Search Results

Search found 3413 results on 137 pages for 'addresses'.

Page 104/137 | < Previous Page | 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111  | Next Page >

  • Overriding some DNS entries in BIND for internal networks

    - by Remy Blank
    I have an internal network with a DNS server running BIND, connected to the internet through a single gateway. My domain "example.com" is managed by an external DNS provider. Some of the entries in that domain, say "host1.example.com" and "host2.example.com", as well as the top-level entry "example.com", point to the public IP address of the gateway. I would like hosts located on the internal network to resolve "host1.example.com", "host2.example.com" and "example.com" to internal IP addresses instead of that of the gateway. Other hosts like "otherhost.example.com" should still be resolved by the external DNS provider. I have succeeded in doing that for the host1 and host2 entries, by defining two single-entry zones in BIND for "host1.example.com" and "host2.example.com". However, if I add a zone for "example.com", all queries for that domain are resolved by my local DNS server, and e.g. querying "otherhost.example.com" results in an error. Is it possible to configure BIND to override only some entries of a domain, and to resolve the rest recursively?

    Read the article

  • Choosing the right e-mail client

    - by CFP
    Hi all, I'm currently using Outlook 2007 (under windows 7), but I much prefer free software (open source being the best of course), so I thought I'd ask for expert advice here. I thought it might be easier if I included a small "wanted list": I receive about 15 to 30 e-mails every day, but I have large archives (10'000 emails), which I frequently need to access. I usually open and close my mail program many times, so I'd like it to start pretty fast I cannot use an online mailbox, because I have too many email addresses (about 5: 1 for work, 1 for home, 1 semi-private, 1 for specific emails, and 1 for newletters By order of importance, the things I'd like my mail client to be able to: Efficiently categorize e-mails. Until now, I've mostly been using Outlook folders, because filtering by tags was not easy, but I'd rather one large list of mails, neatly tagged so I can easily filter. I'd love being able to select mails by tags (eg in a click or too (could be a tab) show all mails tagged with "software") Create "tagging rules", such as "if the mail was sent to this address, add this tag", or "if the body contains ..., add that tag" Sync contacts with Gmail, handle tasks (syncing with toodledo would be awesome), possibly provide a calendar Create e-mail templates, signatures... Other ideas: A timeline, scripting support, being able to import MS Outlook emails, provide a nice backup format... Thanks for sharing ideas and suggestions!

    Read the article

  • finding the best network latency between two countries

    - by Yoav Aner
    I know there are many tools to test for bandwidth and latency, but they all rely on having at least one host from which you can run those tests. I wonder whether there's an online source or some other way to guestimate the latency or speed between two countries (in general). For example, would a customer in Japan get lower latency if the server is located in Singapore or Australia? Is a user in India likely to get higher download speed from a server in the UK or in the US? Are there any online resources or some clever ways to answer those questions with a reasonable degree of accuracy? [UPDATE]: Thanks for the great suggestions from Raffael Luthiger. I didn't know about those looking glass servers. The submarine cable maps were also really cool to discover (Thanks to Jesper Mortensen). Also seems really wise if I could ask those network professional in the area for their experience, but obviously I don't have access to those. At least some of them are on SF :) However, I'm still a little unsure how to combine those resources to give me some measurements. This is the information I have: Two countries (A,B). I do have IP addresses of customers in country A (I can obtain those from the web server log files for example). Presumably I can find some looking glass servers in country B and run a trace to those IPs. What's the best measurements to use? Are there any scripts that help automate at least some of this process?

    Read the article

  • 2 servers on 2 networks in same office

    - by irot
    Hello Gents, My office doesn't have a "server guy" in employ, so I'm stuck with having to fix server issues for now. There are 2 servers in our office, both are file/web servers only accessible via LAN. They are currently on the same network, so no issue there. Problem is, we recently got a static IP to use, but it's with a different ISP, so now we have 2 routers in our office. I would like to open one of the servers to the public as a web/FTP server. But if I hook a server up to the new router, users will no longer be able to access the files shared on that server (because they're on different networks). How can I go about making one server accessible to the public using the static IP line, but still able to share the files on it to the users connected to the other network? The server I want to make public is running Windows Server 2008, the other server Windows Server 2003. And as far as I know, IP addresses are assigned by the router. I'm just a developer, don't know much about networking. Thank you in advance.

    Read the article

  • Display maintenance site to requesters based on their IP address

    - by user64294
    Hi all. I would like to set a special configuration in our apache web server. I would like to display sites to the users according to their IP addresses. We plan to upgrade our web sites. During the upgrade we'll put a maintenance site: so all the users which will connect to our web sites will get this site. There are 200 websites affected by the upgrade, so I don't want to change apache settings for each one. In order to test the upgrade i need to set apache to let only my IP address to access to asked site. If my IP address is a.b.c.d and if i ask for test.com i want to see it. but all other users, having a different IP address, should get the maintenane site even if they look for test.com. Our webserver is hosted out of the office (ovh.com france). The testers are the developers at our office and me. We can take some sites and enable them for test in which we implement IP restrictions in each website: the idea is on these websites, if the visitor's IP address is different from our office IP address we redirect this visitor to our maintenance website else we display the website. Is there a way to do this? Thank you.

    Read the article

  • Exchange SBS 2003 server stopped receiving mail over the weekend, senders getting "Relay access deni

    - by Charlie W.
    Firstly, I should say that I know my way around Windows very well, I don't really know the first thing about Exchange. I am trying to support a user that is running an SBS2003 Server with Exchange. Over the weekend, everyone sending something to any of his addresses gets an error message like the following: Delivery to the following recipient failed permanently: [email protected] Technical details of permanent failure: Google tried to deliver your message, but it was rejected by the recipient domain. We recommend contacting the other email provider for further information about the cause of this error. The error that the other server returned was: 554 554 5.7.1 <[email protected]>: Relay access denied (state 14). ----- Original message ----- Received: by 10.114.18.7 with SMTP id 7mr5572745war.127.1275423472120; Tue, 01 Jun 2010 13:17:52 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: [email protected] Received: by 10.143.10.15 with HTTP; Tue, 1 Jun 2010 13:17:32 -0700 (PDT) From: My Name <[email protected]> Date: Tue, 1 Jun 2010 15:17:32 -0500 X-Google-Sender-Auth: XiPrP8Em_6Eb94EH9m84nJVGvCY Message-ID: <[email protected]> Subject: TEST To: Client <[email protected]> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001636b1484ffe72470487fdaa5b There are a host of errors in the Application log, but nothing that leaps out at me as being obvious. But then again, I don't really know what I'm looking for. Any help would be greatly appreciated.

    Read the article

  • Conditionally Rewrite Email Headers (From & Reply-To) Exchange 2010

    - by NorthVandea
    I have a client who maintains Company A (with email addresses %username%@companyA.com) and they own the domain companyB.com however there is no "infrastructure" (no Exchange server) set up specifically for companyB.com. My client needs to be able to have the end users within it's company (companyA.com) add a specific word or phrase to the Subject (or Body) line of the Outgoing email (they are only concerned with outgoing, incoming is a non-issue in this case) that triggers the Exchange 2010 servers to rewrite the header From and Reply-To [email protected] with [email protected] but this re-write should ONLY occur if the user places the key word/phrase in the Subject (or Body). I have attempted using Transport Rules and the New-AddressRewriteEntry cmdlet however each seems to have a limitation. From what I can tell Transport Rules cannot re-write the From/Reply-To fields and New-AddressRewriteEntry cannot be conditionally triggered based on message content. So to recap: User sends email outside the organization: From and Reply-To remain [email protected] User sends email outside the organization WITH "KeyWord" in the Subject or Body: From and Reply-To change to [email protected] automatically. Anyone know how this could be done WITHOUT coding a new Mail Agent? I don't have the programming knowledge to code a custom Agent... I can use any function of Exchange Management Shell or Console. Alternatively if anyone knows of a simple add-on program that could do this that would be good too. Any help would be greatly appreciated! Thank you!!!

    Read the article

  • Options for small windows network setup without dedicated server?

    - by Mitch
    I'm very weak on networking and hope someone can point me in the right direction: I have written some windows client/server software which incorporates a database which is located on a windows server. I have a test installation running at a customer's office where the server has a static IP address. In this case its easy for the clients to access the database because of the fixed IP address. Also, customers with network servers generally have specialist support staff to set up my software, so its not such a problem for me. However I also need to offer the software to customers who have small offices with less than 10 PCs and no dedicated network server. In this case I want the customer to be able to nominate one PC as the database "server" and install my software and have the clients access it. But in this situation I believe the "server" PC may not have a dedicated IP address. Q1: What is the best way to set this up simply and make it work? Can I reliably reference the "server" by using its name, or is there a way to assign dummy fixed IP addresses? Ideally this needs to be workable on small networks running a mixture of XP/Vista/Windows7 as my target market may well have mixed OSes etc. I guess this would be akin to home networking? Many thanks Mitch

    Read the article

  • Sharepoint Central Administration stuck / high CPU usage

    - by johnnyb10
    I'm using WSS 3 and I recently added a new web application to my SharePoint Server. After adding it, I wasn't able to open the Central Administration site. I also noticed that there was a w3wp.exe error (Event ID 1000) in the Event Viewer. The situation now is that the w3wp.exe process is hovering around 50% CPU usage continuously. I installed a program called IIS Peek, and it shows continuous GET requests on the Central Administration site; this happens even if I stop the Central Administration site in IIS. The IP addresses identified in the GET request is my workstation, which is what I used to attempt to access Central Administration after I created the new web application. Can someone explain what's going on and how I might fix it? It seems as if my computer tried to access Central Administration and then it hung, but the page requests that were happening at the time are somehow continuing over and over again. So my two problems are the inability to access Central Administration, and the CPU Usage of w3wp.exe, which I'm assuming are two symptoms of the same problem. I'd like to know if there's anything I can do besides restarting IIS, because we have clients accessing other sites on this server. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • 530 5.7.1 Client was not authenticated Exchange 2010 for some computers within mask

    - by user1636309
    We have a classic problem with Client not Authenticated but with a specific twist: We have an Exchange 2010 cluster, let's say EX01 and EX02, the connection is always to smtp.acme.com, then it is switched through load balancer. We have an application server, call it APP01 There are clients connected to the APP01. There is a need for anonymous mail relay from both clients and APP01. The Anonymous Users setting of the Exchange is DISABLED, but the specific computers - APP01 and clients by the mask, let's say, 192.168.2.* - are enabled. For internal relay, a "Send Connector" is created, and then the above IP addresses are added for the connector to allow computers, servers, or any other device such as a copy machine to use the exchange server to relay email to recipients. The problem is that the relay works for APP01 and some clients, but not others (we get "Client not Authenticated") - all inside the same network and the same mask. This is basically what we do to test it outside of our application: http://smtp25.blogspot.sk/2009/04/530-571-client-was-not-authenticated.html So, I am looking for ideas: What can be the reason for such a strange behaviour? Where I can see the trace of what's going on at the Exchange side?

    Read the article

  • How do I stop postfix from handling my mail?

    - by Tatu Ulmanen
    Here's the situation: I have a domain, let's say domain.com. That domain has Google Apps for Business enabled, so all mail delivered to @domain.com will end up at Google (MX records point to Google). I have a PHP script at domain.com that I use to send mail to myself. But when the PHP script tries to send mail to [email protected], Postfix at that server decides that the recipient is a local user (because the address matches the domain Postfix itself is at), and tries to deliver the mail locally. But inevitably fails as the mailbox cannot be found. How can I instruct Postfix to not try to handle locally any emails to @domain.com and just send them forward so Google can pick them up? I have already removed $myhostname from mydestination field in Postfix's main.cf file, and I have restarted Postfix but Postfix still tries to deliver the mail locally. Here's a snip from mail.log that show the problem (addresses replaced): postfix/pickup[20643]: AF718422E5: uid=33 from=<server> postfix/cleanup[20669]: AF718422E5: message-id=<62e706bcca5a0de0bfec6baa576d88a5@server> postfix/qmgr[20642]: AF718422E5: from=<server>, size=517, nrcpt=1 (queue active) postfix/pipe[20678]: AF718422E5: to=<[email protected]>, relay=dovecot, delay=0.62, delays=0.47/0.03/0/0.13, dsn=5.1.1, status=bounced (user unknown) postfix/bounce[20680]: AF718422E5: sender non-delivery notification: 29598422E7 postfix/qmgr[20642]: AF718422E5: removed

    Read the article

  • Set postfix to send email but not to receive them

    - by CodeShining
    I'm using Google Apps to handle personal email addresses for my domain name, and I set up the DNS as Google suggests. All works fine. Now since I need a SMTP to send emails from my e-commerce I installed Postfix on the server. It works fine when I send emails to any email address but it doesn't send to the same domain name, so let's say my domain is example.com, I set postfix using example.com, if I try to reset a password using [email protected] postfix doesn't send and instead reports on the mail.log Sep 20 01:09:52 ip-10-54-26-162 postfix/pickup[6809]: B09A3415D8: uid=33 from=<www-data> Sep 20 01:09:52 ip-10-54-26-162 postfix/cleanup[6854]: B09A3415D8: message-id=<20120920010952.B09A3415D8@ip-10-54-26-162.eu-west-1.compute.internal> Sep 20 01:09:52 ip-10-54-26-162 postfix/qmgr[30978]: B09A3415D8: from=<[email protected]>, size=4234, nrcpt=1 (queue active) Sep 20 01:09:52 ip-10-54-26-162 postfix/local[6856]: B09A3415D8: to=<[email protected]>, relay=local, delay=0.01, delays=0.01/0/0/0, dsn=5.1.1, status=bounced (unknown user: "myaccount") Of course it cannot find a local user "myaccount" since that account is on Google Apps... How can I tell Postfix to send the email and do not search for a local user?

    Read the article

  • PC won't PXE boot to WDS/MDT with Dell Optiplex 755

    - by Moman10
    I am trying to set up a basic MDT solution. I have set one up in the past at a previous job and it worked flawlessly, however here I'm running into a problem and am having no luck getting around it. I've installed Windows Server 2012 and MDT 2013, along with adding on the WDS role. I haven't configured much outside of the defaults for WDS, basically just set PXE response to respond to all clients (and unchecked admin approval). This machine does not run a DHCP server. I looked on the DHCP scope of our DHCP server, it shows options 66/67 checked and the server name of the WDS server is in there as well. I didn't add this but I assume it was put on during the install process (I believe I had to manually make some adjustments at my old job for this). The PC I have is a Dell Optiplex 755. I have enabled the onbard NIC w/PXE boot option in BIOS and attempted to boot. I get a "TFTP...." error but nothing offering out a DHCP address like I'm used to. In my previous job it pretty much worked right out of the box. I've verified that PortFast is enabled on the port and I've tried a couple different PCs (but both are the same model, only model I have to work with). No matter what, I get the same error. The subnet the PC is in is a different subnet than where the WDS server is sitting, but there are IP helper statements on the switch and the PCs can get regular DHCP addresses just fine from the DHCP server, just doesn't seem to get offered out a PXE boot option. I don't know if the problem is a configuration with the server or the PC itself...but after a few days of Googling I'm running out of ideas. Does anyone have a good idea of something it may be?

    Read the article

  • mod_rpaf with apache error_log

    - by Camden S.
    I'm using mod-rpaf with Apache 2.4 and it's working properly (showing the real client IP's) in my Apache access_log... but not in my error_log. My error log just shows the client IP address of the proxy server (my load balancer in this case) Here's an example of what I see in my error_log where 123.123.123.123 is the IP of my load balancer/proxy. == /usr/local/apache2/logs/error_log <== [Tue Jun 05 20:24:31.027525 2012] [access_compat:error] [pid 9145:tid 140485731845888] [client 123.123.123.123:20396] AH01797: client denied by server configuration: /wwwroot/private/secret.pdf The exact same request produces the following in my access_log where 456.456.456.456 is a real client IP (not the IP of the load balancer). 456.456.456.456 - - [05/Jun/2012:20:24:31 +0000] "GET /wwwroot/private/secret.pdf HTTP/1.1" 403 228 "-" "Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7; rv:12.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/12.0" Here's my httpd.conf entry: # RPAF LoadModule rpaf_module modules/mod_rpaf-2.0.so RPAFenable On RPAFproxy_ips 127.0.0.1 123.123.123.123 RPAFsethostname On RPAFheader X-Forwarded-For What do I need to do to get the real IP addresses showing in my Apache error_log?

    Read the article

  • Virtual Machine Network Architecture, Isolating Public and Private Networks

    - by Mark
    I'm looking for some insight into best practices for network traffic isolation within a virtual environment, specifically under VMWARE ESXi. Currently I have (in testing) 1 hardware server running ESXi but i expect to expand this to multiple pieces of hardware. The current setup is as follows: 1 pfsense VM, this VM accepts all outside (WAN/internet) traffic and performs firewall/port forwarding/NAT functionality. I have multiple public IP addresses sent to the this VM that are used for access to individual servers (via per incoming IP port forwarding rules). This VM is attached to the private (virtual) network that all other VMs are on. It also manages a VPN link into the private network with some access restrictions. This isn't the perimeter firewall but rather the firewall for this virtual pool only. I have 3 VMs that communicate with each other, as well as have some public access requirements: 1 LAMP server running an eCommerce site, public internet accessible 1 accounting server, access via windows server 2008 RDS services for remote access by users 1 inventory/warehouse management server, VPN to client terminals in warehouses These servers constantly talk with each other for data synchronization. Currently all the servers are on the same subnet/virtual network and connected to the internet through the pfsense VM. The pfsense firewall uses port forwarding and NAT to allow outside access to the servers for services and for server access to the internet. My main question is this: Is there a security benefit to adding a second virtual network adapter to each server and controlling traffic such that all server to server communication is on one separate virtual network, while any access to the outside world is routed through the other network adapter, through the firewall, and on the the internet. This is the type of architecture i would use if these were all physical servers, but i'm unsure if the networks being virtual changes the way i should approach locking down this system. Thank you for any thoughts or direction to any appropriate literature.

    Read the article

  • Exchange Connector Won't Send to External Domains

    - by sisdog
    I'm a developer trying to get my .Net application to send emails out through our Exchange server. I'm not an Exchange expert so I'll qualify that up front!! We've set up a receive Connector in Exchange that has the following properties: Network: allows all IP addresses via port 25. Authentication: Transport Layer Security and Externally Secured checkboxes are checked. Permission Groups: Anonymous Users and Exchange Servers checkboxes are checked. But, when I run this Powershell statement right on our Exchange server it works when I send to a local domain address but when I try to send to a remote domain it fails. WORKS: C:\Windows\system32Send-Mailmessage -To [email protected] -From [email protected] -Subject testing -Body testing -SmtpServer OURSERVER (BTW: my value for OURSERVER=boxname.domainname.local. This is the same fully-qualified name that shows up in our Exchange Management Shell when I launch it). FAILS: C:\Windows\system32Send-Mailmessage -To [email protected] -From [email protected] -Subject testing -Body testing -SmtpServer OURSERVER Send-MailMessage : Mailbox unavailable. The server response was: 5.7.1 Unable to relay At line:1 char:17 + Send-Mailmessage <<<< -To [email protected] -From [email protected] -Subject testing -Body himom -SmtpServer FTI-EX + CategoryInfo : InvalidOperation: (System.Net.Mail.SmtpClient:SmtpClient) [Send-MailMessage], SmtpFailed RecipientException + FullyQualifiedErrorId : SmtpException,Microsoft.PowerShell.Commands.SendMailMessage EDIT: From @TheCleaner 's advice, I ran the Add-ADPermission to the relay and it didn't help; [PS] C:\Windows\system32Get-ReceiveConnector "Allowed Relay" | Add-ADPermission -User "NT AUTHORITY\ANONYMOUS LOGON" -E xtendedRights "Ms-Exch-SMTP-Accept-Any-Recipient" Identity User Deny Inherited -------- ---- ---- --------- FTI-EX\Allowed Relay NT AUTHORITY\ANON... False False Thanks for the help. Mark

    Read the article

  • I receive email not addressed to me - virus?

    - by Anne
    Every once in a while I receive email (on Gmail) that isn't addressed to me. Gmail puts it in the spam box, because it 'can't verify that it has been sent by [sender]'. The emails, when opened, contain confidential information about deliveries and paid bills (it does look an awful lot like 'real' mail from well-known companies, and it doesn't look like a scam, since the mail is informative - they give information instead of asking for credit card numbers ;-)), and I even got an email from "Facebook" that I requested a password change and that I have to 'click here' to change the password for [email address that isn't mine]. I am not the only addressee, there seems to be a whole list of Gmail addresses beginning with 'a'. The original addressee obviously has some sort of virus, and now I wonder if this could be a risk for me too. Is my email being sent around without my knowing too? I am not the kind of person who randomly clicks on shady links - I am very careful on the internet - but maybe there are other ways of catching viruses? Is there something I should do/check? Thank you for your help!

    Read the article

  • IP Blacklists and suspicious inbound and outbound traffic

    - by Pantelis Sopasakis
    I administer a web server and recently we had our IP banned (!) from our host after they received a notification e-mail for abuse. In particular our server is allegedly involved in spam attacks over HTTP. The content of the abuse report email we received was not much informative - for example the IP addresses our server is supposed to have attacked against are not included - so I started a wireshark session checking for suspicious traffic over TCP/HTTP while trying to locate possible security holes on the system. (Let me note that the machine runs a Debian OS). Here is an example of such a request... Source: 89.74.188.233 Destination: 12.34.56.78 // my ip Protocol: HTTP Info: GET 'http://www.media.apniworld.com/image.php?type=hv' HTTP/1.0 I manually blacklisted this host (as well as some other ones) blocking them with iptables, but I can't keep on doing manually all day long... I'm looking for an automated way to block such IPs based on: Statistical analysis, pattern recognition or other AI-based analysis (Though, I'm reluctant to trust such a solution, if exists) Public blacklists Using DNSBL I actually found out that 89.74.188.233 is blacklisted. However other IPs which are strongly suspicious like 93.199.112.126 (i.e. http://www.pornstarnetwork.com/account/signin), unfortunately were not blacklisted! What I would like to do is to automatically connect my firewall with DNSBL (or some other blacklist database) and block all traffic towards blacklisted IPs or somehow have my local blacklist automatically updated.

    Read the article

  • PLESK PostFix Error Local in maillog, how to troubleshoot

    - by RCNeil
    I'm using the PHP mail() function, using PostFix, on CentOS6, Plesk 10.4, and my email is not getting delivered to a particular address. My personal GMail and Yahoo email addresses receive email from my server fine and do not produce errors. After a wonderful suggestion on here, I checked my mail logs, and this is the error I see : Apr 10 10:26:29 ######### postfix/qmgr[8323]: 19EA21827: from= <[email protected]>, size=645, nrcpt=1 (queue active) Apr 10 10:26:29 ######### postfix-local[8331]: postfix-local: [email protected], [email protected], dirname=/var/qmail/mailnames Apr 10 10:26:29 ######### postfix-local[8331]: cannot chdir to mailname dir name: No such file or directory Apr 10 10:26:29 ######### postfix-local[8331]: Unknown user: [email protected] Apr 10 10:26:29 ######### postfix/pipe[8330]: 19EA21827: to=<[email protected]>, relay=plesk_virtual, delay=0.15, delays=0.11/0/0/0.04, dsn=2.0.0, status=sent (delivered via plesk_virtual service) Apr 10 10:26:29 ######### postfix/qmgr[8323]: 19EA21827: removed [email protected] is the name I've declared in php.ini for sendmail_from = "[email protected]" sendmail_path = "/usr/sbin/sendmail -t -f [email protected]" and the recipient is supposed to be [email protected]. Is this an error on my side or the recipients? Can I address this on my server? Many thanks SF.

    Read the article

  • Sending email to google apps mailbox via exim4

    - by Andrey
    I have a hosting server with several users. One of the customers decided to move his email account to google apps and added the corresponding MX records so he can receive email now. But when it comes to sending email from my server to those email addresses, they don't make it. I guess it's because exim still thinks these domains are local. That's what i see in logs (example.com is my domain, example.net is the customer's domain): 2010-06-02 14:55:37 1OJmXp-0006yh-UG <= [email protected] U=root P=local S=342 T="lsdjf" from <[email protected]> for [email protected] 2010-06-02 14:55:38 1OJmXp-0006yh-UG ** [email protected] F=<[email protected]> R=virtual_aliases: 2010-06-02 14:55:38 1OJmXq-0006yl-2A <= <> R=1OJmXp-0006yh-UG U=mail P=local S=1113 T="Mail delivery failed: returning message to sender" from <> for [email protected] 2010-06-02 14:55:38 1OJmXp-0006yh-UG Completed 2010-06-02 14:55:38 1OJmXq-0006yl-2A User 0 set for local_delivery transport is on the never_users list 2010-06-02 14:55:38 1OJmXq-0006yl-2A == [email protected] R=localuser T=local_delivery defer (-29): User 0 set for local_delivery transport is on the never_users list 2010-06-02 14:55:38 1OJmXq-0006yl-2A ** [email protected]: retry timeout exceeded 2010-06-02 14:55:38 1OJmXq-0006yl-2A [email protected]: error ignored 2010-06-02 14:55:38 1OJmXq-0006yl-2A Completed What should i do to fix that?

    Read the article

  • lighttpd with multiple IPs, each with a UCC certificate and many hostnames

    - by Dave
    I'd like to get lighttpd working with UCC certificates, but I can't seem to figure out the correct syntax. Essentially, for each IP address, I have one UCC certificate and a bunch of hostnames. $SERVER["socket"] == "10.0.0.1:443" { ssl.engine = "enable" ssl.ca-file = "/etc/ssl/certs/the.ca.cert.pem" ssl.pemfile = "/etc/ssl/private/websitegroup1.com.pem" $HTTP["host"] =~ "mywebsite.com" { server.document-root = /var/www/mywebsite.com/htdocs" } The above code works fine for one hostname, but as soon as I try to set up another hostname (note the same SSL cert): $SERVER["socket"] == "10.0.0.1:443" { ssl.engine = "enable" ssl.ca-file = "/etc/ssl/certs/the.ca.cert.pem" ssl.pemfile = "/etc/ssl/private/websitegroup1.com.pem" $HTTP["host"] =~ "anotherwebsite.com" { server.document-root = /var/www/anotherwebsite.com/htdocs" } ...I get this error: Duplicate config variable in conditional 6 global/SERVERsocket==10.0.0.1:443: ssl.engine Is there any way I can put a conditional so that only if ssl.engine is not already enabled, enable it? Or do I have to put all my $HTTP["host"]s inside the same $SERVER["socket"] (which will make config file management more difficult for me) or is there some entirely different way to do it? This has to be repeated for multiple IPs too (so I'll have a bunch of SERVER["socket"] == 10.0.0.2:443" etc), each with one UCC cert and many hostnames. Am I going about this the wrong way entirely? My goal is to conserve IP addresses when I have many websites that are related and can share an SSL certificate, but still need their own SSL-accessible version from the appropriate hostname (instead of a single secure.mywebsite.com).

    Read the article

  • Connection refused in ssh tunnel to apache forward proxy setup

    - by arkascha
    I am trying to setup a private forward proxy in a small server. I mean to use it during a conference to tunnel my internet access through an ssh tunnel to the proxy server. So I created a virtual host inside apache-2.2 running the proxy, the proxy_http and the proxy_connect module. I use this configuration: <VirtualHost localhost:8080> ServerAdmin xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ServerName yyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy ErrorLog /var/log/apache2/proxy-error_log CustomLog /var/log/apache2/proxy-access_log combined <IfModule mod_proxy.c> ProxyRequests On <Proxy *> # deny access to all IP addresses except localhost Order deny,allow Deny from all Allow from 127.0.0.1 </Proxy> # The following is my preference. Your mileage may vary. ProxyVia Block ## allow SSL proxy AllowCONNECT 443 </IfModule> </VirtualHost> After restarting apache I create a tunnel from client to server: #> ssh -L8080:localhost:8080 <server address> and try to access the internet through that tunnel: #> links -http-proxy localhost:8080 http://www.linux.org I would expect to see the requested page. Instead a get a "connection refused" error. In the shell holding open the ssh tunnel I get this: channel 3: open failed: connect failed: Connection refused Anyone got an idea why this connection is refused ?

    Read the article

  • "Safe" personal router use on apartment-wide network

    - by noisetank
    I recently moved into an apartment with internet included in my rent. This was a boon at first, but now I'm feeling limited. To get devices connected (wired or wireless), I have to whitelist the MAC addresses on mycampusnet.com. This is annoying (considering I'm well over the 10 device limit including my roommate's stuff), but what's really driving me mad is that I don't seem to have any semblance of a "local" network. I've relied heavily on static IPs and port forwarding in the past (accessing NAS and remote desktop) and (as far as I can understand), that functionality is nonexistent without my router set up. Also, as my wired and wireless devices don't always seem to make it onto the same subnet, I'm unable to use any of my iDevices with my Apple TV (I can, however, mirror to no less than four strangers' Apple TVs at any moment, which is a whole other level of discomforting). I've talked to the head of the apartment complex and she told me that they personally don't have any issue with my using a router, but the provider (CampusConnect) does not currently allow it. Apparently, enough people have put in complaints/requests about the restriction (the apartments are for graduate students and University staff, many of which need to set up things like VPNs for work reasons) to open up some sort of ticket to get the functionality in place, but all the calls I've made to get status updates have been a waste of time. My question is: If I plugged my router into the apartment network, what would happen? I've been told already that personal routers would "interfere with the wireless" and that they would shut my port down if I used one, but is that a legitimate thing or just something made up that sounds real to keep the average Joe from pushing it further? I'm guessing there's some way of configuring my router to keep it from disrupting the rest of the network, but it's not something they want to tell me for obvious reasons. Am I right? And if so, what are the chances that they'd notice the difference in traffic or whatever and shut off my port?

    Read the article

  • postfix smtp_fallback_relay for deferred messages to a single domain

    - by EdwardTeach
    I use Postfix to send messages to a mail server outside my organization which frequently rejects/defers my mail. My Postfix server sees that these messages are deferred and tries again, eventually getting through. Final delivery can take up to an hour, which makes my users unhappy. In comparison, mail from my Postfix server to other hosts works normally. I have now found out about a second, unofficial MX for this domain that does not reject/defer mail. This second MX does not appear when doing a DNS MX query for the domain. Therefore, for the problem domain I would like to use this second MX as a fallback. That is: whenever mail is deferred by the primary MX, try again on the unofficial second MX. I see that there is already a postfix configuration "smtp_fallback_relay". However the documentation seems to indicate that I can not restrict usage of the fallback to a single domain. The documentation also doesn't mention deferred message handling. So is there a way to configure a single-domain, deferred-retry fallback host in Postfix? For reference, I am including my postconf output (the host names and ip addresses are fake): alias_database = hash:/etc/aliases alias_maps = hash:/etc/aliases, hash:/etc/postfix/legacy_mailman, ldap:/etc/postfix/ldap-aliases.cf append_dot_mydomain = no biff = no config_directory = /etc/postfix default_destination_concurrency_limit = 2 inet_interfaces = all inet_protocols = all local_destination_concurrency_limit = 2 local_recipient_maps = $alias_maps mailbox_size_limit = 0 mydestination = myhost.my.network, localhost.my.network, localhost, my.network myhostname = myhost.my.network mynetworks = 127.0.0.0/8, [::ffff:127.0.0.0]/104, [::1]/128, 10.10.10.0/24 myorigin = my.network readme_directory = no recipient_delimiter = + relay_domains = $mydestination relayhost = smtp_fallback_relay = the.problem.host smtp_header_checks = smtpd_banner = $myhostname ESMTP $mail_name virtual_alias_maps = hash:/etc/postfix/virtual

    Read the article

  • Is it possible to change an "Unidentified Network" into a "Home" or "Work" network on Windows 7

    - by Rhys
    I have a problem with Windows 7 RC (7100). I frequently use a crossover network cable on WinXP with static IP addresses to connect to various industrial devices (e.g. robots, pumps, valves or even other Windows PCs) that have Ethernet network ports. When I do this on Windows 7, the network connection is classed as an "Unidentified Network" in Networks and Sharing Center and the public firewall profile is enforced by Windows. I do not want to change the public profile and would prefer to use the Home or Work profile instead. For other networks like Home and Work I'm able to click on them and change the classification. This is not available for unidentified networks. My questions are these:- Is there a way to manual override the "Unidentified Network" classification? What tests are performed on the network that fail, therefore classifying it as an "Unidentified Network" By googling (hitting mainly vista issues) it seems that you need to ensure that the default gateway is not 0.0.0.0. I've done this. I've also tried to remove IPv6 but this does not seem possible on Windows 7.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111  | Next Page >