Search Results

Search found 489 results on 20 pages for 'routed'.

Page 13/20 | < Previous Page | 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20  | Next Page >

• VPN with client-to-client direct connectivity?

  - by Johannes Ernst

  When setting up a VPN, clients (say client1 and client2) usually authenticate to a server, and together the three constitute the VPN. When client1 wishes to send a packet to client2, this packet usually gets routed by way of server. Are there products / configuration blueprints for products where it is possible to send packets directly from client1 to client2 without going though server? (if the underlying network topology permits it, e.g. no firewalls in the way) If not, is there a way by which client1 can send a packet to client2 by way of server, without the server being able to snoop on the content of the packet? (E.g. because the packet is encrypted with the public key of client2) I just asked in the OpenVPN forum, and the answer I got was "not with OpenVPN". So my question is: are there other products with which this is possible? Open-source preferred ... One use case: client1 and client2, typically in separate offices, find themselves both at headquarters. Do they still need to talk to each other via the public internet? Links appreciated. Thank you.

  Read the article

• Debian network bridge configuration - /etc/network/interfaces

  - by Mathias

  I'm running a Lenny Xen dom0 hosting multiple virtual machines in a routed IP setup. To get an additional private subnet, I created the bridge xenbr0 in the dom0 with the following commands: brctl addbr xenbr0 ifconfig xenbr0 10.0.0.1 netmask 255.255.255.0 ifconfig xenbr0 up This works as expected, and domU interfaces are added to the bridge by Xen on VM start. My only problem is: how the heck do i specify this configuration in /etc/network/interfaces that it remains permanent and the bridge is available after a reboot? I tried the following config as found on a lot of tutorials: auto xenbr0 iface xenbr0 inet static address 10.0.0.1 netmask 255.255.255.0 network 10.0.0.0 broadcast 10.0.0.255 bridge_stp no I get 2 different errors, depending on if the bridge already exists or not. If it doesn't exist: root@dom0:~# brctl show bridge name bridge id STP enabled interfaces root@dom0:~# /etc/init.d/networking restart Reconfiguring network interfaces...if-up.d/mountnfs[eth0]: waiting for interface xenbr0 before doing NFS mounts (warning). SIOCSIFADDR: No such device xenbr0: ERROR while getting interface flags: No such device SIOCSIFNETMASK: No such device SIOCSIFBRDADDR: No such device xenbr0: ERROR while getting interface flags: No such device xenbr0: ERROR while getting interface flags: No such device Failed to bring up xenbr0. done. And if it exists: root@dom0:~# brctl show bridge name bridge id STP enabled interfaces xenbr0 8000.000000000000 no root@dom0:~# /etc/init.d/networking restart Reconfiguring network interfaces...if-up.d/mountnfs[eth0]: waiting for interface xenbr0 before doing NFS mounts (warning). RTNETLINK answers: File exists Failed to bring up xenbr0. done. Could anyone point me in the right direction please? The bridge works fine when created manually, i just need the right config file entries. The most tutorials I found add some devices to the bridge in the config, is that maybe the problem why it is not working? I don't have any interfaces I want to add to the bridge on creation as they get added later on VM start... Thanks, Mathias

  Read the article

• How to make Exchange 2003 non-authoritive

  - by Romski

  Background We are a small company with an internally hosted Exchange 2003. It receives email for 2 domains (the company was renamed a few years back). For the sake of argument, the domains are: oldname.com newname.com We have moved newname.com to a hosted exchange service, and our DNS record is correctly routing emails. Our internal server still receives email for oldname.com, although we have asked our hosting company to accept emails for that domain. Problem My problem is that emails generated internally from monitoring software, printer, etc. are being caught by our (defunct) internal server and being delivered to the old mailboxes. I believe that what is happening is that our internal exchange server considers itself to be the authoritive server for newname.com. I think it must be looking in active directory for a mailbox and delivering it internally without ever going outside. Attempt to fix I started to follow the article here: http://support.microsoft.com/kb/321721. I removed the SMTP recipient policy for newname.com, and added a dummy address and made it primary. I also answered yes for updating the associated emails. I then restarted the Microsoft Exchange Routing System and SMTP, but emails are still being routed internally. Is there a way to force the exchange server to route all emails for the domain newname.com to the new hosted service?

  Read the article

• DansGuardian/Squid Traffic doesn't get back to user

  - by DKNUCKLES

  I've purchased a Squid appliance that I'm attempting to implement, however the lack of documentation has left me a bit high and dry. Forgive me if this is a silly question, but this is my first attempt at implementing Squid. From what I can ascertain from the documentation (or lack thereof), the users connect to DansGuardian first at port 8080 where the filtering is done, at which point it forwards it to the Squid appliance at port 3128. The traffic is then sent to the internet. The setup I have is as follows Gateway (MikroTik router) : 192.168.88.1 Squid/DansGuardian :192.168.88.100 Client : 192.168.88.238 Client --- Gateway --- Proxy --- Internet I have set up a simple NAT rule to forward all traffic from the client machine (for testing purposes) to go to the DansGuardian. The traffic seems to get there, although I see a lot of SYN_RECV w/ a netstat -antp command on the virtual appliance machine. From this I gather that the traffic is NOT being routed back to the client machine. Proto Recv-Q Send-Q Local Address Foreign Address State PID/Program name tcp 0 0 0.0.0.0:8080 0.0.0.0:* LISTEN - tcp 0 0 192.168.88.100:8080 192.168.88.238:55786 SYN_RECV - tcp 0 0 192.168.88.100:8080 192.168.88.238:55787 SYN_RECV - tcp 0 0 192.168.88.100:8080 192.168.88.238:55785 SYN_RECV - tcp 0 0 192.168.88.100:8080 192.168.88.238:55788 SYN_RECV - tcp 0 0 0.0.0.0:10000 0.0.0.0:* LISTEN - tcp 0 0 0.0.0.0:22 0.0.0.0:* LISTEN - Is this a routing issue or an issue with the Squid Appliance?

  Read the article

• Public-to-Public IPSec tunnel: NAT confusion

  - by WuckaChucka

  I know this is possible -- and apparently fairly common with larger companies that don't/can't route private addresses for overlap reasons -- but I can't wrap my head around how to get this to work. I'm playing around with pfSense, Vyatta and a Cisco 5505 right now, hardware-wise. So here's my setup: WEST: Vyatta outside: 10.0.0.254/24 inside: 172.16.0.1/24 machine a: 172.16.0.200/24 EAST: Cisco 5505 outside: 10.0.0.210/24 inside: 192.168.10.1 machine b (webserver): 192.168.10.2 So what we're trying to do is this: route traffic across the tunnel from machine A to machine B without using private addresses. i.e. 172.16.0.200 makes a TCP request to 10.0.0.210:80, and as far as EAST is concerned, it sees a src IP of 10.0.0.254. On WEST, I have your typical many-to-one Source NAT to translate 172.16.0.0/24 to 10.0.0.254 and that's confirmed to be working. Also on WEST, I have the following IPSec config: Local IP: 10.0.0.254 Peer IP: 10.0.0.210 local subnet: 10.0.0.254/32 remote subnet: 10.0.0.210/32 I have the reversed configuration on EAST. What happens when I make a request from machine A to 10.0.0.210:80 is that the SNAT translates the private address of machine A to 10.0.0.254 and it's routed out (and discarded at the other end) without establishing the tunnel. What I'm assuming is happening is that the inside interface on WEST receives a packet from 172.16.0.200 and since this doesn't match the local subnet defined in the tunnel configuration, it's not processed by the IPSec engine and the tunnel is not established. How do you make this work? Seems like a chicken and egg thing with the NAT and IPSec and I just can't wrap my head around how this can be done: can I say, "if a packet is received on the inside interface with a destination of 10.0.0.210, translate it to 10.0.0.254 before the IPSec engine inspects it"?

  Read the article

• SharePoint Records Center Submitted E-mail Records not picked up

  - by Kenneth Verburg

  We have set up a new SharePoint 2007 site with a Records Repository. We're using Exchange 2007 Managed Folders to route e-mails to this repository based on the 'label' attached to the e-mail as set in the Exchange 2007 journaling options. E-mails added to a Managed Folder get sent to SharePoint, they end up in the "Submitted E-mail Records" list of the Records Repository. That's according to plan, but the e-mails are not routed to the respective document library as defined by the label. Instead an error appears in the event viewer for every e-mail listed in the Submitted E-mail Records list, on every interval of the records repository schedule (set to every two minutes for testing purposes): Value cannot be null, parameter name: g. Sending a document from the SharePoint site iself to the Records Repository via the Send To... link works fine, but e-mails get stuck in the list... We have set Document Libraries in the Respository with and without content types (with matching names with the Label and the Record Routing rule set). Any ideas what could be wrong? This is in the event log: Every two minutes the following error appears in the Application Log: Source: Office SharePoint Server Category: Records Center Type: Error Event ID: 4975 User: N/A Computer: SPS2007 Description: Value cannot be null. Parameter name: g For more information, see Help and Support Center at http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/events.asp.

  Read the article

• NETKEY IPsec and ARP

  - by Shawn J. Goff

  I'm wondering if I have the correct routing setup for an IPsec tunnel. I have control over the IPsec endpoints and the hosts connected to one side. These hosts are connecting to the tunnel so that they have access to the network on the other side of what I will call the IPsec server. I don't have control of the network upstream of this server. Normally, the IPsec server will not respond to ARP requests for the hosts on the other side of the tunnel. So when a packet arrives for one of my hosts the server gets ARP requests, but the upstream router gets no response, and cannot construct the ethernet frame to send me the packets. If I was using one of the swan stacks, I would have a separate interface, and I'd probably just need to turn on proxyarp, but I'm using NETKEY, which doesn't use a separate interface for the tunnel. To solve the problem for now, I have added an eth0.5 vlan to the IPsec server, turned on proxyarp for that interface, and added all routes my hosts addresses to that interface so that it will respond to those ARP requests (and will therefore get relevant packets routed to it). This works, but it feels wrong. What is the correct way to get the upstream router to send me the traffic for these hosts?

  Read the article

• Host spreads wrong MAC Adress of router on the WIFI

  - by JavaIsMyIsland

  Strange things are going on our network. Since yesterday a host which is actually not on our subnet spreads wrong ARP Replys on our network. To be precise, only on the WIFI. If I connect my Laptop to the cable ethernet, it gets the right MAC adress of the router. Also my Android phone and my Ubuntu system do get the right MAC Adress. So I took a look at wireshark. When I clear the ARP cache of the windows machine, the first ARP response is correct and comes from the router. But like 10 ms later another ARP response comes from another host in the WIFI. The host changes its IP Adresses from time to time and they look like they are not on our subnet. So I can not use the internet because DNS is not working anymore. Sometimes the router wins the race condition and the mac adress is set correctly in the arp cache. I first thought, this is an arp-poisoning mitm attack but it does not make sense if the packets get not routed correctly?! I restarted the router but it didn't help. I have no access to the router, else I would change the shared key to make sure there is no intruder on the wifi.

  Read the article

• GRE Tunnel over IPsec with Loopback

  - by Alek

  Hello, I'm having a really hard time trying to estabilish a VPN connection using a GRE over IPsec tunnel. The problem is that it involves some sort of "loopback" connection which I don't understand -- let alone be able to configure --, and the only help I could find is related to configuring Cisco routers. My network is composed of a router and a single host running Debian Linux. My task is to create a GRE tunnel over an IPsec infrastructure, which is particularly intended to route multicast traffic between my network, which I am allowed to configure, and a remote network, for which I only bear a form containing some setup information (IP addresses and phase information for IPsec). For now it suffices to estabilish a communication between this single host and the remote network, but in the future it will be desirable for the traffic to be routed to other machines on my network. As I said this GRE tunnel involves a "loopback" connection which I have no idea of how to configure. From my previous understanding, a loopback connection is simply a local pseudo-device used mostly for testing purposes, but in this context it might be something more specific that I do not have the knowledge of. I have managed to properly estabilish the IPsec communication using racoon and ipsec-tools, and I believe I'm familiar with the creation of tunnels and addition of addresses to interfaces using ip, so the focus is on the GRE step. The worst part is that the remote peers do not respond to ping requests and the debugging of the general setup is very difficult due to the encrypted nature of the traffic. There are two pairs of IP addresses involved: one pair for the GRE tunnel peer-to-peer connection and one pair for the "loopback" part. There is also an IP range involved, which is supposed to be the final IP addresses for the hosts inside the VPN. My question is: how (or if) can this setup be done? Do I need some special software or another daemon, or does the Linux kernel handle every aspect of the GRE/IPsec tunneling? Please inform me if any extra information could be useful. Any help is greatly appreciated.

  Read the article

• Using Round Robin DNS on simple VPN setup

  - by dannymcc

  We have two internet connections which are load balanced to share the load between the two. We set this up after one of the internet provider proved to be less than reliable but great speed and latency wise when it is working. We'd rather utilise both connections as much as possible rather than leave one idle until the other drops out. We have a number of remote workers who occasionally need to connect via VPN from their laptops or iPads, we also have a small number of permanent LAN to LAN tunnels running from smaller branches. Originally we only had one internet connection and used one of our static IP addresses for all VPN users. Now that we have two internet connections running all of the time I am trying to make sure that the VPN is available to our team regardless of which connection drops. So my solution is to create two A records for our domain name with a value of vpn. and the two static IP addresses from each peer. Is this a sensible way of achieving this? Should I expect higher latency due to packets being lost if one peer fails and some packets still get routed to it anyway? A brief mockup of the setup I have:

  Read the article

• Network Misconfiguration when adding first host to new vSphere cluster

  - by dunxd

  I am building a new vSphere cluster from scratch. I have installed ESXi on the first host, and built a vCenter server on a VM residing on that host (storage is on the local hard drive, although we have iSCSI targets which I can reach from the host). The cluster is configured for HA. When I try and add the host to the cluster, I get an error at the point where HA is configured - Cannot complete the . I have stripped the network configuration of the host down to the most basic - a single NIC attached to a single vSwitch - this is running the VMKernel Port on VLAN 8 - that is our Management VLAN. The vCenter server will have a network address on this VLAN, so I also set the initial Virtual Machine Port Group to this VLAN, and connected the vCenter server NIC to this port group. I understand I can't connect the vCenter server to the VMkernel port group, but shouldn't I be able to connect the vCenter server to a Port Group in the same VLAN? If not, do I need to create a VLAN specifically for VMKernel Port Group? I plan to set up another port group for vMotion with a dedicated and isolated VLAN (i.e. VLAN isn't routed) so this wouldn't allow vCenter to communicate. Does anyone have any suggestions, or other ideas for what might be causing the problem. I've read through the documentation, but it isn't giving me any pointers, and the error message isn't helping me beyond telling me something is wrong with my network config.

  Read the article

• Intel NIC X540-T1 non-functional in Ubuntu Server 12.04

  - by Jeff Carr

  I have installed three Intel X540-T1's in servers running Ubuntu Server 12.04, but all are non-functional, no link lights, no packets sent or received, and no connection on ip4 or ip6 whether set up as dhcp or static. Also, dmesg doesn't detect cable connection or disconnection. I updated the default ixgbe driver to Intel's latest version (3.11.33) with no change. The ethernet controller is being reported as X540-AT2 (which might be a problem that I can't figure out how to fix), but the subsystem is X540-T1 so I believe that might be intended. Does anyone have any experience with this that could assist? ifconfig eth2 eth2 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr a0:36:9f:14:5f:ea inet addr:192.168.101.1 Bcast:192.168.101.255 Mask:255.255.255.0 UP BROADCAST MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1<br> RX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:1000 RX bytes:0 (0.0 B) TX bytes:0 (0.0 B) ethtool -i eth2 driver: ixgbe version: 3.11.33 firmware-version: 0x8000037c bus-info: 0000:08:00.0 supports-statistics: yes supports-test: yes supports-eeprom-access: yes supports-register-dump: yes lspci -vvnns 08:00.0 08:00.0 Ethernet controller [0200]: Intel Corporation Ethernet Controller 10 Gigabit X540-AT2 [8086:1528] (rev 01) Subsystem: Intel Corporation Ethernet Converged Network Adapter X540-T1 [8086:0002] Control: I/O- Mem+ BusMaster+ SpecCycle- MemWINV- VGASnoop- ParErr+ Stepping- SERR+ FastB2B- DisINTx+ Status: Cap+ 66MHz- UDF- FastB2B- ParErr- DEVSEL=fast >TAbort- <TAbort- <MAbort- >SERR- <PERR- INTx- Latency: 0, Cache Line Size: 32 bytes Interrupt: pin A routed to IRQ 16 Region 0: Memory at e8000000 (64-bit, prefetchable) [size=2M] Region 4: Memory at e8200000 (64-bit, prefetchable) [size=16K] [virtual] Expansion ROM at e8280000 [disabled] [size=512K] Capabilities: <access denied> Kernel driver in use: ixgbe Kernel modules: ixgbe

  Read the article

• (Zywall USG 300) NAT bypassed when accessing in-house-server From LAN Via domain name

  - by mschr

  My situations is like this; i host a number of websites from within our joint network solution. On the network is basically 3 categories: the known public, registered via mac, given static dhcp lease the anonymous lan connections, given lease from specific dhcp range switches, unix hosts firewall Now, consider following hosts which are of interest 111.111.111.111 (Zywall USG 300 WAN) 192.168.1.1 (ZyWall USG 300 LAN) load balances and bw monitors plus handles NAT 192.168.1.2 (Linux www) serves mydomain1.tld and mydomain2.tld 192.168.123.123 (Random LAN client) accesses mydomain1.tld from LAN 23.234.12.253 (Random External client) accesses mydomain1.tld via WAN DNS A records are setup so that both mydomain1.tld and mydomain2.tld points to 111.111.111.111 - and the Linux www serves the http parts with VirtualHost configurations, setting up the document roots pr ServerName, this is not so interesting though.. NAT rule translates 111.111.111.111:80 to 192.168.1.2:80 (1:1 NAT) Our problem follows; When accessing http://mydomain1.tld from outside (23.234.12.253 example host) the joint network - everything is fine, zywall receives requests via port 80 and maps it to the linux host' httpd. However - once trying to go through the NAT from LAN side (in-house, 192.168.123.123 example host) then one gets filtered in the Zywall port 80 firewall. I know this only because port 443 is open for administration interface and https://mydomain1.tld prompts for zywall login. So my conclusion is, that the LAN that accesses 111.111.111.111 in fact are routed to 192.168.1.1 whilst bypassing the NAT table. I need to know how to setup NAT / Policy Route, so that LAN WAN LAN will function with proper network translations instead of doing the 'quick nameserver lookup' or whatever this might be.

  Read the article

• RAID administration in Debian Lenny

  - by Siim K

  I've got an old box that I don't want to scrap yet because it's got a nice working 5-disk RAID assembly. I want to create 2 arrays: RAID 1 with 2 disks and RAID 5 with the other 3 disks. The RAID card is Intel SRCU31L. I can create the RAID 1 volume in the console that you access with Ctrl+C at startup. But it only allows for creation of one volume so I can't do anything with the 3 remaining disks. I installed Debian Lenny on the RAID 1 volume and it worked out nicely. What utilites could I now use to create/manage the RAID volumes in Debian Linux? I installed the raidutils package but get an error when trying to fetch a list: #raidutil -L controller or #raidutil -L physical # raidutil -L controller osdOpenEngine : 11/08/110-18:16:08 Fatal error, no active controller device files found. Engine connect failed: Open What could I try to get this thing working? Can you suggest any other tools? Command #lspci -vv gives me this about the controller: 00:06.1 I2O: Intel Corporation Integrated RAID (rev 02) (prog-if 01) Subsystem: Intel Corporation Device 0001 Control: I/O- Mem+ BusMaster+ SpecCycle- MemWINV+ VGASnoop- ParErr- Step ping- SERR+ FastB2B- DisINTx- Status: Cap+ 66MHz- UDF- FastB2B+ ParErr- DEVSEL=medium >TAbort- <TAbort - <MAbort- >SERR- <PERR- INTx- Latency: 64, Cache Line Size: 32 bytes Interrupt: pin A routed to IRQ 26 Region 0: Memory at f9800000 (32-bit, prefetchable) [size=8M] [virtual] Expansion ROM at 30020000 [disabled] [size=64K] Capabilities: <access denied> Kernel driver in use: PCI_I2O Kernel modules: i2o_core

  Read the article

• What parts of a motherboard age, and how can I choose one with the longest possible life?

  - by Robert Harvey

  I have a home-built computer that's probably about four years old. I realize this probably seems ancient to some folks, but computers have no moving parts (except the fans), so theoretically they should last a long time, if I still have software to run on them. A few weeks ago, it began blue-screening and freezing up, with various error messages. It almost always happened about five minutes after startup. I assumed that the video card was overheating, since the cheap little fan on the heatsink died, so I replaced it. Long story short, after upgrading the video drivers a couple of times and performing some other troubleshooting, I remembered that the last time this happened, I took out the memory SIMS and cleaned the contacts with a gum eraser, so I did that again (noting that the SATA cables were very close to the chips on the SIMS). I re-routed the cables and reinstalled the SIMS. So far, so good; the machine has been trouble-free since. But blue-screens are distressing; I never know what bits are being chewed up in my OS installation when something like this happens. So I'm wondering if I'm choosing my components properly. If it matters, it's an Intel D915GAG motherboard and Corsair memory, but what I'm wondering is, should I be looking for certain characteristics when I choose these parts for my next computer, so that I can avoid this problem in my next build?

  Read the article

• How to Load Balance 2 Internet Connections on a Windows 7 machine?

  - by Jimmy Chandra

  It's sort of related to this particular question, but that one is on Mac. I am looking for similar solution on Windows 7. I have 2 network connections: (Connection A) Wireless terminal connecting to ISP A (3G / EVDO internet provider) (Connection B) Broadband wired connection connecting to ISP B (Cable internet provider) Both has access to the internet. When I try connecting to a website and checking the networking tab on my Task Manager, I only see the network traffic being routed to only Connection A. Is there a way to make the computer to utilize both network (in a sense using all the bandwidth available from both the Cable ISP and the 3G / EVDO ISP) at the same time? If so, what do I need to do to set this up ... on Windows 7? Here is a bit more info on my network connections (ipconfig /all): PPP adapter Wireless Terminal: IPv4: aa.bb.ccc.ddd(preferred) Subnet mask: 255.255.255.255 Default Gateway: 0.0.0.0 DNS: aa.ee.f.ggg aa.ee.f.hhh Primary Wins: jjj.ii.k.l Secondary Wins: jjj.ii.k.m Ethernet adapter LAN: IPv4: 192.168.1.100 (connected to a router by wired that itself connect to a cable modem) subnet mask: 255.255.255.0 Default gateway: 192.168.1.1 (the wireless router) DHCP: 192.168.1.1 (the wireless router) DNS: xxx.yy.zz.ww rr.sss.t.uuu For my own privacy, I don't believe the actual number matters, the patterns are representative of the ip numbering scheme...

  Read the article

• Android openvpn + zeroconf browser sending mdns query packets over eth0 instead of tap0 interface on wifi

  - by Mrunal

  On an android device, I am connecting to a remote network using openvpn for performing service discovery. WORKING CASE: After the device is camped on 3g/4g and after connecting to remote network by openvpn, when the zeroconf browser is launched, I can see the mdns query packets being send through the tap0 interface resulting into rendering of services on the browser. From the tcpdump captured on the device, I can see that the mdns query packets are send to tap0 interface. tap0 ip: 192.168.11.200 Route table information: Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref Use Iface 76.26.112.234 10.179.240.1 255.255.255.255 UGH 0 0 0 pdpbr1 10.179.240.1 * 255.255.255.255 UH 0 0 0 pdpbr1 32.1.72.136 * 255.255.255.255 UH 0 0 0 pdpbr0 10.179.240.0 * 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 pdpbr1 192.168.11.0 * 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 tap0 default 192.168.11.1 0.0.0.0 UG 0 0 0 tap0 NOT WORKING CASE: However, after switching on the wifi and connecting it to remote network, when the zeroconf browser is launched, instead of sending the mdns query packets to tap0 interface; these packets are being send to eth0 interface due to which we cannot see the services. From the tcpdump captured on the device, I can see that mdns query packets are send to eth0 interface. tap0 ip: 192.168.11.200 eth0 ip: 192.168.43.230 route table information: Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref Use Iface 76.26.112.234 192.168.43.1 255.255.255.255 UGH 0 0 0 eth0 32.1.72.136 * 255.255.255.255 UH 0 0 0 pdpbr0 192.168.11.0 * 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 tap0 192.168.43.0 * 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth0 default 192.168.11.1 0.0.0.0 UG 0 0 0 tap0 In the above case, even though there is a default route for tap0, all the multicast packets are being routed through eth0. How is this possible? Has anyone observed a similar problem and it would be really helpful if you can help us to discover services through zeroconf browser after the device is connected to remote network via openvpn through wifi. Thank You Very much, Mrunal

  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 2003 - how to route ALL mail (including internal) via an external SMTP gateway? (Or, domain

  - by Scandalon

  Short version: Is there a way to have Exchange route all email, including internal AD users that would normally be routed directly, through an external gateway? (SMTP, probably a "Smart Host" in exchange nomenclature.) Longer version: I'm not an email expert/admin/orevencompetent. Inherited an exchange 2003 server, migrating to web-based SaaS provider. To add to the fun, we're also (forced by deadlines) transitioning domains. What we (my boss) wants is any email sent to the new domain to have a copy sent to both domains. Getting mail sent to the new domain/provider to then be copied/forwarded to our old domain/exchange is easy. But we want mail sent from the old domain to the old domain to get sent to the new domain as well. However: If we route all outgoing exchange mail through the new provider gateway, w/ the new domain forwarding to the old, we'd get an email loop. The "solution" desired is for an exchange user that sends to another exchange user to still be sent via the external gateway, which would in turn be sent to the new domain, and copied/forwarded back to the old domain. Is it possible? A bit of a strange request I'm sure. And I expect that what we're attempting to do is DoingItWrong(tm). Any better ideas?

  Read the article

• iptables secure squid proxy

  - by Lytithwyn

  I have a setup where my incoming internet connection feeds into a squid proxy/caching server, and from there into my local wireless router. On the wan side of the proxy server, I have eth0 with address 208.78.∗∗∗.∗∗∗ On the lan side of the proxy server, I have eth1 with address 192.168.2.1 Traffic from my lan gets forwarded through the proxy transparently to the internet via the following rules. Note that traffic from the squid server itself is also routed through the proxy/cache, and this is on purpose: # iptables forwarding iptables -A FORWARD -i eth1 -o eth0 -s 192.168.2.0/24 -m state --state NEW -j ACCEPT iptables -A FORWARD -m state --state ESTABLISHED,RELATED -j ACCEPT iptables -A POSTROUTING -t nat -j MASQUERADE # iptables for squid transparent proxy iptables -t nat -A PREROUTING -i eth1 -p tcp --dport 80 -j DNAT --to 192.168.2.1:3128 iptables -t nat -A PREROUTING -i eth0 -p tcp --dport 80 -j REDIRECT --to-port 3128 How can I set up iptables to block any connections made to my server from the outside, while not blocking anything initiated from the inside? I have tried doing: iptables -A INPUT -i eth0 -s 192.168.2.0/24 -j ACCEPT iptables -A INPUT -i eth0 -j REJECT But this blocks everything. I have also tried reversing the order of those commands in case I got that part wrong, but that didn't help. I guess I don't fully understand everything about iptables. Any ideas?

  Read the article

• What's the piece of hardware listening on Facebook's or Wikipedia's IP address?

  - by Igor Ostrovsky

  I am trying to understand how massive sites like Facebook or Wikipedia work, for my intellectual curiosity. I read about various techniques for building scalable sites, but I am still puzzled about one particular detail. The part that confuses me is that ultimately, the DNS will map the entire domain to a single IP address, or a handful of IP addresses in the case of round-robin DNS. For example, wikipedia.org has only one type-A DNS record. So, people from all over the world visiting Wikipedia have to send a request to the one IP address specified in DNS. What is the piece of hardware that listens on the IP address for a massive site, and how can it possibly handle all the load coming from the requests for users all over the world? Edit 1: Thanks for all the responses! Anycast seems like a feasible answer... Does anyone know of a way to check whether a particular IP address is anycast-routed, so that I could verify that this really is the trick used in practice by large sites? Edit 2: After more reading on the topic, it appears that anycast is not typically used for dynamic web content. Anycast is usually used for UDP (e.g., DNS lookups), or sometimes for static content. One interesting thing to note is that Facebook uses profile.ak.fbcdn.net to host static content like style sheets and javascript libraries. Each time I ping this name, I get a response from a different IP address. However, I can't tell whether this is anycast in action, or a completely different technique. Back to my original question: as far as I can tell, even a large site will have a single expensive piece of load-balancing hardware listening on its handful of public IP addresses.

  Read the article

• How do I load balance between two Linux machines?

  - by William Hilsum

  Inspired by the Stack Overflow network, I am now obsessed with HAProxy and trying to use it myself. At the moment, each HAProxy box has got two network cards (well, two configured, I can have a maximum of 4 and wasn't sure if they needed their own one for management between the boxes). On both machines, the backend one (eth1) is a private IP that goes to a switch connected to the webservers, and the front facing one (eth0) has a public internet IP that is routed straight though. In addition, I have created an additional virtual ip for eth0 called eth0:0 which has got a third public ip address. I just about get how to use it for load balancing between multiple web servers that are behind it, but, I am failing to load balance between the two HAProxy boxes - they appear to fight for the virtual IP, but, this does not appear to be a smart solution. Now, by using the virtual shared IP address, this solution appears to work and does seem to give me maximum uptime, but, is this the correct way to do it, or is there a smarter way? I have been looking at other Linux packages such as keepalived, but, I have only been using Linux (server) for a week now and am at the limits of my understanding. Is there anyone who has done this before and can you advise anything for maximum uptime?

  Read the article

• iSCSI performance questions

  - by RyanLambert

  Hi everyone, apologies for the long-winded post in advance... Attempting to troubleshoot some iSCSI sluggishness on a brand new vSphere deployment (still in test). Layout is as such: 3 VSphere hosts, each with 2x 10GB NICs plugged into a pair of Nexus 5020s with a 10gig back-to-back between them. NICs are port-channeled in an active/active redundant fashion (using vPC-mac pinning for those of you familiar with N1KV) Both NICs carry service console, vmotion, iSCSI, and guest traffic. iSCSI is on a single subnet/single VLAN that is not routed through our IP network (strictly layer2) Had this been a 1gig deployment, we probably would have split the iSCSI traffic off onto separate NICs, but the price/port gets rather ridiculous when you start throwing 4+ NICs to a server in a 10gigabit infrastructure, and I'm not really convinced it's necessary. Open to dialogue/tech facts re: this, though. At this point even a single VM guest will boot slowly to iSCSI storage (EMC CX4 on the same Nexus 5020 10gig switches), and restores of VMs from iSCSI take about twice as long as we'd expect them to. Our server folks mentioned that if we split the iSCSI off onto its own NIC, performance seems significantly better. From a network perspective, I've run through the variables I can think of (port configuration errors, MTU problems, congestion etc.) and I'm coming up dry. There really is no other traffic on these hosts other than the very specific test being performed at the time. Important thing to note is that guest traffic works just fine... it seems storage is the only thing affected by whatever gremlin exists. Concluding that we're not 'overutilizing' the network infrastructure since we're doing hardly anything, I'm just looking for some helpful tips/ideas we can use to resolve this... preferably without hurling extra 10gig NICs that are going to sit around 10% utilization while we've got 70+% left on our others.

  Read the article

• VPN messes up DNS resolution

  - by user124114

  After connecting with the Kerio VPN client (OS X Leopard) to a server, the internet (~web browsing) stopped working for the client. After poking around, the issue seems to be bad DNS server (i.e., entering IPs directly works). After disconnecting from the VPN, the invalid DNS server disappears from scutil --dns and all's well again. Now, I don't understand why OS X on the client even changes the DNS settings -- internet should be routed through a different interface, through the default gateway, not through the VPN. Questions: By what mechanism does connecting the VPN client change the "default" DNS server? How can I stop the VPN client from changing routing/DNS rules? Where is this stuff stored/modified? Before VPN: $ scutil --dns DNS configuration resolver #1 nameserver[0] : 10.66.77.1 # <---- default gateway = home router; all good order : 200000 resolver #2 domain : local options : mdns timeout : 2 order : 300000 ... VPN connected: $ scutil --dns DNS configuration resolver #1 nameserver[0] : 192.168.1.1 # <--- rubbish nameserver[1] : 192.168.2.1 order : 200000 resolver #2 domain : local options : mdns timeout : 2 order : 300000 ... The VPN doesn't appear among $ networksetup -listallnetworkservices.

  Read the article

• Require and Includes not Functioning Nginx Fpm/FastCGI

  - by Vince Kronlein

  I've split up my FPM pools so that php will run under each individual user and set the routing correctly in my vhost.conf files to pass the proper port number. But I must have something incorrect in my environment because on this new domain I set up, require, require_once, include, include_once do not function, or rather, they may not be getting passed up to the interpreter to be rendered as php. Since I already have a Wordpress install on this server that runs perfectly, I'm pretty sure the error is in my server block for nginx. server { server_name www.domain.com; rewrite ^(.*) http://domain.com$1 permanent; } server { listen 80; server_name domain.com; client_max_body_size 500M; index index.php index.html index.htm; root /home/username/public_html; location / { try_files $uri $uri/ index.php; } location ~ \.php$ { if (!-e $request_filename) { rewrite ^(.*)$ /index.php?name=$1 break; } fastcgi_pass 127.0.0.1:9002; fastcgi_index index.php; fastcgi_param SCRIPT_FILENAME $document_root$fastcgi_script_name; include fastcgi_params; } location ~ /\.ht { deny all; } } The problem I'm finding I think is that there are dynamic calls to the doc root index file, while all calls to anything within a sub-folder should be routed as normal ie: NOT passed to index.php. I can't seem to find the right mix here. It should run like so: domain.com/cindy (file doesn't exist) --> index.php?name=$1 domain.com/admin/anyfile.php (files DO exist) --> admin/anyfile.php?$args

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20  | Next Page >