Search Results

Search found 341 results on 14 pages for 'icmp'.

Page 11/14 | < Previous Page | 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14  | Next Page >

• Ping flood attack every 5 seconds

  - by Mario

  My router's log, which is a D-Link DIR-600, shows 40 pages (and updating) of entries like: Nov 19 11:17:08 PING-FLOODING flooding attack from WAN (ip:85.250.85.11) detected. Nov 19 11:17:02 PING-FLOODING flooding attack from WAN (ip:85.131.129.176) detected. Nov 19 11:16:57 PING-FLOODING flooding attack from WAN (ip:122.107.244.152) detected. Nov 19 11:16:50 PING-FLOODING flooding attack from WAN (ip:88.103.8.96) detected. Nov 19 11:16:46 PING-FLOODING flooding attack from WAN (ip:212.142.91.106) detected. Nov 19 11:16:38 PING-FLOODING flooding attack from WAN (ip:184.170.6.63) detected. Nov 19 11:16:34 PING-FLOODING flooding attack from WAN (ip:1.239.96.192) detected. Nov 19 11:16:26 PING-FLOODING flooding attack from WAN (ip:120.29.76.184) detected. Nov 19 11:16:20 PING-FLOODING flooding attack from WAN (ip:110.77.137.228) detected. Nov 19 11:16:15 PING-FLOODING flooding attack from WAN (ip:201.141.51.210) detected. What should I do? ICMP is disabled (router does not respond to WAN pings).

  Read the article

• using pf for packet filtering and ipfw's dummynet for bandwidth limiting at the same time

  - by krdx

  I would like to ask if it's fine to use pf for all packet filtering (including using altq for traffic shaping) and ipfw's dummynet for bandwidth limiting certain IPs or subnets at the same time. I am using FreeBSD 10 and I couldn't find a definitive answer to this. Googling returns such results as: It works It doesn't work Might work but it's not stable and not recommended It can work as long as you load the kernel modules in the right order It used to work but with recent FreeBSD versions it doesn't You can make it work provided you use a patch from pfsense Then there's a mention that this patch might had been merged back to FreeBSD, but I can't find it. One certain thing is that pfsense uses both firewalls simultaneously so the question is, is it possible with stock FreeBSD 10 (and where to obtain the patch if it's still necessary). For reference here's a sample of what I have for now and how I load things /etc/rc.conf ifconfig_vtnet0="inet 80.224.45.100 netmask 255.255.255.0 -rxcsum -txcsum" ifconfig_vtnet1="inet 10.20.20.1 netmask 255.255.255.0 -rxcsum -txcsum" defaultrouter="80.224.45.1" gateway_enable="YES" firewall_enable="YES" firewall_script="/etc/ipfw.rules" pf_enable="YES" pf_rules="/etc/pf.conf" /etc/pf.conf WAN1="vtnet0" LAN1="vtnet1" set skip on lo0 set block-policy return scrub on $WAN1 all fragment reassemble scrub on $LAN1 all fragment reassemble altq on $WAN1 hfsc bandwidth 30Mb queue { q_ssh, q_default } queue q_ssh bandwidth 10% priority 2 hfsc (upperlimit 99%) queue q_default bandwidth 90% priority 1 hfsc (default upperlimit 99%) nat on $WAN1 from $LAN1:network to any -> ($WAN1) block in all block out all antispoof quick for $WAN1 antispoof quick for $LAN1 pass in on $WAN1 inet proto icmp from any to $WAN1 keep state pass in on $WAN1 proto tcp from any to $WAN1 port www pass in on $WAN1 proto tcp from any to $WAN1 port ssh pass out quick on $WAN1 proto tcp from $WAN1 to any port ssh queue q_ssh keep state pass out on $WAN1 keep state pass in on $LAN1 from $LAN1:network to any keep state /etc/ipfw.rules ipfw -q -f flush ipfw -q add 65534 allow all from any to any ipfw -q pipe 1 config bw 2048KBit/s ipfw -q pipe 2 config bw 2048KBit/s ipfw -q add pipe 1 ip from any to 10.20.20.4 via vtnet1 out ipfw -q add pipe 2 ip from 10.20.20.4 to any via vtnet1 in

  Read the article

• How to add commands of windows to local shell of XShell 4

  - by dylanninin

  XShell is a very powerful tools to ssh remote computers such as Unix/Linux. And it has built some internal commands for you to run within your Windows. Xshell:\> help Internal Commands: new: Creates a new session. open: Opens a session or the session dialog box. edit: Opens the Session Property dialog box for a session. list: Lists information of all available sessions. 'ls' and 'dir' do the same. cd: Changes the current working directory. clear: Clears the screen/address/command history. help: Displays this help. '?' does the same. quit: Quits Local Shell. 'exit' does the same. ssh: Connects to a host using the SSH protocol. telnet: Connects to a host using the TELNET protocol. rlogin: Connects to a host using the RLOGIN protocol. sftp: Connects to a host to transfer files securely. ftp: Connects to a host to transfer files. External Commands: ipconfig: Configures TCP/IP network interfaces. ping: Sends ICMP ECHO_REQUEST packets to network hosts. tracert: Prints the route packets take to network host. netstat: Displays current protocol statistics and current TCP/IP network connections. nslookup: Resolves a hostname to IP address. For more information, type 'help command' for each command. ex) help telnet But these commands are limited, so how to add commands of windows to local shell of XShell 4

  Read the article

• Connecting to IPv6 hosts when mobile and on a Surface?

  - by Cerebrate

  Specifically, at my usual location, I have an IPv6 network which connects to the Internet via a static tunnel set up to Hurricane Electric's tunnel broker ( http://www.tunnelbroker.net/ ). This works essentially perfectly, allowing inbound and outbound connectivity. Now, however, I need to connect back to host(s) on that network over IPv6 from mobile tablet(s); meaning the conditions are such that there is no guarantee or even likelihood of native IPv6 support where it happens to be at any given time, and the IPv4 address of the tablet will change on a fairly regular basis. The native Teredo support, as configured by default, functions well enough to let me ping my target hosts, but appears to have neither the reliability nor the throughput to support anything else; I have been unable to make any actual connections (trying a number of TCP-based protocols) using it. I had considered setting up an independent tunnel for the tablet(s), and using scripts to update the client endpoint IP address when it changes, but since both (a) many of the locations will be behind NAT devices over which I have no control, and (b) the option over which I do have control is an AT&T Unite hotspot which does not offer protocol 41 forwarding or respond to ICMP on its public address, this approach does not seem viable. I am additionally constrained as the mobile tablet(s) in question are Surface RTs, and as such are incapable of running, for example, AICCU client software. What is my best option to pursue to obtain IPv6 connectivity in this scenario?

  Read the article

• Cisco ASA5505 won't sync with NTP

  - by Martijn Heemels

  Today I noticed that the clock my Cisco ASA 5505 firewall was running about 15 minutes late, which surprised me since I've set up the NTP client. My two NTP servers 10.10.0.1 and 10.10.0.2 are virtualized Windows Server 2008 R2 domain controllers, and both have the correct time. As shown below, the ASA knows about the two servers, can ping them and seems to poll them periodically, so I suppose it can reach them both. The ASA claims its time source is NTP, however the clock is unsynchronized. Neither host is marked as synced. Result of the command: "ping 10.10.0.1" Type escape sequence to abort. Sending 5, 100-byte ICMP Echos to 10.10.0.1, timeout is 2 seconds: !!!!! Success rate is 100 percent (5/5), round-trip min/avg/max = 1/1/1 ms Result of the command: "sh ntp ass" address ref clock st when poll reach delay offset disp ~10.10.0.1 .LOCL. 1 78 1024 377 0.5 643.69 17.0 ~10.10.0.2 10.10.0.1 2 190 1024 377 0.9 655.91 58.4 * master (synced), # master (unsynced), + selected, - candidate, ~ configured Result of the command: "sh ntp stat" Clock is unsynchronized, stratum 16, no reference clock nominal freq is 99.9984 Hz, actual freq is 99.9984 Hz, precision is 2**6 reference time is 00000000.00000000 (07:28:16.000 CEST Thu Feb 7 2036) clock offset is 0.0000 msec, root delay is 0.00 msec root dispersion is 0.00 msec, peer dispersion is 0.00 msec Result of the command: "sh clock detail" 10:33:23.769 CEDT Tue Jun 26 2012 Time source is NTP UTC time is: 08:33:23 UTC Tue Jun 26 2012 Summer time starts 02:00:00 CEST Sun Mar 25 2012 Summer time ends 03:00:00 CEDT Sun Oct 28 2012 I've tried the basic steps of manually setting the time and removing and adding the timeservers, to no avail. My ASA's ntp config is simply: ntp server 10.10.0.1 ntp server 10.10.0.2 Do I need to enable authentication to use a Windows NTP server? Any thoughts?

  Read the article

• How to monitor changes in the frequency of network latency spikes over time?

  - by dequis

  I'm currently trying to troubleshoot an issue with my network in which I get latency spikes up to 200 seconds (normally around 50 secs) in an apparently random way at apparently random moments of the day. While trying to find what part of my messy network needs to be blamed (outside of the scope of this question - discussed a bit on chat), I realized I have no reliable way to confirm that a change actually improved anything. So far, the main way in which i notice this is that irssi shows [Lag: 15 (??)] in the statusbar, increasing every 5 seconds, and all other connections seem to be affected too. Since this depends on my observations, it's not a very reliable method to know how often it really happens. Note that just sending ICMP pings is probably not enough, but that's just my guess. It might be a "bufferbloat" issue, it might be packet loss, it might only apply to persistent connections. I suspect this because a few months ago, when the issue started, I had a "ping" command running in background and it didn't show anything weird at all during the latency spikes. This seems to have changed now (pings don't go through), but still, I'd prefer something more robust.

  Read the article

• How to enable Ipv6 on my ubunutu 11.04 virtual machine

  - by liv2hak

  I have installed 3 VM's on my PC.(Ubuntu 11.04).I want to setup an IPV6 network to review and test some of the IPV6 tools like NDPMonitor.(monitors ICMP messages of Neighbour Discovery Protocol.) IP v6 addresses are as follows. linux_router - fe80::a00:27ff:fed5:f7e9/64 labhack1 - fe80::a00:27ff:fed2:8bd1/64 labhack2 - fe80::a00:27ff:fed7:2f2d/64 The below commands have been run on both linux_router and labhack1. sudo ip r a 2001:468:181:f100::/64 dev eth0 sudo vim /etc/radvd.conf /file looks like below./ interface eth0 { AdvSendAdvert on; /*means that we are sending out advertisments.*/ MinRtrAdvInterval 5; /*these options control how often advertisments are sent*/ MaxRtrAdvInterval 15; /*these are not mandatory but valueable settings.*/ prefix fe80::a00:27ff::/64 { AdvOnLink on; /*Says to the host everyone sharing this prefix is on the sam local link as you.*/ AdvAutonomous on; /*Says to a host: "Use this prefix to autoconfigure your address"*/ }; }; sudo sysctl -w net.ipv6.conf.all.forwarding=1 I try to do a ping6 -I eth0 fe80::a00:27ff:fed5:f7e9 I get Destination unreachable: Address unreachable.I am not sure what I am doing wrong here.I am a beginner at linux administration.Basically I think I am missing whatever is analogous to physically connecting VM's.Any help that would point me in the right direction would be greatly appreciated.

  Read the article

• ASA Slow IPSec Performance with Inconsistent Window Size

  - by Brent

  I have a IPSec link between two sites over ASA 5520s running 8.4(3) and I am getting extremely poor performance when traffic passes over the IPSec VPN. CPU on the devices is ~13%, Memory at 408 MB, and active VPN sessions 2. The load on both of the the devices is particularly low. Latency between the two sites is ~40ms. Screenshot of wireshark file transfer between the two hosts over the firewall IPSec VPN performing at 10MBPS. Note the changing window size. http://imgur.com/wGTB8Cr Screenshot of wireshark file transfer between the two hosts over the firewall not going over IPSec performing at 55MBPS. Constant window size. http://imgur.com/EU23W1e I'm showing an inconsistent window size when transferring over the IPSec VPN ranging in 46,796 to 65535. When performing at 55+MBPS, the window size is consistently 65,535. Does this show a problem in my configuration of the IPSec VPN in the ASA or a Layer1/2 issue? Using ping xxxxxx -f -l I finally get a non-fragment at 1418 bytes so 1418+28 for IP/ICMP headers = 1446. I know that I have 1500 set on the ASA and Ethernet. I do have "Force Maximum segment size for TCP proxy connection to be" "1380" bytes set under Configuration Advanced TCP Options on the ASA. Using IPERF, I am getting a "TCP Window Full" every few seconds and ~3 MBPS performance. http://imgur.com/elRlMpY Show Run on the ASA http://pastebin.com/uKM4Jh76 Show cry accelerator stats http://pastebin.com/xQahnqK3

  Read the article

• really weird DNS problem in Ubuntu {after one month, seems like ISP problem}

  - by OmniWired

  Hello everyone. I been having this random dns problem, in Ubuntu 10.04 and in 10.10 it started about 2 weeks ago after (I believe) an update. Basically when I go to a website randomly I get that the website I'm visiting is not available ("Oops! Google Chrome could not connect to ..." & "This webpage is not available."). I tested with Chromium "7.0.515.0 (58587)" and Firefox minefield (4.0ish) and 3.6.9. I did these 4 things already: /etc/default/grub GRUB_CMDLINE_LINUX="ipv6.disable=1" and this: /etc/sysctl.conf net.ipv6.conf.all.disable_ipv6 = 1 net.ipv6.conf.default.disable_ipv6 = 1 net.ipv6.conf.lo.disable_ipv6 = 1 *disabling Chromium DNS pre-fetching *using Google and OpenDNS servers as well as ISP DNS servers. But didn't improve, also no other computers in my network have the same problem. All computer wired to the same router. I'm a software engineer that run out of ideas, please help me. Thanks in advance. UPDATE: some programs (synaptic / firefox update/ vuze(azureus)) say connection refused for the error. Most of the time a second try will fix the "refusal". UPDATE2: I found out with Wireshark, that everytime I have this problem i've got this 192.168.0.10 8.8.8.8 ICMP Destination unreachable (Port unreachable) Confirmed an ISP error. ISP;Speedy Location: Argentina, Buenos Aires (capital Federal) Area.

  Read the article

• I have added a port to the public zone in firewalld but still can't access the port

  - by mikemaccana

  I've been using iptables for a long time, but have never used firewalld until recently. I have enabled port 3000 TCP via firewalld with the following command: # firewall-cmd --zone=public --add-port=3000/tcp --permanent However I can't access the server on port 3000. From an external box: telnet 178.62.16.244 3000 Trying 178.62.16.244... telnet: connect to address 178.62.16.244: Connection refused There are no routing issues: I have a separate rule for a port forward from port 80 to port 8000 which works fine externally. My app is definitely listening on the port too: Proto Recv-Q Send-Q Local Address Foreign Address State User Inode PID/Program name tcp 0 0 0.0.0.0:3000 0.0.0.0:* LISTEN 99 36797 18662/node firewall-cmd doesn't seem to show the port either - see how ports is empty. You can see the forward rule I mentioned earlier. # firewall-cmd --list-all public (default, active) interfaces: eth0 sources: services: dhcpv6-client ssh ports: masquerade: no forward-ports: port=80:proto=tcp:toport=8000:toaddr= icmp-blocks: rich rules: However I can see the rule in the XML config file: # cat /etc/firewalld/zones/public.xml <?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?> <zone> <short>Public</short> <description>For use in public areas. You do not trust the other computers on networks to not harm your computer. Only selected incoming connections are accepted.</description> <service name="dhcpv6-client"/> <service name="ssh"/> <port protocol="tcp" port="3000"/> <forward-port to-port="8000" protocol="tcp" port="80"/> </zone> What else do I need to do to allow access to my app on port 3000? Also: is adding access via a port the correct thing to do? Or should I make a firewalld 'service' for my app instead?

  Read the article

• Network latency and speed of light

  - by James

  This was kinda of covered by the following Is minimum latency fixed by the speed of light? , but i would like to add the follow up a bit. The scenario is as follows; we have two opposing sites one on the West Coast of the US and one in Ireland. The customer is in central Europe, and has requested a latency test. Ireland gives responses of ~65-70ms. However the West Coast guys claim to be faster with a response of 60ms. Now a quick check says that light in fiber would take about 42ms to make the trip to the States and 8.5ms to Ireland. So obviously this is a single hop and does not include routers, switches, firewalls, protocol overhead etc. Would I be right to call BS on their figures? As a final note I tested a ping to Google IP address that was allegedly on the west coast from a site that covered a similar distance and was amazed to get a response time of 20ms. Suggesting ICMP packets that travel twice the speed of light. So A) what am I missing B) Am I right to suspect shenanigans? UPDATE: Guys thanks so far for your help and I have been reading various previous questions on this. About 5 years I had an issue where the hop from the UK to Ireland added 10ms of latency no matter what we did. In the end I moved the servers; So imagine my surprise when I have guys that claim they are 5ms faster with a transatlantic trip. So again should I call BS? Oh and assume both sites are normal mortals that don't have access to Google magical routing, warp dives or flux capacitors. :)

  Read the article

• Bypassing SQUID on freebsd with PF

  - by epema

  I have PF+SQUID31 on FREEBSD-9.0, and I want to have some hosts(aka goodguys) to bypass the proxy, so that torrents are not logged. Also, I am not sure about transparent. It means that I dont have to configure proxy settings on the client side right? I have tried doing a redirect no rdr on $int_if inet proto {tcp,udp} from 192.168.1.233/32 to any However, no luck :( Here is a quick look of my conf files: SQUID /usr/local/etc/squid/squid.conf http_port 192.168.1.1:8080 transparent RC /etc/rc.conf: gateway_enable="YES" pf_enable="YES" pf_rules="/usr/local/etc/pf.conf" pflog_enable="YES" squid_enable="YES" I have squid31 installed from ports with SQUID_PF "Enable transparent proxying with PF" on PF /usr/loca/etc/pf.conf: int_if="re0" ext_if="bge0" localnet="{ 192.168.1.0/24 }" table <goodguys> const { "192.168.1.219", "192.168.1.233" } set block-policy drop set skip on lo0 scrub in all fragment reassemble scrub out all random-id max-mss 1440 block in on $ext_if pass out on $ext_if keep state block in on $int_if pass in on $int_if inet proto tcp from $int_if:network to $int_if port 8080 keep state pass in on $int_if inet proto udp from $int_if:network to $int_if port 21 keep state pass in on $int_if inet proto udp from $int_if:network to $int_if port 22 keep state pass in on $int_if inet proto udp from $int_if:network to $int_if port 53 keep state pass in on $int_if inet proto tcp from $int_if:network to any port { smtp, pop3 } keep state pass in on $int_if inet proto icmp from $int_if:network to $int_if keep state pass out on $int_if keep state What lines should I add in conf files? I am assuming that the problem is on the firewall(pf).

  Read the article

• Cisco IOS BVI ACL: Only allow established UDP

  - by George Bailey

  Related: Cisco IOS ACL: Don't permit incoming connections just because they are from port 80 I know we can use the established keyword for TCP.. but what can we do for UDP (short of replacing a Bridge or BVI with a NAT)? Answer I found out what "UDP has no connection" means. DNS uses UDP for example.. named (DNS server) is lisenting on port 53 nslookup (DNS client) starts listening on some random port and sends a packet to port 53 of the server and notes the source port in that packet. nslookup will retry 3 times if necessary. Also the packets are so small that it does not have to worry about them coming in the wrong order. If nslookup receives a response on that port that comes from the servers IP and port then it stops listening. If the server tried to send two responses (for example a response and a response to the retry) then the server would not care if either of them made it because the client has the job to retry. In fact.. unless ICMP 3/3 packet gets through the server would not know about a failure. This is different from TCP where you get connection closed or timed out errors. DNS allows for an easy retry from the client as well as small packets.. so UDP is an excellent choice because it is more efficient. In UDP you would see nslookup sends request named sends answer In TCP you would see nslookup's machine sends SYN named's machine sends SYN-ACK nslookup's machine sends ACK and the request named's machine sends the response That is much more than is necessary for a tiny DNS packet

  Read the article

• OpenSWAN KLIPS not working

  - by bonzi

  I am trying to setup IPSec between 2 VM launched by OpenNebula. I'm using OpenSWAN for that. This is the ipsec.conf file config setup oe=off interfaces=%defaultroute protostack=klips conn host-to-host left=10.141.0.135 # Local IP address connaddrfamily=ipv4 leftrsasigkey=key right=10.141.0.132 # Remote IP address rightrsasigkey=key ike=aes128 # IKE algorithms (AES cipher) esp=aes128 # ESP algorithns (AES cipher) auto=add pfs=yes forceencaps=yes type=tunnel I'm able to establish the connection with netkey but klips doesnt work. ipsec barf shows #71: ERROR: asynchronous network error report on eth0 (sport=500) for message to 10.141.0.132 port 500, complainant 10.141.0.135: No route to host [errno 113, origin ICMP type 3 code 1 (not authenticated)] Tcpdump shows 22:50:20.592685 IP 10.141.0.132.isakmp > 10.141.0.135.isakmp: isakmp: phase 1 I ident 22:50:25.602182 ARP, Request who-has 10.141.0.135 tell 10.141.0.132, length 46 22:50:26.602082 ARP, Request who-has 10.141.0.135 tell 10.141.0.132, length 46 22:50:27.601985 ARP, Request who-has 10.141.0.135 tell 10.141.0.132, length 46 ipsec eroute shows 0 10.141.0.135/32 -> 10.141.0.132/32 => %trap What could be the problem?

  Read the article

• Small TCP Window on WAN between 2 Locations

  - by Brent

  Site A: Denver datacenter. 60MBPS. Site B: Chicago. 100MBPS. ICMP pings: Packets: Sent = 176, Received = 176, Lost = 0 (0% loss), Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds: Minimum = 74ms, Maximum = 94ms, Average = 75ms File transfer between sites that never goes past ~7MBPS: Windows Update download at 60MBPS+: Site to site: IPSec VPN using two Cisco 5520's. CPU at 3-4% and lots of memory to spare. The latency between to two sites is very acceptable so I can't see an issue why it is performing so slow when transferring between the two sites. I have found that any type of transfer (FTP, HTTP, Windows file shares) will never go above ~7MBPS. When the WAN was first setup, I was able to get transfers at 50-60MBPS, which is what is expected due to the WAN connection at the Site A at 60MBPS. Then a few days later, I was not able to get anything going faster than ~7MBPS. Is there a upstream router between Denver and Chicago causing this? I want to take the blame away from our setup as downloads from Windows Update go blazing fast and for the first few days after the site to site VPN came up, I was transferring VM images at 50-60MBPS. Our stack: HP P2000 MSA - HP C7000 Chassis - HP Flex-10 - Cisco Gigabit switch - Cisco ASA - WAN

  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

• [tcpdump] Proxy delegate refusing connexion ?

  - by simtris

  Hi guys, I'm a little disapointed ! My aim was to build a VERY simple smtp proxy under debian to handle mail from a port (51234) and forward it to the standard 25 port. I compile and install a "delegate" witch can handle easily that. It's working very well like that : delegated SERVER="smtp://anotherSmtpServer:25" -P51234 The strange thing is, it's working on my virtual test machine and on the dedicated server in local but I can't manage to use it trought internet. I test it like that. telnet [mySrv] 51234 Of course, no firewal, no deny host, no ined/xined, the service delegated is listening on the right port ... 2 clues : The port is answering trought internet with nmap as "51234/tcp open tcpwrapped" have a look at the tcpdump following : 22:50:54.864398 IP [myIp].1699 [mySrv].51234: S 2486749330:2486749330(0) win 65535 22:50:54.864449 IP [mySrv].51234 [myIp].1699: S 2486963525:2486963525(0) ack 2486749331 win 5840 22:50:54.948169 IP [myIp].1699 [mySrv].51234: . ack 1 win 64240 22:50:54.965134 IP [mySrv].43554 [myIp].auth: S 2485396968:2485396968(0) win 5840 22:50:55.243128 IP [myIp] [mySrv]: ICMP [myIp] tcp port auth unreachable, length 68 22:50:55.249646 IP [mySrv].51234 [myIp].1699: F 1:1(0) ack 1 win 46 22:50:55.309853 IP [myIp].1699 [mySrv].51234: . ack 2 win 64240 22:50:55.310126 IP [myIp].1699 [mySrv].51234: F 1:1(0) ack 2 win 64240 22:50:55.310137 IP [mySrv].51234 [myIp].1699: . ack 2 win 46 The part "auth" seems suspect to me but didn't ring a bell. I could certaily do with some help. Thx a lot !

  Read the article

• Thomson router reboots unexpectedly with an apparent remote connection attempt

  - by ChrisF

  I've got a weird problem. Every so often my rooter (a Thomson TG585 v8 running version 8.2.7.8 of it's firmware) reboots itself. It seems to be associated with this message in the event log: FIREWALL replay check (1 of 2): Protocol: ICMP Src ip: 183.178.144.177 Dst ip: xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx Type: Destination Unreachable Code: Host Unreacheable xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx is my external IP address 183.178.144.177 resolves to 183178144177.ctinets.com We've got a student from Hong Kong staying with us at the moment and the reboots seem coincidental with him starting up his laptop. I say this because a check on ctinets.com shows it to be based in Hong Kong, though our guest's laptop doesn't appear to have any software related to this company installed. I say "apparently" as he is running the Chinese version of Windows and his English doesn't cover technical subjects like this. I know this is an incoming message but I was assuming that it was in response to something on the student's laptop which is why the first thought was malware, but we've got anti virus on all the other machines and have run malwarebytes on his with a negative result so I don't think the problem is due to a virus or (known) trojan. What else can I do to stop this and identify the cause?

  Read the article

• Windows Server 2008 ignores any change made to firewall

  - by Maurice Courtois

  I have been trying for the last 2 hours to make my Windows Server 2008 answer ping. I have tried almost every single solution I have found on the web, so far nothing work. My current setup: 2 NIC (1x Internet connection, 1x Local network) Server act as VPN server. So I set the corresponding NIC as either Public or Private. I also enable the rule for "File and Printer Sharing (Echo Request...)" for all Nic and from any IPs. I always been able to ping from the local network or the local ip while connected to the VPN. I also tried to create a specific rule for ICMP ping and disabling the firewall for all but the public nic. Regardless of all this, I still can't ping that server from Internet. Any idea suggestion what could cause this? I have the impression that when you set the server as VPN (I switch the box on when setting it up to block everything else than VPN connection) that changing anything to the firewall setting thought mmc is pointless !?!?

  Read the article

• What's going on with traceroute?

  - by Kevin

  The following is what happens when I run traceroute from a certain location: # traceroute google.com traceroute to google.com (74.125.227.39), 30 hops max, 60 byte packets 1 gateway.local.enactpc.com (10.0.0.1) 0.138 ms 0.101 ms 0.084 ms 2 * * * 3 * * * 4 * * * 5 * * * 6 * * * 7 * * * 8 * * * 9 * * * 10 * * * 11 * * * 12 * * * 13 * * * 14 * * * 15 * * * 16 * * * 17 * * * 18 * * * 19 * * * 20 * * * 21 * * * 22 * * * 23 * * * 24 * * * 25 * * * 26 * * * 27 * * * 28 * * * 29 * * * 30 * * * Absolutely nothing of interest... Now, originally I thought this was just a fact of the location's network set up. (I assume they block pings or something...) However, watch what happens when I use nmap to run a traceroute... # nmap -sP --traceroute google.com Starting Nmap 5.21 ( http://nmap.org ) at 2012-09-25 22:18 CDT Nmap scan report for google.com (74.125.227.40) Host is up (0.034s latency). Hostname google.com resolves to 11 IPs. Only scanned 74.125.227.40 rDNS record for 74.125.227.40: dfw06s06-in-f8.1e100.net TRACEROUTE (using proto 1/icmp) HOP RTT ADDRESS 1 0.19 ms gateway.local.enactpc.com (10.0.0.1) 2 1.93 ms 99-20-92-1.lightspeed.austtx.sbcglobal.net (99.20.92.1) 3 25.61 ms 99-20-92-2.lightspeed.austtx.sbcglobal.net (99.20.92.2) 4 ... 6 7 23.68 ms 12.83.68.137 8 31.30 ms gar23.dlstx.ip.att.net (12.122.85.73) 9 ... 10 31.82 ms 72.14.233.65 11 32.27 ms 209.85.250.77 12 32.98 ms dfw06s06-in-f8.1e100.net (74.125.227.40) Nmap done: 1 IP address (1 host up) scanned in 3.29 seconds When using nmap I get A LOT more results than with traceroute, why? Note, I checked, and the difference in target IP addresses is not related...

  Read the article

• How can the route between two private IPs go via public IPs?

  - by Gilles

  I'm trying to understand what this output from traceroute means. I changed the IP addresses for privacy but retained the public/private IP range distinction. traceroute.db -e -n 10.1.1.9 traceroute to (10.1.1.9), 30 hops max, 60 byte packets 1 10.0.0.1 0.596 ms 0.588 ms 0.577 ms 2 10.0.0.2 1.032 ms 1.029 ms 1.084 ms 3 10.0.0.3 3.360 ms 3.355 ms 3.338 ms 4 23.0.0.4 3.974 ms 4.592 ms 4.584 ms 5 23.0.0.5 13.442 ms 13.445 ms 13.434 ms 6 45.0.0.6 13.195 ms 12.924 ms 12.913 ms 7 67.0.0.7 52.088 ms 51.683 ms 52.040 ms 8 10.1.1.8 46.878 ms 44.575 ms 44.815 ms 9 10.1.1.9 45.932 ms 45.603 ms 45.593 ms The first 10.0.* range is inside my organisation. The last 10.1.* range is another site of my organisation. The intermediate addresses belong to various ISPs. I expect that there is some kind of VPN between the two sites, but I don't know much about our network topology. What I don't understand is how the route can go from a private address through public addresses back into private addresses. Searching led me to Public IPs on MPLS Traceroute, which gives a possible explanation: MPLS. Is MPLS the only possible or most likely explanation? Otherwise what does this tell me about our network infrastructure? Bonus question for my edification: in this scenario, who is generating the ICMP TTL exceeded packets and if relevant mangling their source and destination addresses?

  Read the article

• IPv6 works only after ping to routing box

  - by Ficik

  Situation: There is ipv4 only router in network and every computer is connected to it (wifi or cable). Server with ipv4 and ipv6 is connected to this router as well. Server has configured tunnelbrokers 6to4 tunnel and radvd. Clients in network has right prefix and can ping each other. But they can't ping to internet until they ping Server (the one with tunnel). I found somewhere that it's icmp problem, but I couldn't find solution. Is it problem that there is ipv4 only router? server and client runs linux router runs dd-wrt without ipv6 support :( Ping try: standa@standa-laptop:~$ ping6 ipv6.google.com PING ipv6.google.com(2a00:1450:8007::69) 56 data bytes ^C --- ipv6.google.com ping statistics --- 29 packets transmitted, 0 received, 100% packet loss, time 28223ms standa@standa-laptop:~$ ping6 2001:470:XXXX:XXXX:21c:c0ff:fe2b:6478 PING 2001:470:XXXX:XXXX:21c:c0ff:fe2b:6478(2001:470:XXXX:XXXX:21c:c0ff:fe2b:6478) 56 data bytes 64 bytes from 2001:470:XXXX:XXXX:21c:c0ff:fe2b:6478: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=3.55 ms 64 bytes from 2001:470:XXXX:XXXX:21c:c0ff:fe2b:6478: icmp_seq=2 ttl=64 time=0.311 ms 64 bytes from 2001:470:XXXX:XXXX:21c:c0ff:fe2b:6478: icmp_seq=3 ttl=64 time=0.269 ms 64 bytes from 2001:470:XXXX:XXXX:21c:c0ff:fe2b:6478: icmp_seq=4 ttl=64 time=0.292 ms ^C --- 2001:470:XXXX:XXXX:21c:c0ff:fe2b:6478 ping statistics --- 4 packets transmitted, 4 received, 0% packet loss, time 3000ms rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 0.269/1.107/3.559/1.415 ms standa@standa-laptop:~$ ping6 ipv6.google.com PING ipv6.google.com(2a00:1450:8007::69) 56 data bytes 64 bytes from 2a00:1450:8007::69: icmp_seq=1 ttl=57 time=20.7 ms 64 bytes from 2a00:1450:8007::69: icmp_seq=2 ttl=57 time=20.2 ms 64 bytes from 2a00:1450:8007::69: icmp_seq=3 ttl=57 time=23.4 ms ^C --- ipv6.google.com ping statistics --- 3 packets transmitted, 3 received, 0% packet loss, time 2001ms rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 20.267/21.479/23.413/1.392 ms

  Read the article

• Windows Server 2003 IPSec Tunnel Connected, But Not Working (Possibly NAT/RRAS Related)

  - by Kevinoid

  Configuration I have setup a "raw" IPSec tunnel between a Windows Server 2003 (SBS) machine and a Netgear FVG318 according to the instructions in Microsoft KB816514. The configuration is as follows (using the same conventions as the article): NetA | SBS2003 | FVG318 | NetB 10.0.0.0/24 | 216.x.x.x | 69.y.y.y | 10.0.254.0/24 Both the Main Mode and Quick Mode Security Associations are successfully completed and appear in the IP Security Monitor. I am also able to ping the SBS2003 server on its private address from any computer on NetB. The Problem Any traffic sent from a computer on NetA to NetB, or from SBS2003 to NetB (excluding ICMP Ping responses), is sent out on the public network interface outside the IPSec tunnel (no encryption or header authentication, as if the tunnel were not there). Pings sent from a computer on NetB to a computer on NetA successfully reach computers on NetA, but the responses are silently discarded by SBS2003 (they do not go out in the clear and do not generate any encrypted traffic). Possible Solutions Incorrect Configuration I could have mistyped something, somewhere, or KB816514 could be incorrect in some way. I have tried very hard to eliminate the first option. Have re-created the configuration several times, tried tweaking and adjusting all the settings I could without success (most prevent the SA from being established). NAT/RRAS I have seen multiple posts elsewhere suggesting that this could be due to interaction between NAT and the IPSec filters. Possibly the NetA private addresses get rewritten to 216.x.x.x before being compared with the Quick Mode IPSec filters and don't get tunneled because of the mismatch. In fact, The Cable Guy article from June 2005 "TCP/IP Packet Processing Paths" suggests that this is the case, (see step 2 and 4 of the Transit Traffic path). If this is the case, is there a way to exclude NetA-NetB traffic from NAT? Any thoughts, ideas, suggestions, and/or comments are appreciated.

  Read the article

• How can I stop SipVicious ('friendly-scanner') from flooding my SIP server?

  - by a1kmm

  I run an SIP server which listens on UDP port 5060, and needs to accept authenticated requests from the public Internet. The problem is that occasionally it gets picked up by people scanning for SIP servers to exploit, who then sit there all day trying to brute force the server. I use credentials that are long enough that this attack will never feasibly work, but it is annoying because it uses up a lot of bandwidth. I have tried setting up fail2ban to read the Asterisk log and ban IPs that do this with iptables, which stops Asterisk from seeing the incoming SIP REGISTER attempts after 10 failed attempts (which happens in well under a second at the rate of attacks I'm seeing). However, SipVicious derived scripts do not immediately stop sending after getting an ICMP Destination Host Unreachable - they keep hammering the connection with packets. The time until they stop is configurable, but unfortunately it seems that the attackers doing these types of brute force attacks generally set the timeout to be very high (attacks continue at a high rate for hours after fail2ban has stopped them from getting any SIP response back once they have seen initial confirmation of an SIP server). Is there a way to make it stop sending packets at my connection?

  Read the article

• Connecting to SVN server from a computer outside of my LAN

  - by Tom Auger

  I've got a Fedora server running Subversion and svnserve on port 3690. My repo is at /var/svn/project_name. I have my router forwarding port 3690 to the local server (as well as port 80, 21, 22 and a few others). When I connect locally to svn://192.168.0.2/project_name it works great. When I connect from an external server to svn://my.static.ip/project_name I get a time out connecting to the host. However, if I http://my.static.ip there is no problem, so port forwarding is working (at least for port 80). I don't want to run WebDAV or svn via HTTP/s. I'd like it to work using svnserve, as documented in the svn book. What have I misconfigured? EDIT Here is the last part of my iptables dump. I'm not an expert, but it looks OK to me: ACCEPT tcp -- anywhere anywhere state NEW tcp dpt:svn ACCEPT udp -- anywhere anywhere state NEW udp dpt:svn ACCEPT tcp -- anywhere anywhere state NEW tcp dpts:6680:6699 ACCEPT udp -- anywhere anywhere state NEW udp dpts:6680:6699 REJECT all -- anywhere anywhere reject-with icmp-host-prohibited EDIT 2 Results from sudo netstat -tulpn tcp 0 0 0.0.0.0:3690 0.0.0.0:* LISTEN 1455/svnserve

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14  | Next Page >