Search Results

Search found 30486 results on 1220 pages for 'network level auth'.

Page 131/1220 | < Previous Page | 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138  | Next Page >

  • Mount a remote Linux hard drive as another Windows 7 partition during boot?

    - by zhuanyi
    I would like to mount a hard drive on a remote computer (running on CentOS 6) as a Windows drive so that I can install programs to that drive. The primary hard drive for my Windows machine (which is at home) is pretty small, I have a Linux server sitting in a remote data center with a much larger hard drive and allow me to install more stuff. I know most of you are going to say Samba, unfortunately the biggest problem for me in this case is that I can not mount Samba as a network share unless I start OpenVPN or SSH tunneling first, which is not good for my case because I will install some startup programs to the remote drive as well. Therefore, the remote drive has to be ready and work just like another drive BEFORE any of the startup programs start to load. Is that possible? My home PC has Windows 7 Professional 32 bit installed and the remote server is a Xen virtual server running on CentOS 6. I have admin/root permissions for both. Thanks a lot!

    Read the article

  • Error when trying to access Shared files from iMac [closed]

    - by SatheeshJM
    I used to access all my Windows XP shared files on my Mac using Finder -- Window -- Connect to server. Now all of a sudden, an error crops up when I try to connect. I get the error "There was a problem connecting to the server "192.168.1.*" The server may not exist or it is unavailable at this time. Check the server name or IP address, check your internet connection and then try again. How can I remove this error and access my shared files from my Mac? P.S my network connections is fine.

    Read the article

  • How to temporarily disable SonicWall from connecting to the internet?

    - by Jerry Dodge
    I have been doing some extensive seeking in our SonicWall TZ-215 for the source(s) of unnecessary internet traffic, as we have issues with excessive traffic. As part of my research, I need to watch the Connections Monitor, which lists me all the current connections. This list becomes quite long, with 40+ devices on the network, it's tough to pinpoint the main causes. What I would like to do is disable the SonicWall its self from letting its internal components from connecting to anything. Is there any type of trick I can do in the Firewall which can prevent the router system from connecting to anything, to clean up the connections monitor and allow only suspicious traffic?

    Read the article

  • Shared printer can't be added

    - by Sandokan
    We have a small training network with server 2003, and XP clients and users in a AD domain. A printer is connected to a client with USB. We are trying to share the printer to all the users but it's not working. We come so far as the users can see the printer when they search for it. But when they try to add it, there appears a pop up window for user name and password. No matter what user name we try it doesn't work. We have checked the shared printer's security settings and they are all in order. Everyone has printer rights. But even with full rights it doesn't work. The only ones it works for are Domain Admins. Anyone have any ideas?

    Read the article

  • Windows 7: Shared folder over wifi working for ONLY "Guests"

    - by James_Smith
    Hi, I have a desktop and a laptop connected to same wifi router. Desktop is connected with wire and laptop with wifi. Both the system runs windows 7 and are on the same workgroup. I have shared some folders on desktop and can view the shared folder list on laptop under "network places". But when I try to open a folder, a prompt appears for username and password. When I enter BOTH username and password, It does not authenticate when I enter ONLY username, I get:- "Windows cannot access \WIn71\Setups you do not have permission to access ..." Now to get around this message I have to give access to "Guests" group on my desktop shared folder. Cant seem to figure out why It cant authenticate username with password. And giving access to "Guests" does not sounds safe!

    Read the article

  • Load-balance with LAN and Wi-Fi

    - by Synox
    I have a Mac, which runs Mac OS X 10.6 or Ubuntu 9.10 or Windows XP (Multiboot). Solution can be for any of the systems, whatever works better. I have two ISPs, one can be accessed via Wi-Fi, one can be accessed via LAN. In Mac OS X I can define the priority, which network to choose first. But what I wish to do is to load-balance with both networks. I don't want to buy extra hardware. I have some unused Wi-Fi routers if this would help. Compiling and configuring programs in Linux is no problem for me. Similar question: Load balancing with multiple gateways

    Read the article

  • Mapping printers using Group Policy Preferences; works on Windows XP, not on Windows 7 x64

    - by Graeme Donaldson
    I'm trying to use Group Policy Preferences to manage user connections to shared printers. The print server is Windows Server 2003 R2 Std edition. Several printers are installed, and I've added x64 editions of all the drivers to the print server as well. I've created a new GPO containing the printer preference settings. Printer mappings are targeted based on AD security group membership. I log on to a Windows XP PC with the Group Policy CSEs installed and the printer maps perfectly. I log on to a Windows 7 x64 PC and it doesn't map. If I manually connect to the shared printer, I get a prompt which asks me to confirm if I trust the server before installing the driver, and then it works perfectly. I have domain admin rights and my UAC settings have not been changed from the default, i.e. UAC is enabled and the default level is selected. Is the printer mapping failing because it's unable to prompt me to install the driver, or is there something else afoot?

    Read the article

  • Domino to Exchange 2007 (or 2010) Design Concerns?

    - by NickToyota
    Today we got the executive green light to proceed with changing from a Domino platform to Exchange. The business prefers Exchange for a messaging platform. (even though IMO IBM Domino is fine - if it aint broke, don't fix it but it was not my call). I have been put in charge of Domino to Exchange process goes smoothly as possible. I have also been told to put together costs for this project. I have some questions and concerns re: network design, licensing, costs: The current setup is as follows. 1 HQ office (100 users), 1 secondary office (50 users), 5 branch offices (under 10 users). 5 different email domains Windows Server 2003 functional level with a few 2008 R2 Servers Lotus Domino Notes Servers (one in each office) Ironmail Appliance Public Domino Web Mail server Majority G5+ Proliant Servers Domino Blackberry Enterprise license and server No VoIP phones What are the basic hardware requirements for Exchange 2007 or 2010? Can I simply purchase a single physical server? Will each office require an Exchange server or possibly additional servers (roles)? How is email routed to the smaller branch offices? Standard or Enterprise licenses? The business has been running Domino (messaging and application services) for over 10 years and also want Exchange to support email services, Blackberry, Outlook Web Access, possibly support for iPhone devices. Thank you Serverfault universe.

    Read the article

  • Wireless to Wireless Transfer Slow on a Linksys WRT54GL

    - by Kyle Brandt
    The Situation: When I try to transfer a file from one computer to another that are both connected via wireless on a WRT54GL (in a office) with dd-wrt firmware I often get bad speeds. In generally they average around 100 kilobytes a second. Either computer can download via wireless from the Internet at at about 2 megabytes a second. The speed is slow with the transfer of one large file. There are about 20 other wireless networks that the computers can see, so there is a lot of noise, but I don't have the equipment to really monitor the frequencies well. But that still seems pretty slow. I thought maybe it was the transmit on each card, but even when they are 5 feet away with a line of sight I still get these speeds. According to Linux both cards are operating at 54g. My Questions: Is this normal for this sort of consumer level wireless equipment? Anything I can do to improve it? why is wireless to wireless transfer slow when everything else isn't? Whats steps might I take to figure out what is happening? For example, are lots of packets not making to the access point requiring retransmissions? Above all, I want to find out what the problem actually is. This may seem odd, but at this point I am more interested in understanding what the problem is than fixing it. What I have tried: I have tried messing with lots of settings. Different channels, xmit power, G-Only, none of which has made anything any better. I've also tried upgrading to newer dd-wrt firmware version and doing a reset to wipe out the settings.

    Read the article

  • INSERT and transaction serialization in PostreSQL

    - by Alexander
    I have a question. Transaction isolation level is set to serializable. When the one user opens a transaction and INSERTs or UPDATEs data in "table1" and then another user opens a transaction and tries to INSERT data to the same table, does the second user need to wait 'til the first user commits the transaction?

    Read the article

  • NHibernate + ASP.NET + Open Session in View + L2Cache

    - by Pedro
    I am using CodeProject's well known Open Session in View to handle NHibernate Sessions. Does it works well with Level 2 Cache? Anyone has succeeded doing it? Should I use NH.Burrow instead? Any advice on l2 cache in asp.net best practices is appreciated. Edit: link to CodeProject's article: http://www.codeproject.com/KB/architecture/NHibernateBestPractices.aspx

    Read the article

  • Different cache concurrent strategies for root entity and its collection (Hibernate with EHCache)?

    - by grigory
    Given example from Hibernate docs and modifying it so that root level entity (Customer) is read-only while one of its collections (tickets) is read-write: @Entity @Cache(usage = CacheConcurrencyStrategy.READ_ONLY) public class Customer { ... @OneToMany(...) @Cache(usage = CacheConcurrencyStrategy.READ_WRITE) public SortedSet<Ticket> getTickets() { return tickets; } ... } Would collection of tickets get refreshed when accessing customer from cache?

    Read the article

  • INSERT and transaction searilization in PostreSQL

    - by Alexander
    Hello! I have a question. Transaction isolation level set to serializable. When the one user open transaction and INSERT or UPDATE data in "table1" and then another user open transaction and try to INSERT data to the same table is second user need to wait 'til the first user commits the transaction?

    Read the article

  • Access to iTunes Sound Check Results on iPhone

    - by Baldoph
    I would like to propose to the user some songs whose volume doesn't exceed a certain level. Is there any way to access to the results of the 'Sound Check' option, from the iPhone ? If not, do you know if I can calculate that with the audio tools in the iPhone SDK ? Thanks a lot.

    Read the article

  • Weird Network Behavior of Home Router

    - by Stilgar
    First of all I would like to apologize because what you are going to read will be long and confusing but I am fighting this issue for 3 days now and am out of ideas. At home I have the following setup 50Mbps Internet connects into a home router A 2 desktop computers connect to router A via standard FTP LAN cables including one where the cable is ~20m long. a second router B connects to router A via standard FTP LAN cable X (~20m long). several devices connect to the wireless network of router B and there are a couple of desktop computers connected to it through FTP LAN cables. For some reason computers connected to router B when it is connected via cable X have very slow Internet connection. It is like 5 times slower than what is expected. This is the actual problem I am trying to solve. Interesting facts If a computer is connected to cable X directly instead of through router B the Internet speed is just fine (up to the 50Mbps I get from the ISP). Tested with two computers. I have tried replacing router B with another router C and the problem persists. If I connect router B via another cable to the same ports with the same settings everything seems to work fine and computers connected to router B have quite fast Internet I have tested mainly via Speedtest.net but I have also achieved similar speeds when downloading a file The upload speed is quite higher than the download speed in all cases. Note that my ISP usually has higher upload speed (unless it manages to hit the 50Mbps cap) It seems like the speed when connecting through router B with cable X is reduced 4-5 times no matter what the original speed is. For example via router B I get 10Mbps speed to local servers where I get 50Mbps when connected on router A. If I use a distant server where the ISP is only able to provide 25Mbps I get 4-5Mbps on router B. WiFi is slower than LAN on both routers (which is normal) but the reduced speed is reduced proportionally for WiFi. In addition the upload speed is normally higher from the ISP and it is also reduced proportionally. I have tried two different network configurations. One where I have NAT behind NAT where router B connects to router A via the WAN port and has its own DHCP. Second where router B connects to router A via standard LAN port and has DHCP disabled. In this configuration router B serves as a switch and the Network Gateway for computers connected to router B is the internal IP address of router A. Both configurations work just fine but both manifest the reduced speed issue. pings seem to work just fine As far as I can tell none of the cables is crossed The RJ45 setup for cable X orange orange-white brown brow-white blue blue-white green green-white This is a big problem for me since cable X passes through walls and floors and is very hard to replace. I also may have gotten some of the facts wrong because I am almost going crazy with this issue and testing includes going several floors up and down the staircase. One hypothesis I came up with is that the cable is defective in such a way that the voltage from the router affects its performance. When it is connected to a computer it performs just fine but the router has less power. Related hypothesis includes the cable being affected by electricity cables in the walls when the voltage is low. (I know nothing about electricity) So any ideas what to do, what to test or what the issue may be?

    Read the article

  • Does this prove a network bandwidth bottleneck?

    - by Yuji Tomita
    I've incorrectly assumed that my internal AB testing means my server can handle 1k concurrency @3k hits per second. My theory at at the moment is that the network is the bottleneck. The server can't send enough data fast enough. External testing from blitz.io at 1k concurrency shows my hits/s capping off at 180, with pages taking longer and longer to respond as the server is only able to return 180 per second. I've served a blank file from nginx and benched it: it scales 1:1 with concurrency. Now to rule out IO / memcached bottlenecks (nginx normally pulls from memcached), I serve up a static version of the cached page from the filesystem. The results are very similar to my original test; I'm capped at around 180 RPS. Splitting the HTML page in half gives me double the RPS, so it's definitely limited by the size of the page. If I internally ApacheBench from the local server, I get consistent results of around 4k RPS on both the Full Page and the Half Page, at high transfer rates. Transfer rate: 62586.14 [Kbytes/sec] received If I AB from an external server, I get around 180RPS - same as the blitz.io results. How do I know it's not intentional throttling? If I benchmark from multiple external servers, all results become poor which leads me to believe the problem is in MY servers outbound traffic, not a download speed issue with my benchmarking servers / blitz.io. So I'm back to my conclusion that my server can't send data fast enough. Am I right? Are there other ways to interpret this data? Is the solution/optimization to set up multiple servers + load balancing that can each serve 180 hits per second? I'm quite new to server optimization, so I'd appreciate any confirmation interpreting this data. Outbound traffic Here's more information about the outbound bandwidth: The network graph shows a maximum output of 16 Mb/s: 16 megabits per second. Doesn't sound like much at all. Due to a suggestion about throttling, I looked into this and found that linode has a 50mbps cap (which I'm not even close to hitting, apparently). I had it raised to 100mbps. Since linode caps my traffic, and I'm not even hitting it, does this mean that my server should indeed be capable of outputting up to 100mbps but is limited by some other internal bottleneck? I just don't understand how networks at this large of a scale work; can they literally send data as fast as they can read from the HDD? Is the network pipe that big? In conclusion 1: Based on the above, I'm thinking I can definitely raise my 180RPS by adding an nginx load balancer on top of a multi nginx server setup at exactly 180RPS per server behind the LB. 2: If linode has a 50/100mbit limit that I'm not hitting at all, there must be something I can do to hit that limit with my single server setup. If I can read / transmit data fast enough locally, and linode even bothers to have a 50mbit/100mbit cap, there must be an internal bottleneck that's not allowing me to hit those caps that I'm not sure how to detect. Correct? I realize the question is huge and vague now, but I'm not sure how to condense it. Any input is appreciated on any conclusion I've made.

    Read the article

  • What to filter when providing very limited open WiFi to a small conference or meeting?

    - by Tim Farley
    Executive Summary The basic question is: if you have a very limited bandwidth WiFi to provide Internet for a small meeting of only a day or two, how do you set the filters on the router to avoid one or two users monopolizing all the available bandwidth? For folks who don't have the time to read the details below, I am NOT looking for any of these answers: Secure the router and only let a few trusted people use it Tell everyone to turn off unused services & generally police themselves Monitor the traffic with a sniffer and add filters as needed I am aware of all of that. None are appropriate for reasons that will become clear. ALSO NOTE: There is already a question concerning providing adequate WiFi at large (500 attendees) conferences here. This question concerns SMALL meetings of less than 200 people, typically with less than half that using the WiFi. Something that can be handled with a single home or small office router. Background I've used a 3G/4G router device to provide WiFi to small meetings in the past with some success. By small I mean single-room conferences or meetings on the order of a barcamp or Skepticamp or user group meeting. These meetings sometimes have technical attendees there, but not exclusively. Usually less than half to a third of the attendees will actually use the WiFi. Maximum meeting size I'm talking about is 100 to 200 people. I typically use a Cradlepoint MBR-1000 but many other devices exist, especially all-in-one units supplied by 3G and/or 4G vendors like Verizon, Sprint and Clear. These devices take a 3G or 4G internet connection and fan it out to multiple users using WiFi. One key aspect of providing net access this way is the limited bandwidth available over 3G/4G. Even with something like the Cradlepoint which can load-balance multiple radios, you are only going to achieve a few megabits of download speed and maybe a megabit or so of upload speed. That's a best case scenario. Often it is considerably slower. The goal in most of these meeting situations is to allow folks access to services like email, web, social media, chat services and so on. This is so they can live-blog or live-tweet the proceedings, or simply chat online or otherwise stay in touch (with both attendees and non-attendees) while the meeting proceeds. I would like to limit the services provided by the router to just those services that meet those needs. Problems In particular I have noticed a couple of scenarios where particular users end up abusing most of the bandwidth on the router, to the detriment of everyone. These boil into two areas: Intentional use. Folks looking at YouTube videos, downloading podcasts to their iPod, and otherwise using the bandwidth for things that really aren't appropriate in a meeting room where you should be paying attention to the speaker and/or interacting.At one meeting that we were live-streaming (over a separate, dedicated connection) via UStream, I noticed several folks in the room that had the UStream page up so they could interact with the meeting chat - apparently oblivious that they were wasting bandwidth streaming back video of something that was taking place right in front of them. Unintentional use. There are a variety of software utilities that will make extensive use of bandwidth in the background, that folks often have installed on their laptops and smartphones, perhaps without realizing.Examples: Peer to peer downloading programs such as Bittorrent that run in the background Automatic software update services. These are legion, as every major software vendor has their own, so one can easily have Microsoft, Apple, Mozilla, Adobe, Google and others all trying to download updates in the background. Security software that downloads new signatures such as anti-virus, anti-malware, etc. Backup software and other software that "syncs" in the background to cloud services. For some numbers on how much network bandwidth gets sucked up by these non-web, non-email type services, check out this recent Wired article. Apparently web, email and chat all together are less than one quarter of the Internet traffic now. If the numbers in that article are correct, by filtering out all the other stuff I should be able to increase the usefulness of the WiFi four-fold. Now, in some situations I've been able to control access using security on the router to limit it to a very small group of people (typically the organizers of the meeting). But that's not always appropriate. At an upcoming meeting I would like to run the WiFi without security and let anyone use it, because it happens at the meeting location the 4G coverage in my town is particularly excellent. In a recent test I got 10 Megabits down at the meeting site. The "tell people to police themselves" solution mentioned at top is not appropriate because of (a) a largely non-technical audience and (b) the unintentional nature of much of the usage as described above. The "run a sniffer and filter as needed" solution is not useful because these meetings typically only last a couple of days, often only one day, and have a very small volunteer staff. I don't have a person to dedicate to network monitoring, and by the time we got the rules tweaked completely the meeting will be over. What I've Got First thing, I figured I would use OpenDNS's domain filtering rules to filter out whole classes of sites. A number of video and peer-to-peer sites can be wiped out using this. (Yes, I am aware that filtering via DNS technically leaves the services accessible - remember, these are largely non-technical users attending a 2 day meeting. It's enough). I figured I would start with these selections in OpenDNS's UI: I figure I will probably also block DNS (port 53) to anything other than the router itself, so that folks can't bypass my DNS configuration. A savvy user could get around this, because I'm not going to put a lot of elaborate filters on the firewall, but I don't care too much. Because these meetings don't last very long, its probably not going to be worth the trouble. This should cover the bulk of the non-web traffic, i.e. peer-to-peer and video if that Wired article is correct. Please advise if you think there are severe limitations to the OpenDNS approach. What I Need Note that OpenDNS focuses on things that are "objectionable" in some context or another. Video, music, radio and peer-to-peer all get covered. I still need to cover a number of perfectly reasonable things that we just want to block because they aren't needed in a meeting. Most of these are utilities that upload or download legit things in the background. Specifically, I'd like to know port numbers or DNS names to filter in order to effectively disable the following services: Microsoft automatic updates Apple automatic updates Adobe automatic updates Google automatic updates Other major software update services Major virus/malware/security signature updates Major background backup services Other services that run in the background and can eat lots of bandwidth I also would like any other suggestions you might have that would be applicable. Sorry to be so verbose, but I find it helps to be very, very clear on questions of this nature, and I already have half a solution with the OpenDNS thing.

    Read the article

  • Good C# Networking Book

    - by Dan
    Hey guys I am looking for a good solid introduction book to the fundementals of network programming in C#. For example is have looked at this one http://www.amazon.com/C-Network-Programming-Richard-Blum/dp/0782141765/ref=pd_sim_b_5 but it is quite old now. Anyone used one recently, i would greatly appriciate it thanks dan

    Read the article

  • Per Application Packet Analyzer

    - by Anindya Chatterjee
    Is there any tool which can analyze network traffic per application? Wireshark does not have per application filtering, fiddler also does not give proper logging for any application. So can anyone please help me out to find an app which can analyze network traffic originating from a random application and log the traffic for that particular application only?

    Read the article

  • What is the iPhone simulator IP address?

    - by Chris G
    Hi I have been looking for the answer to this question for some time. I am doing network programming for the iPhone and it is necessary for me to use the IP address of the device. This isn't a problem on the physical device as it has its own IP address on the network. However I was wondering what was the case with it on the simulator. Does it get assigned an IP address to be used? Thanks in advanced for any help, CG

    Read the article

  • Account sharing among Ubuntu machines

    - by muckabout
    I'd like a simple and secure system to have allow users in our network to have their account (e.g., 'myname') work on every machine in the network (e.g., such that they could ssh to any machine and have the same userid, mounted smb share). Any suggestions?

    Read the article

  • C# - NetworkChangeEventHandler

    - by Andy
    I have small application which catches Network Availability change and its working very fine in client Desktop m/c (which is having XP) But when I tested the same in Vista by disabling the network and enabling it again..the event is not getting triggered. NetworkChange.NetworkAvailabilityChanged += new NetworkAvailabilityChangedEventHandler(NetworkChange_NetworkAvailabilityChanged); private void NetworkChange_NetworkAvailabilityChanged(object sender, NetworkAvailabilityEventArgs e) {.....} Does .Net framework 3.5 got any new solution introduced ...

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138  | Next Page >