Search Results

Search found 17476 results on 700 pages for 'static route'.

Page 143/700 | < Previous Page | 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150  | Next Page >

  • Routing table with two NIC adapters in libvirt/KVM

    - by lzap
    I created a virtual NAT network (192.168.100.0/24 network) in my libvirt and new guest with two interfaces - one in this network, one as bridged (10.34.1.0/24 network) to the local LAN. The reason for that is I need to have my own virtual network for my DHCP/TFTP/DNS testing and still want to access my guest externally from my LAN. On both networks I have working DHCP, both giving them IP addresses. When I setup NAT port forwarding (e.g. for ssh), I can connect to the eth0 (virtual network), everything is fine. But when I try to access the eth1 via bridged interface, I have no response. I guess I have problem with my routing table - outgoing packets are routed to the virtual NAT network (which has access to the machine I am connecting from - I can ping it). But I am not sure if this setup is correct. I think I need to add something to my routing table. # ifconfig eth0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 52:54:00:B4:A7:5F inet addr:192.168.100.14 Bcast:192.168.100.255 Mask:255.255.255.0 inet6 addr: fe80::5054:ff:feb4:a75f/64 Scope:Link UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 RX packets:16468 errors:0 dropped:27 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:6081 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:1000 RX bytes:22066140 (21.0 MiB) TX bytes:483249 (471.9 KiB) Interrupt:11 Base address:0x2000 eth1 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 52:54:00:DE:16:21 inet addr:10.34.1.111 Bcast:10.34.1.255 Mask:255.255.255.0 inet6 addr: fe80::5054:ff:fede:1621/64 Scope:Link UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 RX packets:34 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:189 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:1000 RX bytes:4911 (4.7 KiB) TX bytes:9 # route -n Kernel IP routing table Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref Use Iface 192.168.100.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth0 10.34.1.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth1 169.254.0.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.0.0 U 1002 0 0 eth0 169.254.0.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.0.0 U 1003 0 0 eth1 0.0.0.0 192.168.100.1 0.0.0.0 UG 0 0 0 eth0 Network I am trying to connect from is different than network the hypervisor is connected to: 10.36.0.0. But it is accessible from that network. So I tried to add new route rule: route add -net 10.36.0.0 netmask 255.255.0.0 dev eth1 And it is not working. I thought setting correct interface would be sufficient. What is needed to get my packets coming through?

    Read the article

  • Help me upgrade my pf.conf for OpenBSD 4.7

    - by polemon
    I'm planning on upgrading my OpenBSD to 4.7 (from 4.6) and as you may or may not know, they changed the syntax for pf.conf. This is the relevant portion from the upgrade guide: pf(4) NAT syntax change As described in more detail in this mailing list post, PF's separate nat/rdr/binat (translation) rules have been replaced with actions on regular match/filter rules. Simple rulesets may be converted like this: nat on $ext_if from 10/8 -> ($ext_if) rdr on $ext_if to ($ext_if) -> 1.2.3.4 becomes match out on $ext_if from 10/8 nat-to ($ext_if) match in on $ext_if to ($ext_if) rdr-to 1.2.3.4 and... binat on $ext_if from $web_serv_int to any -> $web_serv_ext becomes match on $ext_if from $web_serv_int to any binat-to $web_serv_ext nat-anchor and/or rdr-anchor lines, e.g. for relayd(8), ftp-proxy(8) and tftp-proxy(8), are no longer used and should be removed from pf.conf(5), leaving only the anchor lines. Translation rules relating to these and spamd(8) will need to be adjusted as appropriate. N.B.: Previously, translation rules had "stop at first match" behaviour, with binat being evaluated first, followed by nat/rdr depending on direction of the packet. Now the filter rules are subject to the usual "last match" behaviour, so care must be taken with rule ordering when converting. pf(4) route-to/reply-to syntax change The route-to, reply-to, dup-to and fastroute options in pf.conf move to filteropts; pass in on $ext_if route-to (em1 192.168.1.1) from 10.1.1.1 pass in on $ext_if reply-to (em1 192.168.1.1) to 10.1.1.1 becomes pass in on $ext_if from 10.1.1.1 route-to (em1 192.168.1.1) pass in on $ext_if to 10.1.1.1 reply-to (em1 192.168.1.1) Now, this is my current pf.conf: # $OpenBSD: pf.conf,v 1.38 2009/02/23 01:18:36 deraadt Exp $ # # See pf.conf(5) for syntax and examples; this sample ruleset uses # require-order to permit mixing of NAT/RDR and filter rules. # Remember to set net.inet.ip.forwarding=1 and/or net.inet6.ip6.forwarding=1 # in /etc/sysctl.conf if packets are to be forwarded between interfaces. ext_if="pppoe0" int_if="nfe0" int_net="192.168.0.0/24" polemon="192.168.0.10" poletopw="192.168.0.12" segatop="192.168.0.20" table <leechers> persist set loginterface $ext_if set skip on lo match on $ext_if all scrub (no-df max-mss 1440) altq on $ext_if priq bandwidth 950Kb queue {q_pri, q_hi, q_std, q_low} queue q_pri priority 15 queue q_hi priority 10 queue q_std priority 7 priq(default) queue q_low priority 0 nat-anchor "ftp-proxy/*" rdr-anchor "ftp-proxy/*" nat on $ext_if from !($ext_if) -> ($ext_if) rdr pass on $int_if proto tcp to port ftp -> 127.0.0.1 port 8021 rdr pass on $ext_if proto tcp to port 2080 -> $segatop port 80 rdr pass on $ext_if proto tcp to port 2022 -> $segatop port 22 rdr pass on $ext_if proto tcp to port 4000 -> $polemon port 4000 rdr pass on $ext_if proto tcp to port 6600 -> $polemon port 6600 anchor "ftp-proxy/*" block pass on $int_if queue(q_hi, q_pri) pass out on $ext_if queue(q_std, q_pri) pass out on $ext_if proto icmp queue q_pri pass out on $ext_if proto {tcp, udp} to any port ssh queue(q_hi, q_pri) pass out on $ext_if proto {tcp, udp} to any port http queue(q_std, q_pri) #pass out on $ext_if proto {tcp, udp} all queue(q_low, q_hi) pass out on $ext_if proto {tcp, udp} from <leechers> queue(q_low, q_std) pass in on $ext_if proto tcp to ($ext_if) port ident queue(q_hi, q_pri) pass in on $ext_if proto tcp to ($ext_if) port ssh queue(q_hi, q_pri) pass in on $ext_if proto tcp to ($ext_if) port http queue(q_hi, q_pri) pass in on $ext_if inet proto icmp all icmp-type echoreq queue q_pri If someone has experience with porting the 4.6 pf.conf to 4.7, please help me do the correct changes. OK, this is how far I've got: I commented out nat-anchor and rdr-anchor, as describted in the guide: #nat-anchor "ftp-proxy/*" #rdr-anchor "ftp-proxy/*" And this is how I've "converted" the rdr rules: #nat on $ext_if from !($ext_if) -> ($ext_if) match out on $ext_if from !($ext_if) nat-to ($ext_if) #rdr pass on $int_if proto tcp to port ftp -> 127.0.0.1 port 8021 match in on $int_if proto tcp to port ftp rdr-to 127.0.0.1 port 8021 #rdr pass on $ext_if proto tcp to port 2080 -> $segatop port 80 match in on $ext_if proto tcp tp port 2080 rdr-to $segatop port 80 #rdr pass on $ext_if proto tcp to port 2022 -> $segatop port 22 match in on $ext_if proto tcp tp port 2022 rdr-to $segatop port 22 rdr pass on $ext_if proto tcp to port 4000 -> $polemon port 4000 match in on $ext_if proto tcp tp port 4000 rdr-to $polemon port 4000 rdr pass on $ext_if proto tcp to port 6600 -> $polemon port 6600 match in on $ext_if proto tcp tp port 6600 rdr-to $polemon port 6600 Did I miss anything? Is the anchor for ftp-proxy OK as it is now? Do I need to change something in the other pass in on... lines?

    Read the article

  • Windows Server 2008 R2 Virtual Network Setup

    - by jpearl01
    Some background: I'm very much new to networking in general, and virtualization in particular. I'm trying to set up a series of VMs as we are transitioning to a thin client setup. I have been supplied a limited number of static ip addresses. The server is located in an offsite building which houses the network we use to connect to the internet, share folders etc. The setup I've been trying to go for is this: The host OS (Windows Server 2008 R2) is bound to one nic using one of the static ips (say, Nic1 and ip 10.255.6.61). I've set up another external virtual network attached to another physical nic , and a virtual private network attached to no nic. There is one VM running the same os (as the host). This VM is connected to both the external virtual network (and uses another static ip say Nic2 and ip 10.255.6.62) and also to the virtual private network (I gave it a static random ip 192.168.88.1 subnet mask 255.255.255.0). This virtual private network is connected to all the other VMs. I'd like to share the internet connection with all the other VMs on the private virtual network, and so I installed the RRAS role on the server connected to Nic2, and selected the option to share the internet over the vpn. I've run through the RRAS wizard a few times, trying different configurations, but none of them seem to be letting the other vms connect to the 'net. The vms seem to connect to the virtual private network fine, they are assigned an ip address and everything, but no internet, and no rest of the network either. The other problem is in general I connect to the vms with RDP. Will that be possible with a setup like this? i.e. will the vms show up as computers on the network? If not, what are my other options? Thanks! ~josh

    Read the article

  • why this routing configuration does not work?

    - by avs099
    I have 2 VMs in HyperV role: first is RRAS - it has 2 interfaces (both manually configured, no DHCP): 192.168.1.110 - "external" one, connected to the router 192.168.10.2 - that's internal interface which other VMs will be using as well also I added VPN connection to our main server - and it gets 192.168.2.136 IP address in 192.168.2.XXX network. And IP route is create on the server as well for this interface. second VM is called KITCHENER. It only has 1 interface 192.168.10.99 / 255.255.255.0, with default gateway set to RRAS server - 192.168.10.2 QUESTION: how can I ping "main server" - 192.168.2.1 - from the KITCHENER server when RRAS server is connected to VPN? please see screenshots with ipconfig /all, route print and ping 192.168.2.1 commands. What needs to be done to get this working? all servers are Windows 2008 R2 if that matters.

    Read the article

  • OpenVPN - client-to-client traffic working in one direction but not the other

    - by Pawz
    I have the following VPN configuration: +------------+ +------------+ +------------+ | outpost |----------------| kino |----------------| guchuko | +------------+ +------------+ +------------+ OS: FreeBSD 6.2 OS: Gentoo 2.6.32 OS: Gentoo 2.6.33.3 Keyname: client3 Keyname: server Keyname: client1 eth0: 10.0.1.254 eth0: 203.x.x.x eth0: 192.168.0.6 tun0: 192.168.150.18 tun0: 192.168.150.1 tun0: 192.168.150.10 P-t-P: 192.166.150.17 P-t-P: 192.168.150.2 P-t-P: 192.168.150.9 Kino is the server and has client-to-client enabled. I am using "fragment 1400" and "mssfix" on all three machines. An mtu-test on both connections is successful. All three machines have ip forwarding enabled, by this on the gentoo boxes: net.ipv4.conf.all.forwarding = 1 And this on the FreeBSD box: net.inet.ip.forwarding: 1 In the server's "ccd" directory is the following files: client1: iroute 192.168.0.0 255.255.255.0 client3: iroute 10.0.1.0 255.255.255.0 The server config has these routes configured: push "route 192.168.0.0 255.255.255.0" push "route 10.0.1.0 255.255.255.0" route 192.168.0.0 255.255.255.0 route 10.0.1.0 255.255.255.0 Kino's routing table looks like this: 192.168.150.0 192.168.150.2 255.255.255.0 UG 0 0 0 tun0 10.0.1.0 192.168.150.2 255.255.255.0 UG 0 0 0 tun0 192.168.0.0 192.168.150.2 255.255.255.0 UG 0 0 0 tun0 192.168.150.2 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.255 UH 0 0 0 tun0 Outpost's like this: 192.168.150 192.168.150.17 UGS 0 17 tun0 192.168.0 192.168.150.17 UGS 0 2 tun0 192.168.150.17 192.168.150.18 UH 3 0 tun0 And Guchuko's like this: 192.168.150.0 192.168.150.9 255.255.255.0 UG 0 0 0 tun0 10.0.1.0 192.168.150.9 255.255.255.0 UG 0 0 0 tun0 192.168.150.9 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.255 UH 0 0 0 tun0 Now, the tests. Pings from Guchuko to Outpost's LAN IP work OK, as does the reverse - pings from Outpost to Guchuko's LAN IP. However... Pings from Outpost, to a machine on Guchuko's LAN work fine: .(( root@outpost )). (( 06:39 PM )) :: ~ :: # ping 192.168.0.3 PING 192.168.0.3 (192.168.0.3): 56 data bytes 64 bytes from 192.168.0.3: icmp_seq=0 ttl=63 time=462.641 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.0.3: icmp_seq=1 ttl=63 time=557.909 ms But a ping from Guchuko, to a machine on Outpost's LAN does not: .(( root@guchuko )). (( 06:43 PM )) :: ~ :: # ping 10.0.1.253 PING 10.0.1.253 (10.0.1.253) 56(84) bytes of data. --- 10.0.1.253 ping statistics --- 3 packets transmitted, 0 received, 100% packet loss, time 2000ms Guchuko's tcpdump of tun0 shows: 18:46:27.716931 IP 192.168.150.10 > 10.0.1.253: ICMP echo request, id 63009, seq 1, length 64 18:46:28.716715 IP 192.168.150.10 > 10.0.1.253: ICMP echo request, id 63009, seq 2, length 64 18:46:29.716714 IP 192.168.150.10 > 10.0.1.253: ICMP echo request, id 63009, seq 3, length 64 Outpost's tcpdump on tun0 shows: 18:44:00.333341 IP 192.168.150.10 > 10.0.1.253: ICMP echo request, id 63009, seq 3, length 64 18:44:01.334073 IP 192.168.150.10 > 10.0.1.253: ICMP echo request, id 63009, seq 4, length 64 18:44:02.331849 IP 192.168.150.10 > 10.0.1.253: ICMP echo request, id 63009, seq 5, length 64 So Outpost is receiving the ICMP request destined for the machine on it's subnet, but appears not be forwarding it. Outpost has gateway_enable="YES" in its rc.conf which correctly sets net.inet.ip.forwarding to 1 as mentioned earlier. As far as I know, that's all that's required to make a FreeBSD box forward packets between interfaces. Is there something else I could be forgetting ? FWIW, pinging 10.0.1.253 from Kino has the same result - the traffic does not get forwarded. UPDATE: I've found that I can only ping certain IP's on Guchuko's LAN from Outpost. From Outpost I can ping 192.168.0.3 and 192.168.0.2, but 192.168.99 and 192.168.0.4 are unreachable. The same tcpdump behavior can be seen. I think this means the problem can't be due to ipforwarding or routing, because Outpost can reach SOME hosts on Guchuko's LAN but not others and likewise, Guchuko can reach two hosts on Outpost's LAN, but not others. This baffles me.

    Read the article

  • How to Configure Different Gateways for Different VLANs

    - by Bryan
    I have around 10 VLANs, and two different internet gateways. I want traffic on some VLANs to use one gateway, and traffic on other VLANs to use another gateway. (e.g. I wish to route server traffic via one gateway and desktop internet traffic down another). Is it possible to configure different default routes for different VLANs on a Dell 6224 switch? Or is their a better way of doing what I'm trying to achieve? The core switch I am using is a Dell PowerConnect 6224 switch. Currently I'm using: ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 10.58.3.16 which creates the default gateway for all VLANs. I did consider adding multiple routes with equal metric, and setting ACLs between the VLANs to deny access to the 'wrong' gateway, but that idea just doesn't feel right to me.

    Read the article

  • trigger script on postfix delivery errors

    - by edovino
    I'm trying to get postfix to run a script on soft (4xx) and hard (5xx) delivery errors, but I'm not sure where to start. If I understand things correctly, I could insert (pipe-based) filters in the master.cf file, there's a whole 'milter' infrastructure available, an finally I suppose I could simply grep through the mail.info logs. So - any advice? Should I go the 'handle it via master.cf' route, and if so, what daemon should I intercept? 'bounce'? The grep-the-logs route is probably simplest, but I can't help but feel that there is a better way. Any advice appreciated!

    Read the article

  • how install minimum domain email piping to script in centos?

    - by Adam Ramadhan
    hello i have search google on a simple tutorial on how to make a piping email. first how does really email technically work? "stmp is a process that binds to 25, waiting for email request that goes in from another stmp process(in another server) determined by the domain MX route that will send the message to port 25 if any email goes though the MX.domain.tld" that is in a nutshell how emailing work, am i right? or there is something wrong here? second, so if im right, we need to set a SMTP server so we can receive incoming emails from MX SMTP route right? ive googled though google and found two best STMP servers from my opinion, they are EXIM and POSTFIX, can anybody give us a simple tutorial installing and setting up an email piping for a fresh installed linux/centos? example *.domain.tld -> allinonepipe.php thanks.

    Read the article

  • Unable to access internet if wireless enabled

    - by balki
    The following is my route output. eth0 is my wired network and eth1 is my wireless network. Only wired one has access to internet. If I enable wireless, I am not able to access internet, it tries to access via eth1 and I get 404 page of the wireless router. Why does eth1 have higher preference though default is eth0 (link)? [balakrishnan@mylap ~]$ route Kernel IP routing table Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref Use Iface default 10.26.0.1 0.0.0.0 UG 0 0 0 eth0 10.26.0.0 * 255.255.192.0 U 1 0 0 eth0 link-local * 255.255.0.0 U 1000 0 0 eth0 192.168.1.0 * 255.255.255.0 U 9 0 0 eth1

    Read the article

  • No internet access on Windows 7 - part 2

    - by Vnuk
    This is a continuation of my previous question. The problems started when I turned on my wireless connection for the first time. Since then, every time I boot my Windows 7, my LAN connection does not have internet access. In my previous question, I got a key answer (route delete). Now my procedure to get LAN internet connectivity (local network works fine) when I boot looks like this: Power on WLAN Disconnect LAN cable Power off WLAN Execute route delete 0.0.0.0 if 11 Connect LAN cable Now my LAN connection has internet access. Another behavior that I can't explain - while my LAN connection has no internet access, Network and Sharing center refers to it as Unknown network, with a public icon. When I go through the fore mentioned procedure, it is referred to with my home WLAN network name, with status connected, and the Unknown network disappears.

    Read the article

  • Apache Balancing by source IP

    - by Daniel
    I am using Apache's Proxy Balancer to balance one sub domain (e.g. subdomain.domain.com) to an application which is located on 2 servers. Here an extract from my Apache configuration file: <Proxy *> Order deny,allow Allow from all </Proxy> <Proxy balancer://cluster1> BalancerMember http://server1:28081 route=w1 BalancerMember http://server2:28082 route=w2 </Proxy> ProxyPass /path balancer://cluster1/path ProxyPassReverse /path balancer://cluster1/path My question is, if it's possible to decide with the source IP-address which BalancerMember should be used for the request? To e.g. Requests from 1.2.3.4 to Member 1?

    Read the article

  • Routing based on source address in Windows Server 2008 R2

    - by rocku
    I'm implementing a direct routing load balanced solution using Windows Server 2008 R2 as back-end server. I've configured a loopback interface with the external IP address. This works, I am receiving packets with the external IP address and respond to them appropriately. However our infrastructure requires that traffic which is being load-balanced should go through a different gateway then any other traffic originating from the server, ie. updates etc. So basicly I need to route packets based on source address (external IP) to another gateway. The built-in Windows 'route' command allows routing based on destination address only. I've tried setting a default gateway on the loopback interface and mangled with weak/strong host send/receive parameters on the interfaces, however this didn't work. Is there any way around this, possibly using third party tools?

    Read the article

  • Share the same subnet between Internal network and VPN Clients

    - by Pascal
    I would like to set up a configuration where VPN clients connecting to my Forefront TMG can access all the resources of my Internal network without having the to use the option "Use default gateway on remote network" on the VPN's TCP/IP Ipv4 Advanced Settings. This is important to me, since they can use their own internet while accessing my network through VPN (the security implications of this are acceptable on my cenario) My Internal network runs on 10.50.75.x, and I set up Forefront TMG to relay the DHCP of my Internal network to the VPN clients, so they get IPs from the same range as the Internal network. This setup initially works, and the VPN clients use their own internet, and can access anything that is on the internal network. However, after a while, HTTP Proxy Traffic from the Internal network starts getting routed to the IP of the RRAS Dial In Interface, instead of the IP of the Internal's network gateway. When this happens, the HTTP Proxy starts getting denied for obvious reasons. My first question is: does this happen because Forefront TMG wasn't designed to handle a cenario that I described above, and it "loses itself"? My second question is: Is there any way to solve this problem, either through configuration or firewall policies? My third question is: If there's no way that it can work with the cenario above, is there another cenario that will solve my problem, and do what I'd like it to do properly? Below are my network routes: 1 => Local Host Access => Route => Local Host => All Networks 2 => VPN Clients to Internal Network => Route => VPN Clients => Internal 3 => Internet Access => NAT => Internal, Perimeter, VPN Clients => External 4 => Internal to Perimeter => Route => Internal, VPN Clients => Perimeter Tks!

    Read the article

  • Conflicting ip routes with local table on attaching a virtual network interface

    - by user1071840
    I have an EC2 instance with these ip rules: $ sudo ip rule show 0: from all lookup local 32766: from all lookup main 32767: from all lookup default I can attach an elastic network interface to it with a private IP. Say the IP of my machine is 10.1.3.12 and the IP of the interface is 10.1.1.190. As soon as I attach the interface to my machine a new entry is added to the routing policy and local routing table: sudo ip rule show 0: from all lookup local 32765: from 10.1.1.190 lookup 10003 32766: from all lookup main 32767: from all lookup default $ sudo ip route show table local broadcast 10.1.1.0 dev eth3 proto kernel scope link src 10.1.1.190 local 10.1.1.190 dev eth3 proto kernel scope host src 10.1.1.190 broadcast 10.1.1.255 dev eth3 proto kernel scope link src 10.1.1.190 broadcast 10.1.3.0 dev eth0 proto kernel scope link src 10.1.3.12 local 10.1.3.12 dev eth0 proto kernel scope host src 10.1.3.12 broadcast 10.1.3.255 dev eth0 proto kernel scope link src 10.1.3.12 broadcast 127.0.0.0 dev lo proto kernel scope link src 127.0.0.1 local 127.0.0.0/8 dev lo proto kernel scope host src 127.0.0.1 local 127.0.0.1 dev lo proto kernel scope host src 127.0.0.1 broadcast 127.255.255.255 dev lo proto kernel scope link src 127.0.0.1 I can send traffic to this ENI directly from a host that can have the same IP as the host the ENI is attached to. This is where the problem starts. I ran tcpdump on the port in question and saw multiple SYNs going to the ENI with src '10.1.3.12' and destination '10.1.1.190' but didn't see even a single ACK. In my understanding if ACKs were being sent from the ENI they'd have destination as 10.1.3.12 i.e. the same as the local machine's IP and such packets will now be routed as local packets matching local routing policy: local 10.1.3.12 dev eth0 proto kernel scope host src 10.1.3.12 I'd like to send all the packets originating from 10.1.1.190 (my ENI) to go back on the same interface i.e. eth3 in this case. Contents of the nee table 10003 are: $ sudo ip route show table 10003 default via 10.1.1.1 dev eth3 I think I can do the following: I don't know if its possible but probably decrease the priority of local table so the packets match the table 10003. Use iptables to mangle these packets and update the local table route to include the mark information But I'm not sure if these are the right approaches.

    Read the article

  • pfSense routing between two routers with shared network

    - by JohnCC
    I have a network set-up using two pfSense routers arranged like this:- DMZ1 WAN1 WAN2 DMZ2 | | | | | | | | \___ PF1 PF2___/ | | | | \___TRUSTED___/ Each pfSense router has its own separate WAN connection, and a separate DMZ network attached to it. They share a common TRUSTED LAN between them. The machines on the trusted network have PF1 as their default gateway. PF1 has a static route defined to DMZ2 via PF2, and PF2 has a static route to DMZ1 via PF1. There is NAT to the WAN but internal networks (DMZ1/2 and TRUSTED) use different RFC1918 subnets. I inherited this arrangement, and all used to work fine. I made a config change to PF1 (relating to multicast), and machines on DMZ2 suddenly could not talk to TRUSTED. I rolled the change back, but the problem persisted. What I guess you'd hope would happen is that TCP packets would go DMZ2 - PF2 - TRUSTED and on return TRUSTED - PF1 - PF2 - DMZ2. That's the only way I can see it would have worked. However, PF1 drops the returning packets. I've verified this using tcpdump. I've worked around this by adding static routes to DMZ2 via PF2 to the servers on TRUSTED, but some devices on there do not support static routes so this is not ideal. Is there way to make this arrangement work decently, or is the design inherently flawed? Thanks!

    Read the article

  • How to configure postfix to dynamically choose different relayhosts?

    - by user24315
    I use my laptop at work on wireless and wired networks, at home on a wireless network, and at various other places (such as conferences, friends houses, etc). When at work I'd like postfix to use the corportate mail server to route emails. When at home I'd like it to use my personal mail server to route emails. When elsewhere I'd like to have the laptop attempt to deliver email in the normal smtp fashion. Is this possible using just postfix? Do I need something else (such as Lamson http://lamsonproject.org/, or scripts that dynamically patch my postfix configuration) when I want to do routing that depends on my current location?

    Read the article

  • OpenVPN Chaining

    - by noderunner
    I'm trying to set up an OpenVPN "chain", similar to what is described here. I have two separate networks, A and B. Each network has an OpenVPN server using a standard "road warrior" or "client/server" approach. A client can connect to either one for access to the hosts/services on that respective network. But server A and B are also connected to each other. The servers on each network have a "site-to-site" connection between the two. What I'm trying to accomplish, is the ability to connect to network A as a client, and then make connections with hosts on network B. I'm using tun/routing for all of the VPN connections. The "chain" looks something like this: [Client] --- [Server A] --- [Server A] --- [Server B] --- [Server B] --- [Host B] (tun0) (tun0) (tun1) (tun0) (eth0) (eth0) The whole idea is that server A should route traffic destined to network B through the "site-to-site" VPN set up on tun1 when a client from tun0 tries to connect. I did this simply by setting up two connection profiles on server A. One profile is a standard server config running on tun0, defining a virtual client network, IP address pool, pushing routes, etc. The other is a client connection to Server B running on tun1. With ip_forwarding enabled, I then simply added a "push route" to the clients advertising a route to network B. On server A, this seems to work when I look at tcpdump output. If I connect as a client, and then ping a host on network B, I can see the traffic getting passed from tun0 to tun1 on Server A: tcpdump -nSi tun1 icmp The weird thing is that I don't see Server B receiving that traffic through the tunnel. It's as if Server A is sending it through the site-to-site connection like it should, but server B is completely ignoring it. When I look for the traffic on Server B, it simply isn't there. A ping from Server A -- Host B works fine. But a ping from a client connected to Server A to host B does not. I'm wondering if Server B is ignoring the traffic because the source IP does not match the client IP pool that it hands out to clients? Does anyone know if I need to do something on Server B in order for it to see the traffic? This is a complicated problem to explain, so thanks if you stuck with me this far.

    Read the article

  • OpenBSD: Gateway outside subnet (works in Linux)

    - by kshade
    We need to set up an OpenBSD host to use a default gateway that's outside of it's subnet. This is all I need to do on Linux (not the actual IPs) to achieve it: ifconfig eth0 33.33.33.33/31 up route add 33.33.33.254 dev eth0 route add default gw 33.33.33.254 The problem is that we don't know the proper equivalent of the middle command in OpenBSD. The man page says: If the destination is directly reachable via an interface requiring no intermediary system to act as a gateway, the -iface modifier should be specified; Sadly we can't seem to figure out how to make it work with that. This is a virtual host on an OVH server, they have documentation for many other operating systems showing how to do it here: http://help.ovh.co.uk/BridgeClient

    Read the article

  • Bringing the xenbr0 interface up on XEN under Ubuntu 8.04

    - by iyl
    I installed XEN on Ubuntu 8.04 using this tutorial: http://www.howtoforge.com/ubuntu-8.04-server-install-xen-from-ubuntu-repositories but after I reboot with the XEN kernel, I don't have xenbr0 device. I see that network-bridge script runs and it creates peth0 device, but not xenbr0. I have a very basic IP setup, with a single static IP defined in /etc/network/interfaces. The only unusual thing is that my hosting (1&1) gave me a netmask 255.255.255.255, so I had to add the default gateway with this script: /sbin/route add -host 10.255.255.1 dev eth0 /sbin/route add default gw 10.255.255.1 Everything else is plain vanilla Ubuntu 8.04.

    Read the article

  • Selectively routing traffic via ethernet or wifi, with proper DNS (Mac OS X 10.6)

    - by Dan
    When I'm at work, I access various intranet pages as well as the wider Internet through ethernet. However, the company LAN blocks some ports (e.g. Google Calendar). I can get to those through WiFi. So, I gave the Airport priority, and then using route add, I set up selective routing: all intranet traffic goes through the ethernet and everything else via WiFi: sudo route add 10.0.0.0/8 <intranet gateway>. However, there are a number of intranet sites that have their own DNS; i.e., hr.company.com only resolves on the intranet. The only way that I can get the DNS to work properly is to add the internal DNS server to the Airport DNS listing, however I fear that when I go elsewhere and forget, this will break things. What's the right way to get the DNS to resolve using this setup?

    Read the article

  • Bonding and default gateway problem (CentOS)

    - by lg
    I configured network bonding on two machine with centos 5.5. Bonding works well, but the problem is default gateway: it is not configured! I follow this tutorial. I added GATEWAY in both (and either) /etc/sysconfig/network and /etc/sysconfig/network-scripts/ifcfg-bond0. But, when I restart network (or server) there is no default gateway (route command). This is ip route ls output after network restart: 10.0.0.0/16 dev bond0 proto kernel scope link src 10.0.0.88 Where is my mistake?

    Read the article

  • HAproxy to web host sub directory?

    - by daemonza
    Hi for reasons outside my control, I need to load balance two servers, that run a non-virtual host enabled app on IIS. Normally in HAProxy I would load balance servers(apache, tomcat, etc) like this : acl is_www_example_com hdr_end(host) -i www.example.com use_backend www_example_com if is_www_example_com backend www_example_com balance roundrobin cookie SERVERID insert nocache indirect option httpchk HEAD / HTTP/1.0 option httpclose option forwardfor server node1 192.168.1.1:80 cookie node1 server node1 192.168.1.2:80 cookie node1 Which will route to the node 1 and node 2 server and serve up the virtual host site. if I need to route to www.example.com/application/data How would I be able to do it, with the above example, if at all even possible?

    Read the article

  • [UIView didCreateWorkout:Type:Distance:Time:Message:]: unrecognized selector sent to instance.

    - by Stephen
    Hello, I'm getting the above error and have been looking at it all day, I'm getting no where fast. Anyone any ideas ? I'm new to IPhone Development. Code Below: #import "WorkoutViewController.h" #import "Workout.h" @implementation WorkoutViewController @synthesize workoutDelegate; //@synthesize Speed; //@synthesize Calories; @synthesize route; @synthesize type; @synthesize distance; @synthesize time; @synthesize message; @synthesize DBContents; @synthesize workoutArray; @synthesize managedObjectContext; //@synthesize saveWorkout; //@synthesize cancelWorkout; -(IBAction)hideKeyboard { } -(IBAction)saveWorkout { [workoutDelegate didCreateWorkout: route.text Type: type.text Distance: distance.text Time: time.text Message: message.text]; } -(IBAction)cancelWorkout { [self.workoutDelegate didCancelWorkout]; } // Implement viewDidLoad to do additional setup after loading the view, typically from a nib. -(void)viewDidLoad { //Set images for Save & Cancel buttons. UIImage *normalImage = [[UIImage imageNamed:@"whiteButton.png"] stretchableImageWithLeftCapWidth:12.0 topCapHeight:0.0]; [saveWorkout setBackgroundImage:normalImage forState:UIControlStateNormal]; [cancelWorkout setBackgroundImage:normalImage forState:UIControlStateNormal]; UIImage *pressedImage = [[UIImage imageNamed:@"blueButton.png"] stretchableImageWithLeftCapWidth:12.0 topCapHeight:0.0]; [saveWorkout setBackgroundImage:pressedImage forState:UIControlStateHighlighted]; [cancelWorkout setBackgroundImage:pressedImage forState:UIControlStateHighlighted]; //Fetch details from the database. NSFetchRequest *request = [[NSFetchRequest alloc] init]; NSEntityDescription *entity = [NSEntityDescription entityForName:@"Workout" inManagedObjectContext:managedObjectContext]; [request setEntity:entity]; NSError *error; self.workoutArray = [[managedObjectContext executeFetchRequest:request error:&error] mutableCopy]; [request release]; //self.workoutArray = [[NSMutableArray alloc] init]; //self.DBContents.text = [self.workoutArray objectAtIndex:0]; [super viewDidLoad]; } -(void)didReceiveMemoryWarning { // Releases the view if it doesn't have a superview. [super didReceiveMemoryWarning]; // Release any cached data, images, etc that aren't in use. } -(void)viewDidUnload { // Release any retained subviews of the main view. // e.g. self.myOutlet = nil; } -(void) didCreateWorkout:(NSString *)thisRoute Type:(NSString *)thisType Distance:(NSString *)thisDistance Time:(NSString *)thisTime Message:(NSString *)thisMessage { // Add the new workout. Workout *newWorkout = [NSEntityDescription insertNewObjectForEntityForName:@"Workout" inManagedObjectContext:self.managedObjectContext]; newWorkout.route = thisRoute; newWorkout.type = thisType; newWorkout.distance = thisDistance; newWorkout.time = thisTime; newWorkout.message = thisMessage; [self.workoutArray addObject:newWorkout]; //[self dismissModalViewControllerAnimated:YES]; } -(void)didCancelWorkout { [self dismissModalViewControllerAnimated:YES]; } -(void)dealloc { // [Speed release]; // [Calories release]; [route release]; [type release]; [distance release]; [time release]; [message release]; // [saveWorkout release]; // [cancelWorkout release]; [workoutArray release]; [managedObjectContext release]; [super dealloc]; } @end I'm trying to save details that I key on the screen (WorkoutViewController.xib) and I click the save button and get the above error. Thanks Stephen

    Read the article

  • TypeError: Object {...} has no method 'find' - when using mongoose with express

    - by sdouble
    I'm having trouble getting data from MongoDB using mongoose schemas with express. I first tested with just mongoose in a single file (mongoosetest.js) and it works fine. But when I start dividing it all up with express routes and config files, things start to break. I'm sure it's something simple, but I've spent the last 3 hours googling and trying to figure out what I'm doing wrong and can't find anything that matches my process enough to compare. mongoosetest.js (this works fine, but not for my application) var mongoose = require('mongoose'); mongoose.connect('mongodb://localhost/meanstack'); var db = mongoose.connection; var userSchema = mongoose.Schema({ name: String }, {collection: 'users'}); var User = mongoose.model('User', userSchema); User.find(function(err, users) { console.log(users); }); These files are where I'm having issues. I'm sure it's something silly, probably a direct result of using external files, exports, and requires. My server.js file just starts up and configures express. I also have a routing file and a db config file. routing file (allRoutes.js) var express = require('express'); var router = express.Router(); var db = require('../config/db'); var User = db.User(); // routes router.get('/user/list', function(req, res) { User.find(function(err, users) { console.log(users); }); }); // catch-all route router.get('*', function(req, res) { res.sendfile('./public/index.html'); }); module.exports = router; dbconfig file (db.js) var mongoose = require('mongoose'); var dbHost = 'localhost'; var dbName = 'meanstack'; var db = mongoose.createConnection(dbHost, dbName); var Schema = mongoose.Schema, ObjectId = Schema.ObjectId; db.once('open', function callback() { console.log('connected'); }); // schemas var User = new Schema({ name : String }, {collection: 'users'}); // models mongoose.model('User', User); var User = mongoose.model('User'); //exports module.exports.User = User; I receive the following error when I browse to localhost:3000/user/list TypeError: Object { _id: 5398bed35473f98c494168a3 } has no method 'find' at Object.module.exports [as handle] (C:\...\routes\allRoutes.js:8:8) at next_layer (C:\...\node_modules\express\lib\router\route.js:103:13) at Route.dispatch (C:\...\node_modules\express\lib\router\route.js:107:5) at C:\...\node_modules\express\lib\router\index.js:213:24 at Function.proto.process_params (C:\...\node_modules\express\lib\router\index.js:284:12) at next (C:\...\node_modules\express\lib\router\index.js:207:19) at Function.proto.handle (C:\...\node_modules\express\lib\router\index.js:154:3) at Layer.router (C:\...\node_modules\express\lib\router\index.js:24:12) at trim_prefix (C:\...\node_modules\express\lib\router\index.js:255:15) at C:\...\node_modules\express\lib\router\index.js:216:9 Like I said, it's probably something silly that I'm messing up with trying to organize my code since my single file (mongoosetest.js) works as expected. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Connecting Linux to WatchGuard Firebox SSL (OpenVPN client)

    Recently, I got a new project assignment that requires to connect permanently to the customer's network through VPN. They are using a so-called SSL VPN. As I am using OpenVPN since more than 5 years within my company's network I was quite curious about their solution and how it would actually be different from OpenVPN. Well, short version: It is a disguised version of OpenVPN. Unfortunately, the company only offers a client for Windows and Mac OS which shouldn't bother any Linux user after all. OpenVPN is part of every recent distribution and can be activated in a couple of minutes - both client as well as server (if necessary). WatchGuard Firebox SSL - About dialog Borrowing some files from a Windows client installation Initially, I didn't know about the product, so therefore I went through the installation on Windows 8. No obstacles (and no restart despite installation of TAP device drivers!) here and the secured VPN channel was up and running in less than 2 minutes or so. Much appreciated from both parties - customer and me. Of course, this whole client package and my long year approved and stable installation ignited my interest to have a closer look at the WatchGuard client. Compared to the original OpenVPN client (okay, I have to admit this is years ago) this commercial product is smarter in terms of file locations during installation. You'll be able to access the configuration and key files below your roaming application data folder. To get there, simply enter '%AppData%\WatchGuard\Mobile VPN' in your Windows/File Explorer and confirm with Enter/Return. This will display the following files: Application folder below user profile with configuration and certificate files From there we are going to borrow four files, namely: ca.crt client.crt client.ovpn client.pem and transfer them to the Linux system. You might also be able to isolate those four files from a Mac OS client. Frankly, I'm just too lazy to run the WatchGuard client installation on a Mac mini only to find the folder location, and I'm going to describe why a little bit further down this article. I know that you can do that! Feedback in the comment section is appreciated. Configuration of OpenVPN (console) Depending on your distribution the following steps might be a little different but in general you should be able to get the important information from it. I'm going to describe the steps in Ubuntu 13.04 (Raring Ringtail). As usual, there are two possibilities to achieve your goal: console and UI. Let's what it is necessary to be done. First of all, you should ensure that you have OpenVPN installed on your system. Open your favourite terminal application and run the following statement: $ sudo apt-get install openvpn network-manager-openvpn network-manager-openvpn-gnome Just to be on the safe side. The four above mentioned files from your Windows machine could be copied anywhere but either you place them below your own user directory or you put them (as root) below the default directory: /etc/openvpn At this stage you would be able to do a test run already. Just in case, run the following command and check the output (it's the similar information you would get from the 'View Logs...' context menu entry in Windows: $ sudo openvpn --config client.ovpn Pay attention to the correct path to your configuration and certificate files. OpenVPN will ask you to enter your Auth Username and Auth Password in order to establish the VPN connection, same as the Windows client. Remote server and user authentication to establish the VPN Please complete the test run and see whether all went well. You can disconnect pressing Ctrl+C. Simplifying your life - authentication file In my case, I actually set up the OpenVPN client on my gateway/router. This establishes a VPN channel between my network and my client's network and allows me to switch machines easily without having the necessity to install the WatchGuard client on each and every machine. That's also very handy for my various virtualised Windows machines. Anyway, as the client configuration, key and certificate files are located on a headless system somewhere under the roof, it is mandatory to have an automatic connection to the remote site. For that you should first change the file extension '.ovpn' to '.conf' which is the default extension on Linux systems for OpenVPN, and then open the client configuration file in order to extend an existing line. $ sudo mv client.ovpn client.conf $ sudo nano client.conf You should have a similar content to this one here: dev tunclientproto tcp-clientca ca.crtcert client.crtkey client.pemtls-remote "/O=WatchGuard_Technologies/OU=Fireware/CN=Fireware_SSLVPN_Server"remote-cert-eku "TLS Web Server Authentication"remote 1.2.3.4 443persist-keypersist-tunverb 3mute 20keepalive 10 60cipher AES-256-CBCauth SHA1float 1reneg-sec 3660nobindmute-replay-warningsauth-user-pass auth.txt Note: I changed the IP address of the remote directive above (which should be obvious, right?). Anyway, the required change is marked in red and we have to create a new authentication file 'auth.txt'. You can give the directive 'auth-user-pass' any file name you'd like to. Due to my existing OpenVPN infrastructure my setup differs completely from the above written content but for sake of simplicity I just keep it 'as-is'. Okay, let's create this file 'auth.txt' $ sudo nano auth.txt and just put two lines of information in it - username on the first, and password on the second line, like so: myvpnusernameverysecretpassword Store the file, change permissions, and call openvpn with your configuration file again: $ sudo chmod 0600 auth.txt $ sudo openvpn --config client.conf This should now work without being prompted to enter username and password. In case that you placed your files below the system-wide location /etc/openvpn you can operate your VPNs also via service command like so: $ sudo service openvpn start client $ sudo service openvpn stop client Using Network Manager For newer Linux users or the ones with 'console-phobia' I'm going to describe now how to use Network Manager to setup the OpenVPN client. For this move your mouse to the systray area and click on Network Connections => VPN Connections => Configure VPNs... which opens your Network Connections dialog. Alternatively, use the HUD and enter 'Network Connections'. Network connections overview in Ubuntu Click on 'Add' button. On the next dialog select 'Import a saved VPN configuration...' from the dropdown list and click on 'Create...' Choose connection type to import VPN configuration Now you navigate to your folder where you put the client files from the Windows system and you open the 'client.ovpn' file. Next, on the tab 'VPN' proceed with the following steps (directives from the configuration file are referred): General Check the IP address of Gateway ('remote' - we used 1.2.3.4 in this setup) Authentication Change Type to 'Password with Certificates (TLS)' ('auth-pass-user') Enter User name to access your client keys (Auth Name: myvpnusername) Enter Password (Auth Password: verysecretpassword) and choose your password handling Browse for your User Certificate ('cert' - should be pre-selected with client.crt) Browse for your CA Certificate ('ca' - should be filled as ca.crt) Specify your Private Key ('key' - here: client.pem) Then click on the 'Advanced...' button and check the following values: Use custom gateway port: 443 (second value of 'remote' directive) Check the selected value of Cipher ('cipher') Check HMAC Authentication ('auth') Enter the Subject Match: /O=WatchGuard_Technologies/OU=Fireware/CN=Fireware_SSLVPN_Server ('tls-remote') Finally, you have to confirm and close all dialogs. You should be able to establish your OpenVPN-WatchGuard connection via Network Manager. For that, click on the 'VPN Connections => client' entry on your Network Manager in the systray. It is advised that you keep an eye on the syslog to see whether there are any problematic issues that would require some additional attention. Advanced topic: routing As stated above, I'm running the 'WatchGuard client for Linux' on my head-less server, and since then I'm actually establishing a secure communication channel between two networks. In order to enable your network clients to get access to machines on the remote side there are two possibilities to enable that: Proper routing on both sides of the connection which enables both-direction access, or Network masquerading on the 'client side' of the connection Following, I'm going to describe the second option a little bit more in detail. The Linux system that I'm using is already configured as a gateway to the internet. I won't explain the necessary steps to do that, and will only focus on the additional tweaks I had to do. You can find tons of very good instructions and tutorials on 'How to setup a Linux gateway/router' - just use Google. OK, back to the actual modifications. First, we need to have some information about the network topology and IP address range used on the 'other' side. We can get this very easily from /var/log/syslog after we established the OpenVPN channel, like so: $ sudo tail -n20 /var/log/syslog Or if your system is quite busy with logging, like so: $ sudo less /var/log/syslog | grep ovpn The output should contain PUSH received message similar to the following one: Jul 23 23:13:28 ios1 ovpn-client[789]: PUSH: Received control message: 'PUSH_REPLY,topology subnet,route 192.168.1.0 255.255.255.0,dhcp-option DOMAIN ,route-gateway 192.168.6.1,topology subnet,ping 10,ping-restart 60,ifconfig 192.168.6.2 255.255.255.0' The interesting part for us is the route command which I highlighted already in the sample PUSH_REPLY. Depending on your remote server there might be multiple networks defined (172.16.x.x and/or 10.x.x.x). Important: The IP address range on both sides of the connection has to be different, otherwise you will have to shuffle IPs or increase your the netmask. {loadposition content_adsense} After the VPN connection is established, we have to extend the rules for iptables in order to route and masquerade IP packets properly. I created a shell script to take care of those steps: #!/bin/sh -eIPTABLES=/sbin/iptablesDEV_LAN=eth0DEV_VPNS=tun+VPN=192.168.1.0/24 $IPTABLES -A FORWARD -i $DEV_LAN -o $DEV_VPNS -d $VPN -j ACCEPT$IPTABLES -A FORWARD -i $DEV_VPNS -o $DEV_LAN -s $VPN -j ACCEPT$IPTABLES -t nat -A POSTROUTING -o $DEV_VPNS -d $VPN -j MASQUERADE I'm using the wildcard interface 'tun+' because I have multiple client configurations for OpenVPN on my server. In your case, it might be sufficient to specify device 'tun0' only. Simplifying your life - automatic connect on boot Now, that the client connection works flawless, configuration of routing and iptables is okay, we might consider to add another 'laziness' factor into our setup. Due to kernel updates or other circumstances it might be necessary to reboot your system. Wouldn't it be nice that the VPN connections are established during the boot procedure? Yes, of course it would be. To achieve this, we have to configure OpenVPN to automatically start our VPNs via init script. Let's have a look at the responsible 'default' file and adjust the settings accordingly. $ sudo nano /etc/default/openvpn Which should have a similar content to this: # This is the configuration file for /etc/init.d/openvpn## Start only these VPNs automatically via init script.# Allowed values are "all", "none" or space separated list of# names of the VPNs. If empty, "all" is assumed.# The VPN name refers to the VPN configutation file name.# i.e. "home" would be /etc/openvpn/home.conf#AUTOSTART="all"#AUTOSTART="none"#AUTOSTART="home office"## ... more information which remains unmodified ... With the OpenVPN client configuration as described above you would either set AUTOSTART to "all" or to "client" to enable automatic start of your VPN(s) during boot. You should also take care that your iptables commands are executed after the link has been established, too. You can easily test this configuration without reboot, like so: $ sudo service openvpn restart Enjoy stable VPN connections between your Linux system(s) and a WatchGuard Firebox SSL remote server. Cheers, JoKi

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150  | Next Page >