Search Results

Search found 20448 results on 818 pages for 'ip address'.

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

Page 140/818 | < Previous Page | 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147  | Next Page >

  • Twisted: how-to bind a server to a specified IP address? (solved)

    - by daccle
    I want to have a twisted service (started via twistd) which listens to TCP/POST request on a specified port on a specified IP address. By now I have a twisted application which listens to port 8040 on localhost. It is running fine, but I want it to only listen to a certain IP address, say 10.0.0.78. How-to manage that? This is a snippet of my code: application = service.Application('SMS_Inbound') smsInbound = resource.Resource() smsInbound.putChild('75sms_inbound',ReceiveSMS(application)) smsInboundServer = internet.TCPServer(8001, webserver.Site(smsInbound)) smsInboundServer.setName("SMS Handling") smsInboundServer.setServiceParent(application)

    Read the article

  • Having problem with a crawl service in .net: Server not responding to IP ping. Is it bandwidth or ht

    - by Hamid
    Hi to all I develop web crawling service (windows service / multi-thread) . its work fine, but sometimes my server network not response. and i can't ping server IP (from internet), but can ping by other network card (local ip) that not access to internet. after i open server with remote desktop and stop crawling service. i could ping. What's my problem? Bandwidth limit or max connection limit exceed or ??? how to prevent this issue? Note: when this problem occur, i open browser for browse web site, but can't open any website!!! Could you please help me. Thanks in advanced

    Read the article

  • Qmail Patching Makes me Nervous

    - by JM4
    We have a system running CentOS 5 with Plesk 8.6 and Qmail running. Our primary domain is hosted through Media Temple. When Plesk and Qmail are hosted on a single Dedicated Virtual server, it reads the primary server IP and domain and reports that when sending emails from the system. Our pages are written in PHP so we are using the mail() function. While our email goes out to everybody, several enterprise email domains reject our email because it shows a different originating IP (our primary server IP and domain) than the domain we list in the 'from' address. This is not modifiable. Every domain we own of course does have its own IP as well underneath our primary server IP. I have seen several places online that provide a patch, specifically - which allows Domain Binding: "DomainBindings -- For servers that host multiple domains or have multiple IP addresses assigned to them, it is sometimes useful (or important) to have qmail use a specific IP address for its outgoing mail. By default, qmail uses whatever address the OS chooses for all outbound connections. With this patch, you can specify which address to use. It uses a control file similar to smtproutes to specify the outbound IP address to use, based on the sender's domain (local copy) (pyropus.ca)" Qmail Link First off I do not have netqmail installed so I'll need to find another source, but also I am completely unfamiliar with applying patches to qmail. Will I lose email services if I patch? Is it a simple apply and use process? Will my existing email accounts and data be restored after the patch? I am very, very new to unix/linux so this does make me a bit nervous but I am the only person who can make the change and it is one our company "HAS" to have. Any ideas?

    Read the article

  • Trouble with local id / remote id configuration of VPN

    - by Lynn Owens
    I have a NetGear UTM firewall and a Windows machine running NetGear's VPN client. The Windows machine I can put on the UTM network and take off of it. When I am cabled into the local (internal) the following configuration works: UTM: Local Id: Local Wan IP: (The UTM's WAN IP address) Remote Id: User FQDN: utm_remote1.com Client: Local Id: DNS: utm_remote1.com Remote Id: (The UTM's WAN IP address) Gateway authentication: preshared key Policy remote endpoint: FQDN: utm_remote1.com But when I'm off the UTM's internal local network and simply coming in from the internet, this does not work. It simply repeats SEND phase 1 before giving up. Since I know that the UTM WAN IP is accessible from both inside and outside the network, I figured the problem was with the Client local id. So, I tried the following: UTM: Local Id: Local Wan IP: (The UTM's WAN IP address) Remote Id: (A DN of a self-signed certificate I created for the client and uploaded into the UTM certificates) Client: Local Id: (The DN of the aforementioned self signed cert) Remote Id: (The UTM's WAN IP address) Gateway authentication: (the aforementioned self signed cert) Policy remote end point: ... er, ... my choices are IP and FQDN.... Not sure what to put here No matter what I've tried, it just keeps repeating the SEND phase 1. Any ideas?

    Read the article

  • DHCP forwarding behind access list on a Cisco Catalyst

    - by Ásgeir Bjarnason
    I'm having some trouble with forwarding DHCP from a subnet behind an access list on a Cisco Catalyst 4500 switch. I'm hoping somebody can see the mistake I'm making. The subnet is defined like this: (first three octets of IP addresses and vrf name anonymized) interface Vlan40 ip vrf forwarding vrf_name ip address 10.10.10.126 255.255.255.0 secondary ip address 10.10.10.254 255.255.255.0 ip access-group 100 out ip helper-address 10.10.20.36 no ip redirects I tried turning on a VMWare machine on this subnet that was configured to use DHCP, but I never got a DHCP response and the DHCP server didn't receive a request. I tried putting the following in the access-list: access-list 100 permit udp host 10.10.10.254 host 10.10.20.36 eq bootps access-list 100 permit udp host 10.10.10.254 host 10.10.20.36 eq bootpc access-list 100 permit udp host 10.10.20.36 host 10.10.10.254 eq bootps access-list 100 permit udp host 10.10.20.36 host 10.10.10.254 eq bootpc That didn't help. Can anybody see what the problem is? I know that the DHCP server works; our whole network is running off of this DHCP server I also know that the subnet works because we have active servers running on the network The DHCP scope is already defined on the DHCP server The subnet is correctly defined on the VMWare server (already servers running on the subnet on VMWare) Edit 2012-10-19: This is solved! The subnet had formerly been defined as a /25 network, but was then expanded into a /24 network. When the DHCP scope was altered after this change it was done incorrectly; the gateway was moved to .254, the leasable IP range was in the lower half of the /24 subnet but we forgot to change the CIDR prefix from /25 into /24. This happened some 2 years ago, and we didn't need to use DHCP on this server network again until this week. Thank you MDMarra and Jason Seemann for looking at the question and trying to troubleshoot. Now I'm wondering if I should mark Jason's answer as the accepted answer (I am new to the Stack Exchange network, so I don't know the etiquette of what to do if I misstated the question like in this case).

    Read the article

  • Problem with TL-R480T+ and static routes

    - by Globulopolis
    Hi! I've some question about this router. Before starting, some configurations, specified by my provider. Wan1 VPN IP - 192.168.172.84 Mask - 255.255.255.0 Gateway - 192.168.172.253 DNS - 195.110.6.7 Wan2 Dynamic IP DHCP - 168.120.1.34 Mask - 255.255.255.0 Router IP 192.168.1.1 Computer IP 192.168.1.7 Routes: route -p add 192.168.0.0 mask 255.255.0.0 192.168.172.253 route -p add 195.110.6.0 mask 255.255.254.0 192.168.172.253 route -p add 88.135.112.0 mask 255.255.240.0 192.168.172.253 route -p add 178.219.160.0 mask 255.255.240.0 192.168.172.253 For first provider I need to provide a routes. 'Cause router does not support different routes for different WAN interfaces I put them in "Static routes". But when I try to save them I've got an error: Destination IP address can not be set in a same subnet with the WAN or LAN IP address. If I change IP's to local like 192.168.x.x router tell me: Gateway must be set in a same subnet with WAN or LAN IP address. Changing mask on WAN1 interface to 255.255.0.0 doesn't help. Any ideas? PS! Or maybe I'm must email to TP-Link support?

    Read the article

  • New router messed up server 2003 setup...

    - by Aceth
    Hey, We were sent a new 2wire router today configured it as best we can to match the old bt voyager. We've also got X static IP's. We've manage to get our webserver on one of the new IP's public facing. then we use a hardware firewall which is in a DMZ again with a different static IP. This firewall then is our gateway for our internal LAN. with a few servers etc. The problem we're having is only our PDC (primary Domain controller which has exchange 2003 on) can't ping externally even an external IP. We've connected laptops to the 2wire router and obtain a private ip 192.168.1.X and it works fine can ping etc. our other servers with an internal ip behind the firewall can ping out fine. We've connected to the firewalls logging console and the pings from the server are allowed through so its fine there. The server in question is a Windows server 2003 R2 Enterprise SP2 + Exchange 2003 Server doesn't have firewall turned on. it has static private IP .. gateway is pointing to the right one External Static IP is routing fine inwards We've ran out of ideas .. help??

    Read the article

  • OpenVPN IPV6 Tunnel Radvd

    - by Arenstar
    Hello.. I have an interesting question regarding ipv6 + openvpn.. My Version is OpenVPN 2.1.1 i have been given a native /64 ipv6 network ( for this example 2001:acb:132:acb::/64 ) The plan was/is, route this block through openvpn and into an office ( for testing purposes ) Soo to explain.. I have a Centos Box as the first linux "router" in a datacenter & a Ubuntu box as the second linux "router" in the office I have created a simple point-to-point tunnel using tun ( based off ipv4 address to start the tunnel ) I have assigned to Centos /sbin/ip addr add fed1::1/128 dev eth0 /sbin/ip addr add fed2::2/128 dev tun0 /sbin/ip route add 2001:acb:132:acb::/64 dev tun0 ## ipv6 Block down the tunnel /sbin/ip route add ::/0 dev eth0 ## Default out to Gateway I have assigned to Ubuntu /sbin/ip addr add fed1::3/128 dev tun0 /sbin/ip addr add fed1::4/128 dev eth0 /sbin/ip route add 2001:acb:132:acb::/64 dev eth0 ## ipv6 Block down to eth0 /sbin/ip route add ::/0 dev tun0 ## Default up the tunnel I have also included on both servers.. sysctl -w net.inet6.ip6.forwarding=1 Looks Good... right??? Wrong.. :( I am not able to ping fed1::1 from fed1::4 (Ubuntu) (can ping :4,:3,:2) However, i can ping fed1::1 fed1::2 from :3 ?????? ( very strange ) I am able to access the internet from any ipv6 interface on the Centos Box but clearly not from the Ubuntu box.. Further, i will eventually run radvd on the Ubuntu box eth0, and autoconf the network with ipv6 address's Anyone with some advice / tips to help me out.. ??? Cheers

    Read the article

  • pfSense router on a LAN with two gateways

    - by JohnCC
    I have a LAN with an ADSL modem/router on it. We have just gained an alternative high-speed internet connection at our location, and I want to connect the LAN to it, eventually dropping the ADSL. I've chosen to use a small PFSense box to connect the LAN to the new WAN connection. Two servers on the LAN run services accessible to the outside via NAT using the single ADSL WAN IP. We have DNS records which point to this IP. I want to do the same via the new connection, using the WAN IP there. That connection permits multiple IPs, so I have configured pfSense using virtual IP's, 1:1 NAT and appropriate firewall rules. When I change the servers' default gateway settings to the pfSense box, I can access the services via the new WAN IPs without a problem. However, I can no longer access them via the old WAN IP. If I set the servers' default gateway back to the ADSL router, then the opposite is true - I can access the services via the ADSL IP, but not via the new one. In the first case, I believe this is because an incoming SYN packet arrives at the ADSL WAN IP, and is NAT'd and sent to the internal IP of the server. The server responds with a SYN/ACK which it sends via its default gateway, the pfSense box. The pfSense box sees a SYN/ACK that it saw no SYN for and drops the packet. Is there any sensible way around this? I would like the services to be accessible via both IPs for a short period at least, since once I change the DNS it will take a while before everyone picks up the new address.

    Read the article

  • DNS failover in a two datacenter scenario

    - by wanson
    I'm trying to implement a low-cost solution for website high availability. I'm looking for the downsides of the following scenario: I have two servers with the same configuration, content, mysql replication (dual-master). They are in different datacenters - let's call them serverA and serverB. Users use serverA - serverB is more like a backup. Now, I want to use DNS failover, to switch users from serverA to serverB when serverA goes down. My idea is that I setup DNS servers (bind/powerdns) on serverA and serverB - let's call them ns1.website.com and ns2.website.com (assuming I own website.com). Then I configure my domain to use them as its nameservers. Both DNS servers will return serverA IP as my website's IP. If serverA goes down I can (either manually or automatically from serverB) change configuration of serverB's DNS, to return IP of serverB as website's IP. Of course the TTL will be low, as it's supposed to be in DNS failovers. I know that it may take some time to switch to serverB (DNS ttl, time to detect serverA failure, serverB DNS reconfiguration etc), and that some small part of users won't use serverB anyway. And I'm OK with that. But what are other downsides of such an approach? An alternative scenario is that ns1.website.com will return serverA IP as website's IP, and ns2.website.com will return serverB IP as website's IP. But AFAIK clients not always use primary nameserver and sometimes would use secondary one. So some small part of users would use serverB instead of serverA which is not quite what I'd like. Can you confirm that DNS clients behave like that and can you tell what percentage of clients would possibly use serverB instead of serverA (statistically)? This one also has the downside that when serverA goes back up, it will be automatically used as website's primary server, which is also a bad situation (cold cache, mysql replication could fail in the meantime etc). So I'm adding it only as a theoretical alternative. I was thinking about using some professional DNS failover companies but they charge for the number of DNS requests and the fees are very high (why?)

    Read the article

  • Route all wlan0 traffic over tun0

    - by Tuinslak
    I'm looking for a way to route all wlan0 traffic (tcp and udp) over tun0 (openvpn). However, all other traffic originating from the device itself should not be routed through tun0. I'm guessing this could be realized using iptables or route, but none of my options seem to work. # route add -net 0.0.0.0 gw 172.27.0.1 dev wlan0 SIOCADDRT: No such process Info: This is because the VPN server is not redundant, and wlan users are not really important. However, all services running on the device are fairly important and having a VPN virtual machine with no SLA on it is just a bad idea. Trying to minimize the odds of something going wrong. So setting the VPN server as default gateway is not really an option. I also want all wlan0 user to use the VPN server's IP address as external IP. Edit with the script provided: root@ft-genesi-xxx ~ # route -n Kernel IP routing table Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref Use Iface 172.27.0.17 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.255 UH 0 0 0 tun0 192.168.1.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth0 10.13.37.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 wlan0 172.27.0.0 172.27.0.17 255.255.192.0 UG 0 0 0 tun0 0.0.0.0 192.168.1.1 0.0.0.0 UG 0 0 0 eth0 root@ft-genesi-xxx ~ # ./test.sh RTNETLINK answers: No such process root@ft-genesi-xxx ~ # cat test.sh #!/bin/sh IP=/sbin/ip # replace with the range of your wlan network, or use fwmark instead ${IP} rule add from 10.13.37.0/24 table from-wlan ${IP} route add default dev tun0 via 127.72.0.1 table from-wlan ${IP} route add 10.13.37.0/24 dev wlan0 table from-wlan

    Read the article

  • DD-WRT Acces Point as a Router

    - by Dzh
    Following suggestion to this question asked on Network Engineering, I am asking the question here. this is an extension to my previous question (I think it was deleted), where I was claiming that DDWRT was disabling it's DHCP server once connected to the network. I was wrong, as it now seems that it is bridging itself with another parallel connected wireless router. I have two Draytek 2820 and one Netgear WG602v3 with latest DDWRT. Lets call one wired-Draytek and it has wireless disabled. The other one, let's call it wireless-Draytek, is connected to wired-Draytek and has wireless with MAC filtering enabled. Once I connect Netgear to the wired-Draytek, the client that connects to Netgear, will be assigned with IP address from the wireless-Draytek. If the MAC address is not on the wireles-Draytek, the client is unable to obtain IP address and has no connectivity at all, even with manually assigned static IP configuration. To illustrate further, this is how network is set up: wired-Draytek ---------- wireless-Draytek \_________ Netgear What I wish to have, is that Netgear issues IP addresses from it's own IP pool and ignores the MAC filtering rules from wireless-Draytek. This is kind of puzzling how this they are bridging (if they are) themselves automatically. Thanks. UPDATE: It's not a home network. I gave you a bit simplified set-up. If there is a better site on Stack Exchange to ask this, please let me know. The Drayteks are running stock firmware, it's only Netgear that I've flashed to get more stability. In addition to these routers, I have also three 3COM Baseline switch 2824, and another Draytek router with Prosafe FS752TP PoE switch dedicated for VoIP phones. Wired-Draytek has IP 10.0.0.1, DHCP disabled as there is AD DC which is issuing IP addresses. Wireless-Draytek has IP 1.1.1.1 and DHCP enabled. Netgear has default - 192.168.1.1. As per suggestion, the specific question is - how do I isolate these two wireless routers?

    Read the article

  • How to troubleshoot Linksys E4200 Remote Management

    - by Jordan
    My Linksys E4200 is configured for Remote Management, but the router is not accepting the connections. Here's the configuration under Administration Management Remote Management Access: Remote Management: Enabled Access via: HTTP Remote Upgrade: Disabled Allowed Remote IP Address: Any IP Address Remote Management Port: 8080 The router is setup to use 192.168.10.41 as its static Internet IP address, and 192.168.35.1 as its LAN IP address. I can access the router just fine via its LAN IP address, but I can't make a connection using http://192.168.10.41:8080. I've tried variations of the settings above (enabled HTTPS, enabled Remote Upgrade, set an IP range of 192.168.10.1-254) but nothing has worked yet. Hoping someone can at least point me in the right direction. Thanks. Update: To clarify, I have a wired router that connects straight to the T1 modem. It's configured to use 192.168.10.1-254 as its internal LAN range. The E4200 wireless router in question is on that LAN using 192.168.10.41 as its WAN IP address. The E4200's internal LAN range is 192.168.35.1-254. I'm not trying to access the E4200 from the Internet, I'm just trying to access it from its WAN IP address. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Nginx Multiple If Statements Cause Memory Usage to Jump

    - by Justin Kulesza
    We need to block a large number of requests by IP address with nginx. The requests are proxied by a CDN, and so we cannot block with the actual client IP address (it would be the IP address of the CDN, not the actual client). So, we have $http_x_forwarded_for which contains the IP which we need to block for a given request. Similarly, we cannot use IP tables, as blocking the IP address of the proxied client will have no effect. We need to use nginx to block the requested based on the value of $http_x_forwarded_for. Initially, we tried multiple, simple if statements: http://pastie.org/5110910 However, this caused our nginx memory usage to jump considerably. We went from somewhere around a 40MB resident size to over a 200MB resident size. If we changed things up, and created one large regex that matched the necessary IP addresses, memory usage was fairly normal: http://pastie.org/5110923 Keep in mind that we're trying to block many more than 3 or 4 IP addresses... more like 50 to 100, which may be included in several (20+) nginx server configuration blocks. Thoughts? Suggestions? I'm interested both in why memory usage would spike so greatly using multiple if blocks, and also if there are any better ways to achieve our goal.

    Read the article

  • Domino HTTP Server: Error - Unable to Bind 1.2.3.4, port 80, port in use or Bind To Host configuration specifies a duplicate IP address/host

    - by pdewaard
    We have a Domino 9.0.1 Server hosted on Ubuntu 14.04 Server, which hosts several other http based Tasks, (Nginx, Couchdb, Confluence on Tomcat). The Ubuntu Server has multiple IPs, all bind correctly to the different Tasks. The Domino SMTP task binds correctly and is working well. All http tasks (other than Domino) are proxied behind Nginx version 1.6x and all are working well, netstat shows no 0.0.0.0 bindings, no one is listening on 1.2.3.4:80 . when I try to load http on the (Domino) server console it failes with HTTP Server: Error - Unable to Bind 1.2.3.4, port 80, port in use or Bind To Host configuration specifies a duplicate IP address/host a couple of times, may be 4 or 5 times then it loads without failure! And: when it comes up, I see http is listening on 80 AND 443, but SSL Connections are not working, nor any error log! It must be a kind of bad magic :-( thanks in advance Pitt

    Read the article

  • How to set a management IP on a Dell powerconnect 5524/5548 switch?

    - by John Little
    When you first power on a 5524, connected via the serial console, you are offered a setup wizard where you can enter the management IP/Net/Gateway and enter the admin password. HOWEVER, if you dont do this in 60 seconds, the wizard dissapears, and there seems to be no way to run it again - even if you reboot the box. No commands work in the CLI, it just gives you this prompt: If you type say enable, or login, it gives: >login Unknown parameter May be one from the following list: debug help So no commands seem to work. The CLI reference guide does not seem to have any way to run the wizard, or to set the management port or admin passwords. So by not responding in 60 secons after boot, the unit is bricked. Any ideas?

    Read the article

  • IP addresses for Windows Azure servers seem to be from the US, when the servers are supposed to be located in Europe

    - by paradroid
    I have a couple of test servers on Windows Azure. One is in the North Europe location and the other is in West Europe. I yet to get around to testing which location offers better connection speeds from where I am (London, UK). The Northern Europe Azure datacentre is apparently in Ireland and the West Europe datacentre is in the Netherlands, which is weird in itself I think. But what I am confused about are the IP addresses are both 168.63.xxx.xxx. GeoIP lookup says that they are both located in the US, and traceroute from London to the addresses get to the US before failing to respond pings. What's going on?

    Read the article

  • if I put accept all 0.0.0.0/0 means this server is totally open for any ip ?

    - by davyzhang
    ACCEPT all -- 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 is this means allow all ip from all port? but I still can not visit the server except I go through the allowed ip address and if I put this line in any line, did I make this server totally open for any connection? the full iptable list is below Chain INPUT (policy ACCEPT) target prot opt source destination ACCEPT all -- 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 ACCEPT all -- 116.211.25.89 0.0.0.0/0 ACCEPT all -- 222.215.136.8 0.0.0.0/0 ACCEPT all -- 125.82.87.21 0.0.0.0/0 ACCEPT all -- 127.0.0.1 127.0.0.1 ACCEPT tcp -- 61.172.251.109 0.0.0.0/0 tcp spt:8080 ACCEPT tcp -- 61.172.254.123 0.0.0.0/0 tcp spt:8080 ACCEPT tcp -- 61.129.44.191 0.0.0.0/0 ACCEPT tcp -- 61.129.44.128 0.0.0.0/0 ACCEPT tcp -- 61.172.251.109 0.0.0.0/0 tcp spt:8080 ACCEPT tcp -- 61.172.254.123 0.0.0.0/0 tcp spt:8080 ACCEPT icmp -- 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 icmp type 0 ACCEPT icmp -- 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 icmp type 8 ACCEPT tcp -- 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 tcp spt:53 ACCEPT udp -- 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 udp spt:53 ACCEPT udp -- 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 udp spt:123 ACCEPT udp -- 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 udp dpt:123 ACCEPT tcp -- 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 tcp spt:20 ACCEPT tcp -- 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 tcp spt:21 ACCEPT tcp -- 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 tcp spt:80 ACCEPT tcp -- 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 tcp spt:88 ACCEPT tcp -- 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 tcp spt:8000 ACCEPT tcp -- 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 tcp spt:8080 ACCEPT tcp -- 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 tcp spt:8888 ACCEPT tcp -- 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 tcp spt:873 ACCEPT tcp -- 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 tcp spt:6969 ACCEPT tcp -- 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 tcp spt:6900 ACCEPT tcp -- 61.172.241.98 0.0.0.0/0 ACCEPT tcp -- 61.172.247.98 0.0.0.0/0 ACCEPT tcp -- 61.172.247.100 0.0.0.0/0 ACCEPT tcp -- 61.152.122.33 0.0.0.0/0 ACCEPT tcp -- 61.152.110.130 0.0.0.0/0 ACCEPT tcp -- 210.51.28.220 0.0.0.0/0 ACCEPT tcp -- 210.51.28.120 0.0.0.0/0 ACCEPT tcp -- 61.172.241.120 0.0.0.0/0 ACCEPT tcp -- 211.147.0.85 0.0.0.0/0 ACCEPT tcp -- 211.147.0.114 0.0.0.0/0 ACCEPT tcp -- 222.73.61.249 0.0.0.0/0 ACCEPT tcp -- 222.73.61.250 0.0.0.0/0 ACCEPT tcp -- 222.73.61.251 0.0.0.0/0 ACCEPT tcp -- 210.51.31.11 0.0.0.0/0 tcp dpt:38422 ACCEPT tcp -- 210.51.31.12 0.0.0.0/0 tcp dpt:38422 ACCEPT tcp -- 61.172.254.123 0.0.0.0/0 tcp spt:8080 ACCEPT tcp -- 61.172.251.109 0.0.0.0/0 tcp spt:8080 ACCEPT tcp -- 61.172.247.85 0.0.0.0/0 ACCEPT tcp -- 222.73.12.248 0.0.0.0/0 ACCEPT tcp -- 61.172.254.184 0.0.0.0/0 ACCEPT tcp -- 61.172.254.78 0.0.0.0/0 ACCEPT tcp -- 61.172.254.243 0.0.0.0/0 ACCEPT tcp -- 61.152.97.115 0.0.0.0/0 ACCEPT tcp -- 221.231.128.206 0.0.0.0/0 ACCEPT tcp -- 221.231.130.199 0.0.0.0/0 ACCEPT udp -- 172.0.0.0/8 0.0.0.0/0 udp dpt:161 ACCEPT udp -- 10.0.0.0/8 0.0.0.0/0 udp dpt:161 ACCEPT udp -- 192.168.0.0/16 0.0.0.0/0 udp dpt:161 ACCEPT udp -- 61.172.252.58 0.0.0.0/0 udp dpt:161 ACCEPT udp -- 61.183.13.201 0.0.0.0/0 udp dpt:161 ACCEPT udp -- 222.73.2.11 0.0.0.0/0 udp dpt:161 ACCEPT udp -- 221.208.157.158 0.0.0.0/0 udp dpt:161 ACCEPT udp -- 218.30.74.250 0.0.0.0/0 udp dpt:161 ACCEPT udp -- 202.102.54.234 0.0.0.0/0 udp dpt:161 ACCEPT udp -- 125.64.2.115 0.0.0.0/0 udp dpt:161 ACCEPT udp -- 222.73.23.23 0.0.0.0/0 udp dpt:161 ACCEPT udp -- 210.51.33.97 0.0.0.0/0 udp dpt:161 ACCEPT udp -- 210.51.33.98 0.0.0.0/0 udp dpt:161 ACCEPT udp -- 222.73.11.112 0.0.0.0/0 udp dpt:161 ACCEPT udp -- 222.73.11.111 0.0.0.0/0 udp dpt:161 ACCEPT udp -- 222.73.11.89 0.0.0.0/0 udp spt:38514 DROP tcp -- 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 tcp dpt:38423 REJECT tcp -- 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 reject-with tcp-reset DROP all -- 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 Chain FORWARD (policy ACCEPT) target prot opt source destination DROP all -- 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 Chain OUTPUT (policy ACCEPT) target prot opt source destination ACCEPT udp -- 0.0.0.0/0 222.73.11.89 udp dpt:38514

    Read the article

  • How to disable Tcp/Ip settings in windows 7 via GPO?

    - by Akash Kava
    I have enabled following policies, "Prohibit TCP/IP advanced connection" "Prohibit access to properties of components of a LAN connection" "Enable Windows 2000 Network Connections setings for Administrators" after doing all these, all machines running windows xp, 2000 and vista have network settings properties button disabled as expected. However all machines running windows 7 have no effect, I believe there are few more steps, all Windows 7 machines are on domain and we want to control this via Domain Controler's GPO. Please let me know, what I need to do to have Windows 7 disable the properties of network connection, I am not network expert, I read few articles about what new has been added in GPO of windows 7 but I am blank. Everything works fine on Windows XP, Vista, 2003 Server. Only Windows 7 is a problem.

    Read the article

  • Good way to run commands on remote computer without its own public-facing IP address (Linux Centos)

    - by Chris Dutrow
    Have a few computers running Linux Centos 6.4. They are connected to an unmanaged switch, which in turn, is connected to a router (Verzion Fios issue). What is a good way to "log in" to one of the computers so that I can run commands? Do I need to use SSH, or something different? Since the computers do not have their own public-facing IP addresses, do I need to set up some kind of port forwarding within the router? What is a simple, reliable way to accomplish this? Thanks so much!

    Read the article

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

< Previous Page | 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147  | Next Page >