT

- by Zsub

EDIT: I know how to use NAT, I specifically want the server to be reachable on two IP's, one private, one public, with the firewall of the OpenWRT in between, if feasible. At the office we have recieved a /29 from our ISP. The first address is reserved for their endpoint, so I'm free to use five addresses. We run a local network, so of course there is a router in between running OpenWRT to provide all hosts with (W)LAN (dhcp from a private range). However, we also have a server running OS X Server 10.6 (Snow Leopard) and I'd like that server to be accessible both from the LAN using a private IP as well as from the WAN on it's own public IP. Point of note is that the server only has one network port, so multiple NICs is not an option, unfortunately. How would I go about doing this?

Read the article
Looking for good Open Source email server

- by rockinthesixstring

I'm currently running MailEnable as my email server, it's ok but lacking. I'm looking for a better alternative and am wondering about Open Source. I'm a huge fan of the Smarter Mail, and will pay if it's the best I can get... But I have been learning that there is some good stuff out there in the Open Source community (IE: I've started using PFSense and I love it). Does anyone have any suggestions?

Read the article
Single m0n0wall - Two LAN Subnets - How To Setup

- by SnAzBaZ

I have two LAN subnets that I need to link together they are 192.168.4.0/24 and 192.168.5.0/24 There is a m0n0wall running on 192.168.4.1. It's LAN connection goes out to our network switch, and it's WAN port goes out to our ADSL modem. WAN is connected via PPPoE. The 192.168.4.0 subnet contains all of our office workstations. The 192.168.5.0 subnet contains development servers and test machines that need to obtain internet access and be "managed" by computers on the 192.168.4.0 subnet, but need to be on their own subnet as well. I have a Draytek 2820N configured on 192.168.5.1 with it's WAN2 port configured as 192.168.4.25 and a default gateway of 192.168.4.1. Machines on the 5.0 subnet can connect to the internet via the m0n0wall just fine. I configured a static route on the m0n0wall LAN interface, Network 192.168.5.0/24 and Gateway 192.168.4.25. Machines on the 5.0 subnet can ping machines on the 4.0 network but the reverse does not work. I configured a new firewall rule on the m0n0wall that allows any traffic on the LAN interface with a source IP of 192.168.4.25 to be allowed. The DrayTek firewall is currently configured to pass all traffic regardless. When I try to ping a machine in the 5.0 subnet from 4.0 I see this in my m0n0wall log: BLOCK 14:45:27.888157 LAN 192.168.4.25 192.168.4.37, type echoreply/0 ICMP So the reply is being sent from the 5.0 subnet but is not being allowed to reach my workstation because the firewall is blocking it. Why is the firewall blocking it ? I hope the explanation of my network is clear, please ask if you require further clarification. Thank you.

Read the article
Basic networking: Centos Server Router + Ubuntu Client setup.. unable to access outside world from client

- by ale

I am trying to set up my Centos Server with two NICs as a router. eth0 is connected to the outside world and eth1 is connected to an Ubuntu client. Here's eth0 on the server: DEVICE=eth0 BOOTPROTO=dhcp ONBOOT=yes TYPE=Ethernet eth1 on the server: DEVICE=eth1 BOOTPROTO=static IPADDR=192.168.0.10 # a free address on my network ONBOOT=yes TYPE=Ethernet My server has IPv4 packet forwarding turned on and my iptables only contains: # iptables --table nat --append POSTROUTING --out-interface eth0 -j MASQUERADE # iptables --append FORWARD --in-interface eth1 -j ACCEPT My Ubuntu client has this in its /etc/network/interfaces auto lo iface lo inet loopback iface eth0 inet dhcp gateway 192.168.0.10 but I can't get an Internet connection from the server for my client. I can't even ping my server from the client: $ ping 192.168.0.10 Destination Host Unreachable

Read the article
How to create a template with contact info in Windows Live Mail?

- by Elliott

Is it possible to create a template to use in Windows Live mail which I can load peoples details into from my contact list? I currently send emails to people but I have to manually view them in the address book, then copy there details into an email. What I would like is to open the template, select the email address and everything else is auto completed, such as first name, address etc. These would go in set fields which I set within the template. Is this possible? I am willing to switch to another mail account if needed but I would prefer it to be in Windows Live Mail. Thank you. :)

Read the article
Prevent users from Router 2 seeing Router 1 computers

- by Patrick Robert Shea O'Connor

I've got 2 Netgear N300 (WNR2000v3) routers. Here's my setup: Modem Router 1 Private Users/Router 2 Public Wireless Users on "Guest" Network. I want to prevent users who are connected to Router 2's "Guest" network from accessing anything that is connected to Router 1. There is an option when setting up the "Guest" network called "Allow guest to access My Local Network" which I thought if unchecked would do this very thing; however, I can still access files and such of computers connected to Router 1. Router 1 assigns 192.0.0.x IP addresses, Router 2 assigns 10.0.0.x IP addresses, how can they even see each other? Do I need to change the subnet or something else?

Read the article
Server 2003 and XP Client; Why are HTTP connections being silently dropped.

- by Asa Yeamans

On my network, my edge-router, a windows 2003 r2 server router with all the latest updates, will drop packets, but only under specific circumstances. I have troubleshot and isolated it down to the most simple configuration i can. There is NO NAT involved. Only fully-public IP addresses. No Firewalls are running either, all ahve been disabled. no packet filters on any interfaces anywhere either. I have a single Windows XP virtual machine and my edge-router(the windows 2003 r2 server, and also a virtual machine) running on a windows 2008 x64 r2 system (running virtual server 2005 as i dont have Intel-VT compatible chip yet). The edge router can access any external http site just fine, no issues. However the windows XP machine is only able to access certain sites. These work: www.google.com www.txstate.edu www.workintexas.com www.thedailywtf.com . These Dont: www.yahoo.com www.utexas.edu en.wikipedia.org slashdot.org www.bing.com. I have removed all possibility of DNS issues by connecting with net-cat from the XP box and sending GET /\r\nHost: \r\n\r\n and that connection replicates the issue as well. The network setup: My statically assigned IP block: x.x.x.168/29 DSL Modem -----PPPoE Connection---- x.x.x.169[EdgeRouter] [EdgeRouter]x.x.x.170 -----Virtual Ethernet----- x.x.x.174 [Test2] Test2's Default gateway is x.x.x.170 and test2 can ping any and every valid, accessible, public IP address with no packet loss what-so-ever. If i connect directly over PPPoE from test2 (the XP box) everything works just fine... Im at my wits end, i have NO IDEA whats causing this.

Read the article
Amazon AWS VPN how to open a port?

- by Victor Piousbox

I have a VPN with public and private subnets; I am considering only public subnet for now. The node 10.0.0.23, I can ssh into it. Let's say I want to connect to MySQL on the node using its private address: ubuntu@ip-10-0-0-23:/$ mysql -u root -h 10.0.0.23 ERROR 2003 (HY000): Can't connect to MySQL server on '10.0.0.23' (111) ubuntu@ip-10-0-0-23:/$ mysql -u root -h localhost Welcome to the MySQL monitor. Commands end with ; or \g. --- 8< --- snip --- 8< --- mysql> The port 3306 is not reachable if I use the private IP? My security group allows port 3306 inbound from 0.0.0.0/0 AND from 10.0.0.0/24. Outbound, allowed all. The generic setup done by Amazon through their wizard does not work... I add ACL that allows everything for everybody, still does not work. What am I missing?

Read the article

< Previous Page | 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 | Next Page >