Search Results

Search found 7154 results on 287 pages for 'networking'.

Page 146/287 | < Previous Page | 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153  | Next Page >

  • Asus PCE-N53 11n N600 PCI-E Adapter on 3.x kernel

    - by CITguy
    Problem ASUS PCE-N53 wireless NIC doesn't work for latest versions of the linux kernel. How do I get it working on my system? (Note: I'm posting the answer I've found for others to use.) Installing Driver for Linux 3.x Kernel ASUS provides Linux drivers from their website, but it mentions that the driver supports "Linux Kernel 2.6.x", so it won't work without a some modifications to the driver code. Fortunately, an archlinux forum mentions similar problems and one user was able to create a patch for kernel 3.8.x that seems to work with kernel 3.11.x. Here's how I got it working: Prerequisites Ubuntu: sudo apt-get install build-essential Arch: sudo pacman -S base-devel Steps: 1. Download the driver from the ASUS website The download can be found under "Support Drivers & Tools". 2. Unzip the contents of the downloaded file cd into the new directory 3. Patch The arch forum mentions a 3.8 patch file that needs to be downloaded. Download rt5592sta_fix_64bit_3.8.patch to the current directory. tar -xvf {driver_source.tar.gz} cd into the directory created in previous step patch -p1 < ../rt5592sta_fix_64bit_3.8.patch 4. Compile NOTE: You will need to use sudo for it to compile properly. sudo make sudo make install sudo modprobe rt5592sta 5. Enjoy If all is well, you should now have a working card.

    Read the article

  • Find slow network nodes between two data centers

    - by 2called-chaos
    I've got a problem with syncing big amount of data between two data centers. Both machines have got a gigabit connection and are not fully occupied but the fastest that I am able to get is something between 6 and 10 Mbit = not acceptable! Yesterday I made some traceroute which indicates huge load on a LEVEL3 router but the problem exists for weeks now and the high response time is gone (20ms instead of 300ms). How can I trace this to find the actual slow node? Thought about a traceroute with bigger packages but will this work? In addition this problem might not be related to one of our servers as there are much higher transmission rates to other servers or clients. Actually office = server is faster than server <= server! Any idea is appreciated ;) Update We actually use rsync over ssh to copy the files. As encryption tends to have more bottlenecks I tried a HTTP request but unfortunately it is just as slow. We have a SLA with one of the data centers. They said they already tried to change the routing because they say this is related to a cheap network where the traffic gets routed through. It is true that it will route through a "cheapnet" but only the other way around. Our direction goes through LEVEL3 and the other way goes through lambdanet (which they said is not a good network). If I got it right (I'm a network intermediate) they simulated a longer path to force routing through LEVEL3 and they announce LEVEL3 in the AS path. I basically want to know if they're right or they're just trying to abdicate their responsibility. The thing is that the problem exists in both directions (while different routes), so I think it is in the responsibility of our hoster. And honestly, I don't believe that there is a DC2DC connection which only can handle 600kb/s - 1,5 MB/s for weeks! The question is how to detect WHERE this bottleneck is

    Read the article

  • Openstack - Connectivity between instances on 2 separate nodes

    - by drcursor
    I have the following setup: 1 x Management Node (node A) 2 x Compute Nodes (node B & C) 1 x Volume Node (node D) Relevant configurations: VlanManager multi_host=true Node B[eth0=192.168.6.102;br100=10.1.0.6] Node C [eth0=192.168.6.103;br100=10.1.0.4] I can ping between instances on the same node,but not with instances in different nodes. If I run "brctl br100 eth0" , Instances can ping between nodes, but I loose conectivity on eth0 (192.168.6.102/192.168.6.103) What do I have to change to be able to ping instances between nodes while maintaining normal connectivity on eth0 ?

    Read the article

  • What is the right way to use Internet Sharing in OS X?

    - by Bob King
    For a while now I've been using the Wireless in my Mac Mini as a seperate WiFi access point because my main router doesn't quite cover my whole house. There is a dedicated CAT 5E line down to the Mini, which has a static IP address. I've turned Internet Sharing on, using Airport/WiFi but it seems my options for security are limited. Can I do WPA2? Also, it seems like my iPhone only connects 25% of the time, and the rest of the time it claims I've given a bad password. I've tried "Forget this network" repeatedly.

    Read the article

  • Odd internet packet routing

    - by NachoChip
    I want to know is there anyway to explicitly control the packet routing. I try to connect my computer in HK from San Francisco. It is extremely slow and I use tracert to see what is going on. It seems the packet get routed from HK to Europe and then to New York and then to San Francisco. In US, I am using Astound Cable. Is there any suggestion I can force the packet to not go around the world before it reach my computer? Or it is all ISP dependent?

    Read the article

  • Encrypted WiFi with no password?

    - by Ian Boyd
    Is there any standard that allows a WiFi connection to be encrypted, but not require a password? i know that (old, weak) WEP, and newer WPA/WPA2 require a password (i.e. shared secret). Meanwhile my own wireless connections are "open", and therefore unencrypted. There is no technical reason why i can't have an encrypted link that doesn't require the user to enter any password. Such technology exists today (see public key encryption and HTTPS). But does such a standard exist for WiFi? Note: i only want to protect communications, not limit internet access. i get the sense that no such standard exists (since i'm pretty capable with Google), but i'd like it confirmed. Claraification: i want to protect communcations, not limit internet access. That means users are not required to have a password (or its moral equivalent). This means users are not required: to know a password to know a passphrase to enter a CAPTCHA to draw a secret to have a key fob to know a PIN to use a pre-shared key have a pre-shared file to possess a certificate In other words: it has the same accessibility as before, but is now encrypted.

    Read the article

  • Cisco VPN Client on Vista - Virtual Adapter

    - by ScaleOvenStove
    I have used the Cisco VPN client for years, and on XP it is pretty much rock solid, on Vista, not so much. You might be able to connect, but unless you set up a constant ping to something, it usually will disconnect, with this error: Reason 442: Failed to enable Virtual Adapater Now, most sysadmins will say, update you client - yes, I know, it hasnt mitigated the issue, ever. I have been using it on Vista since it came out, and updated my client every time a new update comes out. I have used it where the VPN server was a Cisco PIX and a Windows Box allowing the Cisco Client to connect. Anyone have any fixes that you can do on your client to fix this issue?

    Read the article

  • unable to access a NAT'ed IP via a VPN on Windows 7

    - by crmpicco
    I connect to a range of servers hosted by one provider via a VPN. I can connect to the VPN fine, however when I then go and try and connect to the server(s) it fails. A NAT'ed IP address that has worked up until today, has stopped working either via SSH/SFTP. As you can see below, if I try and ping the IP then it responds with Destination host unreachable, but, for some reason it says the reply is from 192.168.0.8? If it enter this IP address in my browser, I get nothing. Where is this IP coming from and is there any good reason why I cannot access the IP I am trying to ping? C:\Users\crmpicco>ping 172.26.100.x Pinging 172.26.100.x with 32 bytes of data: Reply from 192.168.0.8: Destination host unreachable. Reply from 192.168.0.8: Destination host unreachable. Reply from 192.168.0.8: Destination host unreachable. Reply from 192.168.0.8: Destination host unreachable. Ping statistics for 172.26.100.x: Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss), I have the VPN remote host address of 80.75.67.x, which shows me as being connected. But i'm unsure if there is a config issue at the server side or my end that has caused this issue? I have had some recent Win7 (automatic) updates, but it's hard to tell if that's caused this problem. This is my output from arp: C:\Users\cmorton>arp -a Interface: 192.168.0.8 --- 0xe Internet Address Physical Address Type 192.168.0.1 00-18-4d-b9-68-5e dynami 192.168.0.6 00-f4-b9-68-0c-9a dynami 192.168.0.7 08-00-27-f2-9f-d6 dynami 192.168.0.255 ff-ff-ff-ff-ff-ff static 224.0.0.22 01-00-5e-00-00-16 static 224.0.0.251 01-00-5e-00-00-fb static 224.0.0.252 01-00-5e-00-00-fc static 239.255.255.250 01-00-5e-7f-ff-fa static 255.255.255.255 ff-ff-ff-ff-ff-ff static Interface: 192.168.56.1 --- 0x15 Internet Address Physical Address Type 192.168.56.255 ff-ff-ff-ff-ff-ff static 224.0.0.22 01-00-5e-00-00-16 static 224.0.0.251 01-00-5e-00-00-fb static 224.0.0.252 01-00-5e-00-00-fc static 255.255.255.255 ff-ff-ff-ff-ff-ff static

    Read the article

  • dd-wrt switch for PfSense

    - by Kmao
    I currently have eth2 on my pfsense set up, and configured as 192.168.1.1, it has dhcp setup with allocation being 192.168.1.10 - 192.168.1.245. On my dd-wrt box, i disabled the WAN, and set it to act as a port for the switch. I disabled dhcp, dnsmasq, spi firewall, Wlan0 and set a static IP for the router being 192.168.1.10 Pfsense is plugged into lan0 and pc plugged into lan1 (wan port is empty) I have followed a few different guides, but i can't seem to get my router to act as a switch. Anyone have success using DD-WRT as a switch while using pfsense as your dhcp/dns/gateway. Any advice would help :)

    Read the article

  • VirtualBox guest OS accessing local server on host OS.

    - by Maxim
    Hi, On my Ubuntu HOST I have my local webserver. I installed VirtualBox and Debian as a GUEST. I would like Debian guest to be able to hit my webserver running on my Ubuntu host (for example, I just type http://localhost:8080/ in the browser under Debian). How can this be done? Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • server dosnt produce syn-ack

    - by steve
    I have a small program that take packets from the nfqueue . change the ip.dst to my server dst (and ttl), recalc checksum and return the packet to the nfqueue. The server and the client are linux and apache web server is run on the server and listen on port 80. i open telnet in the client to fake ip on port 80 . the packet is changed by my program and sent to the server, but the target server (the new dst ip) get the syn , but dosnt generate syn-ack (the server also belong to me , so i can see that it get the syn with checksum correct , but dosnt generate syn-ack). if i do the same , but with the real server ip as the dest, the tcp handshake is done correct (in this case i just change the ttl and checksum. The change that i did to the ttl is just a test to see that my checksum calc is ok). i compare the sys's , but didnt find and difference. Any idea? Ps. i saw this topic : Server not sending a SYN/ACK packet in response to a SYN packet and i set all flags the same , but this didnt help. Thank you

    Read the article

  • Slackware - Assigning routes (IP address ranges) to one of many network adapters

    - by Dogbert
    I am using a Slackware 13.37 virtual machine within VirtualBox (current). I currently have a number of Ubuntu VMs on a single server, along with this Slackware VM. All VMs have been set up to use "Internal Network" mode, so they are all on a private LAN, and can see each other (ie: share files amongst themselves), but they remain private from the outside world. On on the these VMs (the Slackware one), I need to be able to grant it access to both this private network, and the internet at large. The first suggestion I found for handling this is to add another virtual network adapter to the VM, then set it to NAT. This results in the Slackware VM having the following network adapter setup: -NIC#1: Internal Network -NIC#2: NAT I want to set up the first network adapter (NIC#1) to handle all traffic on the following subnets: 10.10.0.0/255.255.0.0 192.168.1.0/255.255.255.0 And I want the second virtual network adapter (NIC#2) to handle everything else (ie: internet access). May I please have some assistance in setting this up on my Slackware VM? Additionally, I have searched for similar questions on SuperUser and Stackoverflow, but they all seem to pertain to my situation (ie: they all refer to OSX, or Ubuntu via the use of some UI-based tool). I'm trying to do this on Slack specifically via the command-line. Thanks!

    Read the article

  • VPN - local and remote networks IP collision

    - by Guido García
    I have created a VPN connection in Windows using the New Network Connection wizard that comes with Windows. It works without problems in most places, but there is one concrete place where, despite the connection to the remote public IP works fine, it is not able to validate the login/password and establish the VPN connection. In this place, the network is 10.0.0.x (the same I use in other places where I am able to connect). The remote network is 192.168.x.x, so I suspect there is some kind of IP collision, because before connecting, a traceroute to i.e. 192.168.0.40 does not fail. 1 4 ms 1 ms 1 ms LINKSYS [10.0.0.1] 2 5 ms 1 ms 1 ms 172.26.27.1 3 4 ms 5 ms 3 ms 192.168.1.100 ... (more) I can't modify the local network further than the first router (10.0.0.1). That is the only different I've found so far. Any idea about how to solve it? Thank you.

    Read the article

  • Dynamically blocking excessive HTTP bandwidth use?

    - by Jeff Atwood
    We were a little surprised to see this on our Cacti graphs for June 4 web traffic: We ran Log Parser on our IIS logs and it turns out this was a perfect storm of Yahoo and Google bots indexing us.. in that 3 hour period, we saw 287k hits from 3 different google ips, plus 104k from yahoo. Ouch? While we don't want to block Google or Yahoo, this has come up before. We have access to a Cisco PIX 515E, and we're thinking about putting that in front so we can dynamically deal with bandwidth offenders without touching our web servers directly. But is that the best solution? I'm wondering if there is any software or hardware that can help us identify and block excessive bandwidth use, ideally in real time? Perhaps some bit of hardware or open-source software we can put in front of our web servers? We are mostly a windows shop but we have some linux skills as well; we're also open to buying hardware if the PIX 515E isn't sufficient. What would you recommend?

    Read the article

  • When browsing a specific network share remotely, Windows Explorer continuously jumps back to the parent folder

    - by Evil Pigeon
    I am accessing a specific network path on another domain. It looks something like this: \\CoputerName.OtherDomain.in\c$\Inetpub\Testing\Website\ In under 30 seconds, I am automatically jumped back to \\CoputerName.OtherDomain.in\c$\Inetpub\Testing\ In less time it then jumps back to \\CoputerName.OtherDomain.in\c$\Inetpub\ Then it jumps back to c$ for its final resting place. \\CoputerName.OtherDomain.in\c$\ At first I thought this had to with a faulty keyboard, but this behaviour also occurs when the window does not have focus. It's as if windows thinks that the folder no longer exists (as in someone else has deleted or moved it). This behaviour is not specific to my PC either, it occurs from other machines in the office. Edit: It looks like this issue only occurs from other Windows 7 machines. There are no issues accessing the path from XP.

    Read the article

  • Multiple VLANs on a single subnet

    - by mstaessen
    I would like to establish the setup shown below. The image is taken from (http://gcharriere.com/blog/?p=620) and explains how to set this up on a brocade device. I would like to use an ubuntu server to do the routing. Right now, the switch and the server/router are connected with a trunk and the server uses the vlan package, kernel module and (inner) subnets for routing. I would like that: no IP addresses get lost in the subnetting (outer subnet is /26, inner subnets are /28) I don't want the rigorous subdivision of my outer subnet. I want to assign a VLAN to any IP in the outer subnet. How do I need to configure my interfaces? What is the "ubuntu" translation of "ip follow ve"? Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Setting a wireless access point on Ubuntu server 11.10

    - by Solignis
    I am trying to setup a wifi access point with my Ubuntu server. I have managed to get my phone to connect the wireless and now it get a DHCP lease. Though it still cannot ping out or get pinged by anything on my network. I am prety sure my problem is iptables, but I not sure what would be wrong. Here is what my rules look like. (The ones pertaining to the bridge interface) # Allow traffic to / from wireless bridge interface iptables -A INPUT -i br0 -j ACCEPT iptables -A OUTPUT -o br0 -j ACCEPT I am guessing my rules are a little lean, the bridge exists on the same subnet as everything else on my network, I am using a 10.0.0.0/24 subnet. EDIT Oh yeah I should mention also, when I do a ping test, I get Destination Host Unreachable as the error.

    Read the article

  • Windows 7 Automatically Connecting To Unsecured Wireless Networks On Startup

    - by Xtend
    Most of the questions on this topic related to folks connecting to somebody else's wireless network when their own was available and could remedy the situation by going to their connections and unchecking the "connect automatically" box. See this: " Avoid automatically connecting to wireless network on windows 7 " as an example. In my situation, I've noticed that Win 7 will automatically connect to any unsecured wifi network - even if I have never connected to it in the past. If I am traveling and boot Win 7, it will start and connect to what appears to be the best signaled unsecured network without prompting me for confirmation (note: in the above link, "Naveen" seems to have same problem). Obviously, that is a security concern to me. Further, when I open "Network and Sharing" and "Manage wireless networks" the network is not displayed (probably because I labelled it a public network). Again, these are new, never connected with before, wireless networks. I always promptly disconnect from them but don't want to have to be on constant guard for an auto connection to a malicious network. This began about a month ago, as I recall, Win 7 did not behave like this in the past, I didn't monkey with wifi settings, and don't use a 3rd party connection manager. I did have to download some internet security certificates for army website access but I don't think that should mess with network settings. Any ideas how I can tell Win7 cease automatically connecting to networks or, at least, to prompt me for a confirmation before connecting?

    Read the article

  • Improve wireless performance

    - by djechelon
    Hello, I have a Trust Speedshare Turbo Pro router, which is running on channel 6. I found that the wireless signal (and network performance) dramatically drops from my PDA (I can barely attach to the network, even if I set the PDA's energy settings to maximum wireless performance) when I even exit my room, and I don't have shielded walls or something like that. I can't even stream a SD video from my desktop (connected via LAN) to my laptop using WiFi, while via LAN it works fine. I read that changing router's channel could improve performance due to interference reducing. I found that almost all wireless networks around here run on channels 6 and 11. I tried to go to my router's settings page to change channel, but I found that the combo box only allows me to select 6!! I'm not sure, but I may have been able in the past to change channel, though not to all of the available channels. A few minutes ago I tried a firmware upgrade, but it didn't solve my problem. My question is Is it possible that my router is someway locked to its channel? I bought it on my own, I didn't receive it from my ISP Apart from boosting the antenna power to the maximum (which, by the way, increases the EM radiation my and my family's bodies absorb 24/7 and is little more environment-unfriendly), do you have any tips on getting high quality transmission up to 5 metres from the antenna? Thank you

    Read the article

  • media storage social network (Host plan)

    - by Samir
    I'm wondering what the best way is to host media for a social network site. Let's say that I expect my social network to reach 500.000 users in 2 years time. I'm not sure how I can best setup my hosting plan in order to have a solid bases to store media files. Which hosting plan would you recommend me to start with and how can I enhance the plan?

    Read the article

  • diagnostic software for wifi adapter

    - by Nathan Fellman
    I'm having trouble with my wifi connection. Is there any software out there that can help me determine if the problem is in the drivers or in the hardware? Regretfully, I'm working on Vista Edit: The problem I'm having is that the Vista reports that the wireless radio is connected, shows an IP and all, the router also shows that the computer is connected, but there's no connectivity. I can't logon to the router, and I can't even ping it. When I ping it I get the response: General Failure I have tried connecting with and without various wireless security protocols. I have tried disabling the wireless adapter and re-enabling it from the Device Manager I have tried updating the driver None of this has helped. When I connect via Ethernet (with a cable, that is), everything works fine. Edit: I'm not using any firewall on the computer, that I'm aware of. The IP address for the WIFI adapter is similar to the one for the LAN adapter. They differ by one.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153  | Next Page >