Search Results

Search found 3325 results on 133 pages for 'route'.

Page 106/133 | < Previous Page | 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113  | Next Page >

  • Connecting to same public IP from different locations yields different results

    - by DHall
    Since yesterday I've been unable to access one of my favorite time-wasting sites, boston.com. It starts to load but then it gets redirected to pagesinxt or something like that. After some investigation, I've narrowed it down to an issue with cache.boston.com, but only from my work location. I found the IP (216.38.160.107) , but even that doesn't work correctly from here at work. When I do a telnet 216.38.160.107 80 GET http://cache.boston.com/universal/css/hp_bgcom.css from another location, I get a nice long CSS, as expected. From here, I get an error (trimmed for size): HTTP/1.1 400 Bad Request Your request could not be processed. Request could not be handled This could be caused by a misconfiguration, or possibly a malformed request. For assistance, contact your network support team. Is there any way I can troubleshoot this further on my end? Tracert doesn't tell me anything too useful: Tracing route to vwrpx1.ttn.xpc-mii.net [216.38.160.107] over a maximum of 30 hops: 1 * * * Request timed out. Since it's not really work-related, I don't really want to bring it up to our network team unless I know what's going on, or if there's some risk to the network (ex. malware or something)

    Read the article

  • Find slow network nodes between two data centers

    - by 2called-chaos
    I've got a problem with syncing big amount of data between two data centers. Both machines have got a gigabit connection and are not fully occupied but the fastest that I am able to get is something between 6 and 10 Mbit = not acceptable! Yesterday I made some traceroute which indicates huge load on a LEVEL3 router but the problem exists for weeks now and the high response time is gone (20ms instead of 300ms). How can I trace this to find the actual slow node? Thought about a traceroute with bigger packages but will this work? In addition this problem might not be related to one of our servers as there are much higher transmission rates to other servers or clients. Actually office = server is faster than server <= server! Any idea is appreciated ;) Update We actually use rsync over ssh to copy the files. As encryption tends to have more bottlenecks I tried a HTTP request but unfortunately it is just as slow. We have a SLA with one of the data centers. They said they already tried to change the routing because they say this is related to a cheap network where the traffic gets routed through. It is true that it will route through a "cheapnet" but only the other way around. Our direction goes through LEVEL3 and the other way goes through lambdanet (which they said is not a good network). If I got it right (I'm a network intermediate) they simulated a longer path to force routing through LEVEL3 and they announce LEVEL3 in the AS path. I basically want to know if they're right or they're just trying to abdicate their responsibility. The thing is that the problem exists in both directions (while different routes), so I think it is in the responsibility of our hoster. And honestly, I don't believe that there is a DC2DC connection which only can handle 600kb/s - 1,5 MB/s for weeks! The question is how to detect WHERE this bottleneck is

    Read the article

  • IP6 seems to be enabled - How do I configure it without interfering with IP4?

    - by Mister IT Guru
    I noticed that some of my Centos boxes have IP6 enabled, and seem to have addresses. I have no problem with this, but I would like to get a handle on it, and even connect to them using IP6. This would really help if for any reason DHCP has a hiccup. But I'm a bit lost as to where the configuration on my CentOS box is. (I am also on google researching this, but I like server fault! :) ) I am hoping that I would be able to log into this via the VPN because every now and then that DHCP device has a bad morning, and needs to be restarted. (I'm also looking into this issue, but someone else handles that, management separation gone mad!) It's a remote client, so it would be a lot easier for me to connect to these systems which seem to self configure, to use that as a pivot via ssh tunnels to get to other remote devices to continue to manage them, while out main route is fixed. I guess, my questions are How can I configure IP6 without interfering with IP4, and On CentOS, can I influence this auto configuration I seem to be seeing?

    Read the article

  • Technology mash: is this possible?

    - by Jon Story
    I'm in the process of setting up my own DNS+hosting on a couple of VPS and my home machines, mostly for academic/learning purposes, but also for convenient accessing of my files, hosting my personal websites, private git repositories etc. I've got a main web server with DNS, and a slave DNS server. I've also got a couple of machines at home doing file hosting, video streaming and all that fun stuff. I'm intending to use my VPS's to provide myself with a dynamic DNS system so that I can point mydomain.com at my DNS servers, with home.mydomain.com going into my home network via a raspberry pi. HOWEVER.... I've not got access to the network infrastructure at home (rented accommodation with managed internet), so I can't forward the ports on the router to my own machines. As such, I'm wondering if it's possible to route all the traffic via an SSH/HTTP tunnel through one of the VPS? My plan is to have the raspberry pi provide a VPN into my home network. The raspberry pi uses SSH to connect to the VPS, and the VPS forwards any traffic to home.mydomain.com via the tunnel to the raspberry pi. Is this even possible, and how do I go about it? I don't mind getting my hands dirty with coding and low level tools, I'm just not sure where to start or what the best way to go about it is.

    Read the article

  • using gmail as email relay for sendmail

    - by Nikita
    I used to be able to send emails using a gmail account & sendmail configured using one of the guides on the Internet, for example: http://appgirl.net/blog/configuring-sendmail-to-relay-through-gmail-smtp/ This is a small server and I've recently moved it to a different house. And sendmail has stop working. The only thing different in the network setup is a new router. What is happening: In the log files, I see the following error: ...stat=Deferred: smtp.gmail.com: No route to host When I run from the command line: strace sendmail -f A -t B -u "Subject" -m "Message" -tls=yes ssl=yes -s smtp.gmail.com:587 -xu A -xp XYZ It hangs on this call: recvfrom(3, "m0\201\203\0\1\0\0\0\0\0\0\4ares\3lan\0\0\34\0\1", 8192, 0, {sa_family=AF_INET, sin_port=htons(53), sin_addr=inet_addr("192.168.1.254")}, [16]) = 26 close(3) = 0 time(NULL) = 1339997943 open("/etc/localtime", O_RDONLY) = 3 fstat64(3, {st_mode=S_IFREG|0644, st_size=3477, ...}) = 0 fstat64(3, {st_mode=S_IFREG|0644, st_size=3477, ...}) = 0 mmap2(NULL, 4096, PROT_READ|PROT_WRITE, MAP_PRIVATE|MAP_ANONYMOUS, -1, 0) = 0xb76ff000 read(3, "TZif2\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\4\0\0\0\4\0\0\0\0"..., 4096) = 3477 _llseek(3, -24, [3453], SEEK_CUR) = 0 read(3, "\nEST5EDT,M3.2.0,M11.1.0\n", 4096) = 24 close(3) = 0 munmap(0xb76ff000, 4096) = 0 socket(PF_FILE, SOCK_DGRAM|SOCK_CLOEXEC, 0) = 3 connect(3, {sa_family=AF_FILE, path="/dev/log"}, 110) = 0 send(3, "<18>Jun 18 01:39:03 sendmail[268"..., 96, MSG_NOSIGNAL) = 96 nanosleep({60, 0}, So it looks like at some point it tries to resolve the DNS name, but I don't have anything running on 53, so it dies out and then just hangs. The other interesting thing is that msmtp works just fine on the same server. Update: ares in strace output is actually the name of my server, but .254 IP address is the address of the router. Could anyone tell me why this is happening or what further steps can I take to investigate the issue? Thanks!

    Read the article

  • XP box with 3 NICs on Server 2003 Domain

    - by Hannibal
    I have assigned all three NICs IP addresses that are outside the DHCP pool. I have 2 NICs are connected to 1 switch and the 3rd to my second switch. I want to assign one of the two NICs on the 1st switch to "normal" network activity (e.g. internet access, RDP, etc.) The other two NICs I want to reserve for mirroring ports on their respective switches. While this machine is connected to the domain I can access the internet and Remote Desktop. I have no idea which NIC I am using until I start mirroring a port, at which time, if I happen to be connected through one of the NICs I have dedicated to mirroring, I lose my remote desktop. I am aware that I would have more control over the NICs using Linux. I want to explore Windows solutions before I go that route because reinstalling another OS would be inconvenient (but not impossible). I would likely use a version of Backtrack (3 or 4 not sure). I would also have to learn how to access the machine remotely but I've done it before so this would be a minor obstacle. Thank you for your assistance.

    Read the article

  • mysqldump skip one table

    - by danneth
    I'm running a cronjob to backup our system using mysqldump. The database contains 90 or so tables. One of these tables is HUGE and every once in a while causes the dump to fail. From the manual I see that you can specify specific tables to dump shell> mysqldump [options] db_name [tbl_name ...] This got me thinking. What if I have two jobs, one for dumping the huge table, and one for all the others. To accomplish this it would be nice if I could to something like shell> mysqldump -u backupuser -p database huge_table > db_huge_table.sql shell> mysqldump -u backupuser -p database --skip huge_table > db_rest.sql Unfortenately I'm not seeing such and option. I could of course explicitly state the 90 tables, but that just seems like a mess. Another option would be a script of some sort, but before checking that route I'll try this resource. MySQL is 5.1.61 on CentOS 6.2

    Read the article

  • Intermittently uncommunicative subnets

    - by mhd
    Last week proved me a veritable Cassandra: I've always said that it's a bad idea to have only one firewall/router, without a backup or failover. And thus our Cisco PIX went haywire, refusing to route properly. And of course, the only one available here on short notice is me, and while I'm quite grounded in Linux, I'm really a developer not a sysadmin (the fact that this hit me on sysadmin appreciation day is a bit ironic). Anyway, this weekend I tried to hack up a temporary solution: I used an old server with enough NICs (two built-in, four on a card) to serve as a gateway and firewall. Due to some problems with the raid controller, I got only two router distros running, and between Untangle and Ebox I decided for the latter. Now everything is quite okay. I've got all the different subnets we've got here (all with separate switches) talking to each other and even to the internet (Cisco 2800 router, T1 lines). But from time to time (20-60 minute intervals), I get a total routing failure. Our main, office subnet can't talk to our server subnet and can't connect to the internet. This is not the end of a gradual slowdown, either everything's working perfectly or I get a total lack of communication for about two minutes each time. Now I'm a bit at wits end what to check. At least with the default EBox setup, nothing in /var/log shows anything weird and it doesn't exactly have lots of built-in monitoring tools. So I'm hoping someone here could give me some pointers about what to look out for. I did change the ethernet cable from the office switch to the firewall, with no results. I might change switches, although within the switch it seems to work ok enough. Edit: I'm not sure whether this is the sole cause of the problem, but after I noticed a few DHCP entries just before the last drop of connectivity, I tried to reproduce that. And alas, whenever I renew a DHCP connection, I can't access other subnets anymore. Running ISC DHCPD 3.0.6.

    Read the article

  • AJP Connector Apache-Tomcat with php and java application

    - by Safari
    I have a question about proxy and ajp module. On my machine I have a Apache web server and a Tomcat servlet container. On Tomcat is running a my java webapplication. On Apache I have some services and I can call these in this way: http://myhos/service1 http://myhos/service2 http://myhos/service3 I would configurate a ajp connector to call my tomcat webapplication from Apache. I would somethin as http://myhost to call the Tomcat webapp. So, I configurated my apache in this way..and I have what I wanted: I can use http://myHost to visualize the Tomcat webApp by Apache. <VirtualHost *:80> ProxyRequests off ProxyPreserveHost On ServerAlias myserveralias ErrorLog logs/error.log CustomLog logs/access.log common <Proxy *> Order deny,allow Allow from all </Proxy> ProxyPass /server-status ! ProxyPass /balancer-manager ! ProxyPass / balancer://mycluster/ stickysession=JSESSIONID nofailover=Off maxattempts=1 <Proxy balancer://mycluster> BalancerMember ajp://myIp:8009 min=10 max=100 route=portale loadfactor=1 ProxySet lbmethod=bytraffic </Proxy> <Location /balancer-manager> SetHandler balancer-manager Order deny,allow Allow from localhost </Location> LogFormat "%h %l %u %t \"%r\" %>s %b \"%{Referer}i\" \"%{User-Agent}i\"" combined LogFormat "%h %l %u %t \"%r\" %>s %b" common LogFormat "%{Referer}i -> %U" referer LogFormat "%{User-agent}i" agent </VirtualHost> But, now I can't use the apache services: If I use http://myhos/service1 I have an error because apache try to search service1 on my tomcatWebApp. Is there a way to fix it?

    Read the article

  • Router vs switch in a LAN [closed]

    - by servernewbie
    If I have a LAN and and connect it with a switch, I understand it uses a CAM table to route packets in layer 2 (by saving mac to port relations). So far all good. However, when using a router for a LAN (ONLY for a LAN, not to connect it to "the outside" WAN/internet/etc) I get a bit confused as to how it internally processes packets. I would first split this into two router scenarios: Router with buit-in switch In this scenario, I would expect that it will act exactly as a switch with a CAM table internally. This would probably benefit a bit in speed (guessing here?) compared to the next option. Router without built-in switch Here is where I get confused. If hostA wants to send a packet to hostB, it will ARP to find hostB's MAC address and send it there. Now, if we had a switch (above scenario) this would be easy. But how does it work now in a router WITHOUT a switch? If I would guess, hostA would send an Ethernet frame with hostB's MAC address to the line. The router would fetch the packet (even though the router has another MAC address, it would still fetch this packet even if it only contains hostB's MAC address). It would strip the Ethernet frame header and check the IP, and then check its own internal ARP table again for the MAC address. Now, this would seem like a waste of resources compared to a router with a built-in switch. But maybe it does not work like that at all. Does it also contain a CAM table? If that would be true, what would then the difference between these two routers really be?

    Read the article

  • How to configure a large mtu (linux)

    - by Somejan
    I have a gigabit ethernet connection from my laptop to my router, and a working ipv6 connection to the internet. I can receive very large packets from sites on the internet, with sizes up to at least 10000 bytes (according to wireshark). (edit: turns out to be linux's 'generic receive offload') However, when trying to send anything, my local computer fragments at just below 1500 bytes for ipv6. (On ipv4, I can send tcp packets to the internet of at least 1514 bytes, I can ping with packets up to the configured mtu of 6128 but they are blackholed.) I'm on ubuntu 12.04. I have configured an mtu for my eth0 of 6128 (the maximum it accepts), both using ip link set dev eth0 mtu 6128 and in the NetworkManager applet gui, and restarted the connection. ip link show eth0 shows the 6128 mtu is indeed set. ip -6 route shows that none of the paths the kernel knows about have an mtu set. I can ping over ipv4 with packets up to 6128 bytes (though I don't get responses), but when I do ping6 myrouter -c3 -s1500 -Mdo I get error replies from my own computer saying that the packets are too large and the mtu is 1480. I have confirmed with Wireshark that nothing is put on the wire, and the replies are indeed generated by my own computer. So, how do I get my computer to use the larger mtu?

    Read the article

  • How to install Windows 7 on a MacBook with HDDs and no optical drive, without rEFIt

    - by user1238528
    I just removed the SuperDrive on my MacBook Pro and replaced it with an SSD. So now my laptop has a SSD, and a HDD, but no optical drive. I have Lion on the SSD and I want to install Windows 7 on the HDD. Unfortunately, Boot Camp only will install Windows off of the Windows DVD. I have made a bootable Windows 7 thumb drive but my MacBook Pro won’t boot off it. So my question is how can I install Windows on the other HDD? I have thought about maybe using Oracle VirtualBox to install it on that hard drive, but I don’t know if that would allow me to boot directly into Windows. I really don't want to go down the whole virtualization route. I know I could just take out the SSD, put back in the optical drive, run the Windows 7 DVD, take the optical drive back out, put the SSD back in. But that sounds like a nightmare. Also, I really don’t want to use things like rEFIt. Any advice?

    Read the article

  • Access server using IP on another interface

    - by Markos
    I am using Windows Server 2012 instead of a router for my home network. Currently I am using RRAS and computers from local network can access Internet correctly. Here is a map of the current setup: [PC1] ---| |---- (lan ip)[Server](wan ip)--> internet [PC2] ---| I have applications running on Server, such as IIS and others. All can be accessed from internet using wan ip and from lan using lan ip. I have a domain, lets say its my-domain.com, which is resolved to my wan ip. What I want is to enable my LAN computers to be able to connect to services on my server using the very same address as internet users: eg http://my-domain.com/. However this does not work for my lan computers. What I understand is that I need to set up some kind of loopback route in a way that packets comming to LAN interface get routed to WAN interface. But I haven't found how to achieve this (in fact, I don't know WHAT to search for). Feel free to ask for additional informations and I will try to update the question.

    Read the article

  • Mangling traffic from a Mikrotik Router

    - by TiernanO
    I have a MikroTik powered Router in the house with a couple of internet connections (2 200/10Mb Cable modems and a 100/20Mb VDSL Line). I am using Mangle rules to set routing marks and NAT rules to do some load balancing, and everything seems to be going grand... But it only works for traffic from outside the router... Let me explain: I have 4 GigE ports on the machine, WAN1,2 and 3, and a LAN port named LAN1. All traffic from LAN1 is getting mangled (as it should be) but traffic from the load router itself (proxy traffic, IPv6 tunnels, VPN connections) are not being mangled. They get the first route to 0.0.0.0/0, which in my case is WAN2, and stick with it. So, how do I get traffic from the local router to be mangled? Originally it was proxy traffic that caused the problem, but now with IPv6 and VPN, they are more important to be mangled... last time i enabled IPv6 traffic, all traffic only went though WAN2, and the rest where unused... Any ideas?

    Read the article

  • Can I boot up a virtual machine natively?

    - by Anshul
    My question is: Is is possible to run a virtual machine natively on your hardware if you have installed the proper drivers etc? In other words, can I use a VHD as a regular hard drive to boot from? The reason I want to do this is that I do both graphics-intensive and audio-intensive work, but my computer is not powerful enough to handle both at the same time and many times I install a bunch of audio programs that I don't want affecting the stability of my graphics programs. Basically I wanted to have sandboxing between the two sets of applications. So I tried running the graphics-intensive programs in a VirtualBox VM and the audio-intensive work natively (simply because it's a pain to route ASIO audio devices in/out of VirtualBox). This kind-of works - the graphics-intensive stuff is tolerable, but still relatively slow, because it's running inside a VM. So my next idea was to just dual-boot and install the graphics and audio programs in separate partitions but I frequently use them in tandem, so it wouldn't be practical to reboot my machine every time I need to use the other set of programs. But I could live with this scenario: If I need to do more audio-intensive stuff, I'll just boot up to the audio partition and run the graphics programs in a VM, and then when I'm working heavily on the graphics part, I'll just boot the graphics partition as a regular OS directly on the hardware. Is this possible? For example by booting up a VHD as a regular hard drive? Or by setting up dual-boot, and every time the audio partition is shut down, synchronize the graphics VM VHD with the native graphics partition? Is it practical, given the above scenario? And if it's not possible, barring buying another computer, can anyone suggest a best-of-all-worlds setup (the two worlds being performance, sandboxing, and running in parallel) for the above scenario? Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • One dns server in different subnets

    - by hofmeister
    I have installed a small Linux server; the server is in a different subnet as the internet hosts. I added a route to my nat router to create a connection between both subnets. In both subnets I use an extra dhcp Server. Subnet A: 192.168.0.0/26 Subnet B: 192.168.1.0/26 Router: 192.168.0.1, Server in A: 192.168.0.62, Server in B: 192.168.1.62 internet ____ nat router ___ (Sub A)___ internet hosts | |____(Sub B)___ other hosts I could ping every host. Also the hosts which are connected to the subnet b, has internet connection. But sadly I have a problem with the dns server. I use the dnsServer from my nat router, I set the dns Server for subnet b to the ip 192.168.0.1, but every dns entries are equal with the hostname from my linux server. Example if the hostname from the server is test Test 192.168.0.62 //Server subnet a Test-2 192.168.1.62 //Server subnet b Test-2-2 192.168.1.1 //host a Test-2-2-2 192.168.1.2 //host b Any idea what went wrong? The internet dns resolution works fine.

    Read the article

  • How to make an x.509 certificate from a PEM one?

    - by Ken
    I'm trying to test a script, locally, which involves uploading a file using a Java-based program to a FileZilla FTPES server. For the real thing, there is a real certificate on the FZ server, and the upload step (tested alone) seems to work fine. I've installed FileZilla Server on my dev box (so it'll test uploading from localhost to localhost). I don't have a real certificate for it, of course, so I used the "Generate new certificate..." button in FZ. It works fine from an interactive FTPES program (as long as I OK the unknown cert), but from my Java program it throws a javax.net.ssl.SSLHandshakeException ("unable to find valid certification path to requested target"). So how do I tell Java that this certificate is OK with me? (I know there's a way to change the Java program to accept any certificate, but I don't want to go down that route. I want to test it just as it will happen in production, and I don't want to ignore unknown certificates in production.) I found that Java has a program called "keytool" that seems to be for managing this sort of thing, but it complains that the certificate file that FZ generated is not an "x.509" file. A posting from the FZ side said it was "PEM encoded". I have "openssl" here, which looks like it's perfect for converting between certificate formats, but I think my understanding of certificate formats is wrong because I'm not seeing anything obvious. My knowledge of security certificates is a bit shaky, so if my title is stupidly wrong, please help by fixing that. :-)

    Read the article

  • Cisco IOS ACL: Don't permit incoming connections just because they are from port 80

    - by cjavapro
    I am going much based on my memory and I may not be correct on all of this. On a Cisco 851 (IOS) that uses a BVI or a bridge-route (the servers on the inside are configured with static and public IP addresses). I would apply two access lists (both end with deny ip any any log) on FastEthernet4 (the WAN port). There would be one for FA4 in and another for FA4 out. FA4 out would have a line like access-list 110 permit 98.76.54.0 0.0.0.255 gt 1023 any eq http I think this means from 98.76.54.* with a from port of at least 1024 can connect to any other machine with a destination port 80. So, then I have to allow the response to the HTTP connection. FA4 in would have a line like access-list 120 permit any eq http 98.76.54.0 0.0.0.255 gt 1023 Now the problem with that is that anybody on the outside can set their from port to port 80 and then connect to any inside port that is at least 1024. How do we prevent this and require the incoming data to be a response to the outgoing data.

    Read the article

  • Switch Before Firewall / Router - Multiple public IPs

    - by rii
    I currently Have a 10Mbit Full duplex circuit connected to a small unmanaged switch which then connects to a Sonicwall Firewall / Router. I have several public IP addresses (/28) that are assigned to several devices in my setup. Now the problem is the small switch I have was lent to me and needs to be returned, I have replaced this switch with several other switches but for some reason any other switch I use causes the network to become extremely slow. I believe this is a problem with the autonegotiation of theses hubs, so I am thinking of purchasing a small managed switch (cisco 300 series) and making the receiving port on the swith Explicitly 10Mbit Full Duplex and see if this works. My question is, being that this is a managed switch and needs an IP, will I still be able to run my public ips through it? Say the circuit has 70.80.4.1 - 7 will I still be able to assign 70.80.4.2 to my firewall and 70.80.4.3 to my router connected to some other port in the switch? Will I have to assign the switch a public IP address in this range as well for it to "route" to those other devices or does the switch does not care what IPs goes through it while operating as a Layer 2 Switch? Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thanks in advanced!

    Read the article

  • What's the best way to telnet from a remote Windows PC without using RDP?

    - by Rob D.
    Three Networks: 10.1.1.0 - Mine 172.1.1.0 - My Branch Office 172.2.2.0 - My Branch Office's VOIP VLAN. My PC is on 10.1.1.0. I need to telnet into a Cisco router on 172.2.2.0. The 10.1.1.0 network has no routes to 172.2.2.0, but a VPN connects 10.1.1.0 to 172.1.1.0. Traffic on 172.1.1.0 can route to 172.2.2.0. All PCs on 172.1.1.0 are running Windows XP. Without disrupting anyone using those PCs, I want to open a telnet session from one of those PCs to the router on 172.2.2.0. I've tried the following: psexec.exe \\branchpc telnet 172.2.2.1 psexec.exe \\branchpc cmd.exe telnet 172.2.2.1 psexec.exe \\branchpc -c plink -telnet 172.2.2.1 Methods 1 and 2 both failed because telnet.exe is not usable over psexec. Method 3 actually succeeded in creating the connection, but I cannot login because the session registers my carriage return twice. My password is always blank because at the "Username:" prompt I'm effectively typing: Routeruser[ENTER][ENTER] It's probably time to deploy WinRM... Does anyone know of any other alternatives? Does anyone know how I can fix plink.exe so it only receives one carriage return when I use it over psexec?

    Read the article

  • Access server using IP on another interface

    - by Markos
    I am using Windows Server 2012 instead of a router for my home network. Currently I am using RRAS and computers from local network can access Internet correctly. Here is a map of the current setup: [PC1] ---| |---- (lan ip)[Server](wan ip)--> internet [PC2] ---| I have applications running on Server, such as IIS and others. All can be accessed from internet using wan ip and from lan using lan ip. I have a domain, lets say its my-domain.com, which is resolved to my wan ip. What I want is to enable my LAN computers to be able to connect to services on my server using the very same address as internet users: eg http://my-domain.com/. However this does not work for my lan computers. What I understand is that I need to set up some kind of loopback route in a way that packets comming to LAN interface get routed to WAN interface. But I haven't found how to achieve this (in fact, I don't know WHAT to search for). Feel free to ask for additional informations and I will try to update the question.

    Read the article

  • How do I uninstall a ruby version installed via source?

    - by Aaron McIver
    I installed a version (1.9.3-p194) of ruby via source using make install and realized this may have been the wrong route to take. Upon doing this, I realized this was a mistake and I should be using a solution such as rvm to address my ruby versions within the OS. I looked to see if an uninstall existed to be ran in conjunction with make and it didn't. I then proceeded to install rvm and add the aforementioned version in to my list of managed rubies within rvm which is not listed as ext-ruby-1.9.3-p194. rvm rubies ext-ruby-1.9.3-p194 [ x86_64 ] =* ruby-1.9.3-p194 [ x86_64 ] # => - current # =* - current && default # * - default** When I perform an rvm remove, it simply removes it from the rubies list however it still exists within /usr/local/bin. I am not concerned with the system install ruby version residing in /usr/bin as I understand that is tied to the OS and should simply be ignored. How can I safely uninstall/remove the aforementioned version and all the places in which it was installed, short of looking at the install script?

    Read the article

  • Vyatta masquerade out bridge interface

    - by miquella
    We have set up a Vyatta Core 6.1 gateway on our network with three interfaces: eth0 - 1.1.1.1 - public gateway/router IP (to public upstream router) eth1 - 2.2.2.1/24 - public subnet (connected to a second firewall 2.2.2.2) eth2 - 10.10.0.1/24 - private subnet Our ISP provided the 1.1.1.1 address for us to use as our gateway. The 2.2.2.1 address is so the other firewall (2.2.2.2) can communicate to this gateway which then routes the traffic out through the eth0 interface. Here is our current configuration: interfaces { bridge br100 { address 2.2.2.1/24 } ethernet eth0 { address 1.1.1.1/30 vif 100 { bridge-group { bridge br100 } } } ethernet eth1 { bridge-group { bridge br100 } } ethernet eth2 { address 10.10.0.1/24 } loopback lo { } } service { nat { rule 100 { outbound-interface eth0 source { address 10.10.0.1/24 } type masquerade } } } With this configuration, it routes everything, but the source address after masquerading is 1.1.1.1, which is correct, because that's the interface it's bound to. But because of some of our requirements here, we need it to source from the 2.2.2.1 address instead (what's the point of paying for a class C public subnet if the only address we can send from is our gateway!?). I've tried binding to br100 instead of eth0, but it doesn't seem to route anything if I do that. I imagine I'm just missing something simple. Any thoughts?

    Read the article

  • Ping with explicit next-hop selection (aka Monitoring multiple default gateways)

    - by Michuelnik
    I have a linux (debian) router with two internet connections (A) and (B). (A) is preferred, (B) is fallback. I want to monitor the internet connection (and not only the availability of the gateways!) and change the default route appropriately. If (A) is not providing internet, switch to (B) If (A) is providing internet again, switch back to (A). Only problem I have is in case (2). My routing table points towards a working internet so I cannot easily detect whether internet is working over link (A) again. I am search for a ping or traceroute (or other diagnosis-tool) which can select the next-hop explicitly. ping -r looks promising, but can only ping a host on the lan. (It only has to write another destination address in the packet, damnit!) traceroute -g gateway looks even more promising and nearly does what I want - but sets source routing options which my next-hops deny. (Not within my administrative boundary...) I just want a $ping, that can: select a source interface (and address) select a next-hop on that interface ping any arbitrary ip address I could do evil trickery with policy-based routing but that would have production impact for all users. I would like to see a side-effect-free solution....

    Read the article

  • OpenVPN bridge network from routed clients

    - by gphilip
    I have the following setup: subnet 1 - 10.0.1.0/24 with a machine used as NAT and also running an OpenVPN client subnet 2 - 192.168.1/24 with an OpenVPN server (the server in subnet 1 connect here) subnet 3 - 10.0.2.0/24 that uses the NAT machine (subnet 1) to access the internet, so all non-local traffic is routed there to the eth0 interface The OpenVPN client creates the tun0 interface and appropriate routing so that I can access machines from 192.168.1/24 [root@ip-10-0-1-208 ~]# telnet 192.168.1.186 8081 Trying 192.168.1.186... Connected to 192.168.1.186. Escape character is '^]'. [root@ip-10-0-1-208 ~]# route -n Kernel IP routing table Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref Use Iface 0.0.0.0 10.0.1.1 0.0.0.0 UG 0 0 0 eth0 10.0.1.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth0 10.8.0.1 10.8.0.5 255.255.255.255 UGH 0 0 0 tun0 10.8.0.5 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.255 UH 0 0 0 tun0 169.254.169.254 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.255 UH 0 0 0 eth0 192.168.0.0 10.8.0.5 255.255.0.0 UG 0 0 0 tun0 However, when I try the same from subnet 3, it can't reach that machine. [root@ip-10-0-2-61 ~]# telnet 192.168.1.186 8081 Trying 192.168.1.186... I suspect that it's because subnet 3 is routed to eth0 on the NAT machine in subnet 1 and it cannot jump to tun0. What's the easiest way to resolve it? I don't want to use iptables. I can't change the routing from machines in subnet 1 because it's done in AWS and so it works only with specific interfaces. Also, the NAT machine gets its IP with DHCP and so bridging is a bit complicated. IP forwarding is set on the NAT machine [root@ip-10-0-1-208 ~]# cat /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_forward 1 Thank you!

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113  | Next Page >