Search Results

Search found 5670 results on 227 pages for 'zend router'.

Page 148/227 | < Previous Page | 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155  | Next Page >

• Why my 2nd ip from traceroute is not answering the ping anymore?

  - by Pedro77

  My Internet is really laggy today, I did a tracerout and I realize that I'm having no answer from an ip at the beginning of the traceroute. see: Tracing route to 12.129.202.154 over a maximum of 30 hops 1 <1 ms <1 ms <1 ms 192.168.0.1 2 * * * Request timed out. 3 8 ms 8 ms 8 ms bd044008.virtua.com.br [189.4.64.8] 4 9 ms 8 ms 8 ms bd044009.virtua.com.br [189.4.64.9] 5 26 ms 26 ms 24 ms embratel-T0-1-5-0-tacc01.cas.embratel.net.br [200.174.243.21] 6 360 ms 15 ms 12 ms ebt-T0-15-0-12-tcore01.ctamc.embratel.net.br [200.244.140.218] 7 330 ms 349 ms 261 ms ebt-Bundle-POS11942-intl04.mianap.embratel.net.br [200.230.220.10] 8 139 ms 141 ms 139 ms sl-st30-mia-.sprintlink.net [144.223.64.221] Connection diagram: PC - Router configured as access point - Router (192.168.0.1) - Cable modem (192.168.100.1). Well, I think it is odd that the 2nd ip is not returning the ping. I looked some old tracerout logs to see what was the 2nd ip. The ip was: 10.19.0.1 So, what this 2nd ip stand for? How can I find why it is not answering the ping? I don't understand it, if does not answer the ping, how can the packets continue (yeah newbie question)? edit: well, because the hope 3 have a ping of 8 ms the hop 2 request time out should really not be a problem. But it is still odd that the 2nd hop stopped to answer ping request. So my doubts are: 1. Were the ip 10.19.0.1 is from? 2. Why it stopped to answer ping requests? 3. How can hop 7 be smaller than 6 and 8 smaller than 7 and 6!?? Shouldn't the pings be higher for each hop? Like: hop 3 time should be the sum of the hops before it plus its own time (hop 3 = 1+2+3) ??

  Read the article

• How to configure VirtualBox server for performance at home

  - by BluJai

  I currently have two physical Ubuntu Server 10.10 servers at home: one serves as our firewall/router/DHCP/VPN server and the other performs double-duty as a file server and a VirtualBox host for an Ubuntu Desktop 10.10 machine which I use from remote connections (via NoMachine) for many thin-client purposes which are irrelevant to my question. What I'd like to accomplish is to consolidate the two physical machines into one which is a dedicated VirtualBox host (most likely running Ubuntu Server 10.10). Note that I'd like to stick with VirtualBox (if possible) because I'm most comfortable with it and use it on a daily basis at both home and work. Specifically, I plan to have one VM set up as file server, another as the firewall/router/DHCP/VPN (or possibly split those a bit) and a third, which is the only current VM (already VirtualBox), which is the thin-client host. My question comes down to performance and/or recommendations about the file server VM. The file server hosts about 6 terabytes of data across 4 drives. What I'd like to do is use raw disk access from the VM directly to the existing disks. However, I'm curious what performance advantage/disadvantage that would have as compared to using shared folders from the VM host and basically just have the whole drive served as a shared folder to the VM which would then serve it to the other machines on the network. I don't know if virtual disks would even work in this scenario and I certainly wouldn't want a drive to be filled with just a single file which is 1.5 TB (disk image). To add understanding of context, but not to get additional advice, I want to virtualize these machines because I intend to regularly use the snapshot capabilities of VirtualBox for the system disks (which will be virtual drives) of the VMs and I have some physical space/power needs to address (as I mentioned, this is at home).

  Read the article

• How to configure VirtualBox server for performance at home

  - by BluJai

  I currently have two physical Ubuntu Server 10.10 servers at home: one serves as our firewall/router/DHCP/VPN server and the other performs double-duty as a file server and a VirtualBox host for an Ubuntu Desktop 10.10 machine which I use from remote connections (via NoMachine) for many thin-client purposes which are irrelevant to my question. What I'd like to accomplish is to consolidate the two physical machines into one which is a dedicated VirtualBox host (most likely running Ubuntu Server 10.10). Note that I'd like to stick with VirtualBox (if possible) because I'm most comfortable with it and use it on a daily basis at both home and work. Specifically, I plan to have one VM set up as file server, another as the firewall/router/DHCP/VPN (or possibly split those a bit) and a third, which is the only current VM (already VirtualBox), which is the thin-client host. My question comes down to performance and/or recommendations about the file server VM. The file server hosts about 6 terabytes of data across 4 drives. What I'd like to do is use raw disk access from the VM directly to the existing disks. However, I'm curious what performance advantage/disadvantage that would have as compared to using shared folders from the VM host and basically just have the whole drive served as a shared folder to the VM which would then serve it to the other machines on the network. I don't know if virtual disks would even work in this scenario and I certainly wouldn't want a drive to be filled with just a single file which is 1.5 TB (disk image). To add understanding of context, but not to get additional advice, I want to virtualize these machines because I intend to regularly use the snapshot capabilities of VirtualBox for the system disks (which will be virtual drives) of the VMs and I have some physical space/power needs to address (as I mentioned, this is at home).

  Read the article

• Very strange networking problem in all computers in my house

  - by Anthony

  I have three computers in my house: One desktop (wired), and two laptops (wireless). I'm using Cox Communications (yes they suck), and yesterday they had a major outage. I know it was them because I called them up when I started losing connection to the internet. All the computers can connect just fine, but they don't have internet access. It just says "local only". The weird thing is, some of them work occasionally. For the first day my laptop was working perfectly, while all the other computers couldn't connect. Later on in the day it got reversed, and the desktop was the one with internet access. By the second day the problem on Cox's end was fixed, but we still had no access. I called them up and they reset my modem, and did the usual troubleshooting stuff. It never fixed the problem, but we found out that the problem had to do with conflicting IP addresses. My router was a Linksys WRT54G and it was about 5 years old. I figured it might have gotten damaged from the outage since it was so old, and now it's having trouble "fixing itself" and giving out the proper IP addresses. So I bought a new router, a Cisco Linksys E1000. I set everything up, and still the same problem. My computer has access right now (that's how I'm writing this), but no other computers seem to be able to get access. Is there possible damage to the modem? Can someone help me please? Sorry for this being so long.

  Read the article

• Port Forwarding(?) TD-W8961nd

  - by rich

  I have a bit of a weird internet setup. I am connected via a decent WiFi connection (from work) which I pick up using a Buffalo Airstation Wireless-G box. This simply picks up the signal and gives me 4 ethernet ports to connect to. That's all fine and works as it should. I also have a TP LINK TD-W8961nd router which used to be connected to the Airstation via an ethernet cable so I could essentially have WiFi access in my house. To cut a long story short I can't remember how the hell I got it to work and I can't find the notes I scribbled down on how to do it. I'm pretty sure I need to tell the router what ip to pick up the internet connection from and have the local wifi as a seperate network. How the hell I do that I have no idea right now. Can anyone give me some advice on this? If you need more information ask and I will be able to do so. Cheers in advance. edit I'm in work at the moment so I can't give 100% details but I will be able to later on.

  Read the article

• NETKEY IPsec and ARP

  - by Shawn J. Goff

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

  Read the article

• Configure Cisco Pix 515 with DMZ and no NAT

  - by Rickard

  I hope that someone could shed some light over my situation, as I am fairly new to PIX configurations. I will be getting a new net for my department, which I am going to configure. At my hands, I have a Cisco PIX 515 (not E), a Cisco 2948 switch (and if needed, I can bring up a 2621XM router, but this is my private and not owned by my dept.). The network I will be getting is the following: 10.12.33.0/26 Link net between the ISP routers and my network will be 10.12.32.0/29 where GW is .1 and HSRP roututers are .2 and .3 The ISP has asked me not to NAT the addresses on my side, as they will set it up to give 10.12.33.2 as a one-to-one nat to a public IP. The rest of the IP's will be a many-to-one NAT to another public IP. 10.12.33.2 is supposed to be my server placed on the DMZ, the rest of the IP's will be used for my clients and the AD server (which is currently also acting as a DHCP server in the old network config with another ISP). Now, the question is, how would I best configure this? I mean, am I thinking wrong here, I am expected to put the PIX first from the ISP outlet, then to the switch which will connect my clients. But with the ISP routers being on a different network, how will the firewall forward the packets to the other network, it's a firewall, not a router. I have actually never configured a pix before, and fortunately, this is more like a lab network, not a production network, so if something goes wrong it's not the end of the world, if though annoying. I am not asking for a full configuration from anyone, just some directions, or possibly some links which will give me some hints. Thank you very much!

  Read the article

• How can I split 200Mbps of streaming traffic into routers?

  - by Jared

  As the title says, I have 200Mbps of streaming video traffic coming into my command center. How do I split the load between routers? Setup is like this: fiber --- router --- switch --- workstations I'm sorry I haven't dealt with this much traffic before. so please be gentle if you're going to kick me out :) EDITED FOR DETAILS: Okay, this specific project is for our company's IP CCTV system. We have deployed over 100++ cameras all over a building/campus and we have estimated each camera to take about 2Mbps of bandwidth each. Now, they're all connected to a switch and that's entirely fine. But coming into our command center, they have to be on a router since it'll get more than 200++ cameras next year (and I don't want to have too many hosts on one subnet). My plan was to have the 1st hundred on a 172.16.9.x block and the 2nd hundred on a 172.16.10.x block (all /24). The servers I have are currently sized to match (about 5 dual 6-core xeons) and I'd have about 19 workstations all streaming video from the 5 servers. (servers pull video from the cameras). But 200Mbps of constant traffic? How the hell do I even break this up? I need to have 1 gateway, to manage the routes... I honestly think I'm way in over my head.

  Read the article

• Windows XP can use a wired network port, but MacBook (OS X) fails on the same port

  - by Dean Hill

  I wired the Cat5 in my house seven years ago. The wired ports have worked fine with both my Windows XP laptop and MacBook. My wireless network also works fine, but I like to use wired occasionally. One of the Cat5 runs wasn't terminated with a jack, so I recently terminated this wire with a port/jack on the wall end and a standard Cat5 plug on the end that plugs into my router. This is the same setup as my other runs. Unfortunately, the MacBook isn't working well with the new wired port. The OS X Network System Preferences show the IP, Subnet, Router, etc., and everything looks fine. A "netstat -ibd" shows no errors or dropped packets. However, when I open a page in Safari, the status says "Contacting 'www.google.com'" and appears to hang. If I wait for a couple minutes, part of the Google page starts to display, but it is still not the full page load. When I use a Windows XP laptop on the same wired port, everything works fine. An internet speed test shows good results and all web pages load fine. A "netstat -e" under Windows shows no errors. I've used a Cat5 tester, and the cable tests fine (wires 1-8 light up in sequence). I've replaced both the port/jack and the connector twice to make sure I wired things correctly. I'd really like this Cat5 to work with the MacBook (and I'm trying to avoid running a new length of cable). Any ideas what the problem could be?

  Read the article

• Webmin ADSL module

  - by expatcm

  I was wondering if the Webmin ADSL module is going to help me solve a problem .... but I cannot find any documentation telling me what the module does ..... Any ideas? What I am hoping is that it will solve a problem .... I am just in the process of setting up a Debian server. I will use the DHCP server as part of the Debian setup to manage the lan IP addresses. I want to turn off the external DHCP server which is part of the Linksys ADSL modem / router and use just the modem. The challenge I have is knowing what I need to do in order to get the public DNS on the eth1. When I turn off the DHCP on the modem / router not a lot happens apart from no longer being able to access the settings .......... So I am looking at this Webmin module and wondering if it is to manage the ADSL connection and find the public DNS address .... The local DHCP server is working well for the lan, I am just stuck for the external DNS.

  Read the article

• Redirect specific domains with DNS

  - by user66377

  Currently we filter internet content using OpenDNS, our internal Windows DC/DNS servers point to the router's DNS, which then points to the OpenDNS servers. This works well to block all computer's on the network equally. New issue. We now need to separate what computers can go to what sites. So facebook is blocked for everyone right now, but I need to open it up to the 3 community computers now. The 3 community computers will be on an untrusted network seperate from the company computers so they can have their own DNS server, from their own router. The issue is though they still must connect to the internet using the same IP address. So OpenDNS sees the same IP and blocks them the same way. We are looking into getting a second IP, but it's not likely an option without going up to the next major level with our ISP which we don't want to do. My thought is this. Can I setup a DNS server on the untrusted network, and then depending on the request that comes in, have it send it to either OpenDNS or our ISP's DNS? Example www.facebook.com and www.youtube.com are both on the OpenDNS blacklist. So if they go to www.youtube.com, the local DNS server goes to the ISP's DNS to get the IP and thus the client gets the right IP and can go to the site. This would be manually entered for each allowed site thus creating a white list. Then if they go to www.facebook.com, since the local DNS server does not find an entry, it sends the request to OpenDNS, which then sees the site is on the blacklist, and thus sends the it's blocked webpage. The local DNS server can be either Bind on Linux or MS DNS on Window 2008. If this can be done, can you give some direction as well as I've never setup a DNS such as this before. Thanks

  Read the article

• Mac and L2TP VPN no problems, xp, vista and 7 no go :s

  - by The_cobra666

  Hi all, I've got some weird problem and I'm out off options. The situation: When connecting from my mac to the VPN server (Windows Server 2003 R2) with L2TP PSK, everything works like it should. However, when I connect from a Windows PC, nothing happens. it spits out error 809 and sometimes 789. Now I know that my ports are OK, since the mac can connect without any problems. It's the same for: XP, Vista SP2 and 7. None can connect. If I connect to the VPN server directly (to the internal IP instead of WAN from the router), it connect's without a problem. Connecting using PPTP works... now if only L2TP would work thank you very much Windows! I have checked the counters on my linux router with iptables -L -nv and they do not raise when connecting. Not on ACCEPT and not on DROP. Only when connecting from the mac. I've found the guide from Microsoft to enable: AssumeUDPEncapsulationContextOnSendRule in the registery. I have set it to "2", on the server and client. Still no go. After that registery key it started giving me error 789 instead of 809. The IPSEC services are running on the client and server. Is there anyone that ppleease can help me with this! I've been working on this for 2 days and I'm out of options. Thanks!

  Read the article

• Passive FTP Server Port Configuration Troubles Win2003

  - by Chris

  Win2003 Ports 20 & 21 are open IIS6 - Direct Metabase Edit enabled Configured FTP service passive range to 5500-5550 5500-5550 added to windows firewall iisreset and double checked by restarting ftp service nothing has changed, when I connect and enter passive, it still hangs when ever I try to LIST or transfer files. Active is just as useless. Microsoft Windows [Version 6.1.7600] Copyright (c) 2009 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved. C:\Users\user>ftp ftp> open x.x.x.x Connected to x.x.x.x. 220-Microsoft FTP Service xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 220 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx User (x.x.x.x:(none)): user 331 Password required for user. Password: 230-YOUR ACTIVITY IS BEING RECORDED TO THE FULLEST EXTENT 230 User user logged in. ftp> QUOTE PASV 227 Entering Passive Mode (82,19,25,134,21,124) ftp> ls 200 PORT command successful. 150 Opening ASCII mode data connection for file list. and it hangs.. Now I can see from microsooft documentation that on newer windows releases, additional steps such as these are suggested, but they dont work on 2003... netsh advfirewall firewall add rule name=”FTP Service” action=allow service=ftpsvc protocol=TCP dir=in netsh advfirewall set global StatefulFTP disable is there anything I am missing, what is this StatefulFTP malarkey at the end EDIT I can connect and transfer binary files using WinSCP client - Therefore the problem must be with my ftp commands no? Can anyone see anything wrong with my windows ftp client example? why would it hang on ls, i tried QUOTE LIST as well, and that just hangs, and the windows ftp client doesnt work in active, it hangs if I try to go "binary" then put - This worked before I added 5500-5550 on the router. I have since added this range to the router but no difference to the windows ftp client.

  Read the article

• Sonicwall TZ210 - Set up public wifi on separate subnet & interface

  - by thomasjbarrett

  I want to set up a public wifi by connecting another router to the X6 interface, and put it on a separate subnet (192.168.10.0/24) & in the DMZ Zone to keep it away from the regular LAN. I believe I have the network settings correct: the router has acquired the IP and DNS information from the TZ210, and the TZ210 shows it as an active DHCP lease. X6 is in the DMZ. I now have a routing/NAT/firewall problem, since I can't get any traffic to travel from the subnet to the internet. I can't get to any external websites and can't ping the TZ210 from the subnet. X0 is the regular LAN, and X1 is the WAN. Looking for any tips or tutorials on this. Here's my current relevant rules: Routing Source: X6 Subnet Destination: Any Service: Any Gateway: Default Gateway Interface: X6 Source: Any Destination: X6 Subnet Service: Any Gateway: 0.0.0.0 Interface: X6 NAT Policies Source Original: Any Translated: WAN IP Destination Original: Any Translated: Original Inbound: X6 Outbound: X1 Source Original: Any Translated: U0 IP Destination Original: Any Translated: Original Inbound: X6 Outbound: U0 Firewall DMZ LAN : Deny All DMZ WAN : Allow All LAN DMZ : Allow All WAN DMZ : Allow All

  Read the article

• Route all traffic via OpenVPN client

  - by Ilya

  I've got OpenVPN client running on 192.168.0.3. What I'd like to do is route all the traffic from the second computer with 192.168.0.100 via OpenVPN client that's running on the first computer. My router ip is 192.168.0.1 Network topology: Windows computer with OpenVPN client: 192.168.0.3 Windows computer whose traffic has to be rerouted: 192.168.0.100 Router: 192.168.0.1 I want it to work in the following way: 192.168.0.100 computer => 192.168.0.3 computer => OpenVPN => 192.168.0.1 How can I achieve that by only modifying windows' routing table? I've tried entering the following into windows shell(on computer without VPN), which didn't work (it just dropped my internet connection): route delete 0.0.0.0 mask 255.255.255.255 192.168.0.1 route add 0.0.0.0 mask 255.255.255.255 192.168.0.3 Should I also setup the computer that has OpenVPN client running? Does it have anything to do with windows tcp forwarding? Thanks!

  Read the article

• Suggestions for accessing SQL Server from internet

  - by Ian Boyd

  i need to be able to access a customer's SQL Server, and ideally their entire LAN, remotely. They have a firewall/router, but the guy responsible for it is unwilling to open ports for SQL Server, and is unable to support PPTP forwarding. The admin did open VNC, on a non-stanrdard port, but since they have a dynamic IP it is difficult to find them all the time. In the past i have created a VPN connection that connects back to our network. But that didn't work so well, since when i need access i have to ask the computer-phobic users to double-click the icon and press Connect i did try creating a scheduled task that attempts to keep the VPN connection back to our office up at all times by running: >rasdial "vpn to me" But after a few months the VPN connection went insane, and thought it was both, and neither, connected an disconnected; and the vpn connection wouldn't work again until the server was rebooted. Can anyone think of a way where i can access the customer's LAN that doesn't involve opening ports on the router needing to know their external IP customer interaction of any kind Blah blah blah use vpn vnc protocol has known weaknesses you are unwise to lower your defenses it's not wise to expose SQL Server directly to the internet you stole that line from Empire Customer doesn't care about any of that. Customer wants things to work.

  Read the article

• Optimal Networking Setup for a 2-Story unit?

  - by user29336

  I am moving into a 4 bedroom two-story unit. It’s roughly 2,200 sq ft. I want absolute max throughput possible to be achieved in all focal points. We’re all in internet related industries. Between gaming and web-development latency and throughput are major factors for us. Here’s our main focal points: 1) Garage (office). downstairs 2) Each bedroom x4. upstairs 3) Living room. downstairs The fastest line we can get is Comcast 50mbdown/5up (Wideband). I am looking for the best way to achieve wireless and wired performance for our setup. Our gaming computers may be in our bedroom, and we also may bring it down to the office every now and then for “LAN” sessions. Most wireless will be happening downstairs with our laptops, but since we may do LAN sessions then hard wired latency may be important there too. My concerns: If we do only wireless there would be too much latency for gaming. I don’t know if placing one D-link DGL 4500 on the top floor would be enough; which I currently own. (http://dlink.com/us/en/home-solutions/support/product/dgl-4500-xtreme-n-gaming-router) As far as I’m aware wireless signals transfer best top down. Would this wireless router be enough on top floor and that’s it? My second strategy was a combination of wiring and wireless but I’m not sure what’s easiest way to do this? This is a place we’re renting, so I’m not sure how much leeway we have with wiring, but we’re all pretty competent... if we can’t drill through a wall we can probably “stitch” them across the edges wherever needed. Thoughts on the optimal way to do this?

  Read the article

• Virtual Wifi Issue Windows 7

  - by Matt

  Lately I've been trying to use my laptop as a wireless router in my room. I have it connected to my school's network through ethernet, and I want to set up wireless so that I can use Wifi on my Android phone and iPod Touch. In the past, I used Connectify, but I started having an issue where my phone would find the network, connect, attempt to get the IP, and then suddenly the network would disappear. Then it'd pop up again, and the same process would happen over and over. I decided that I'd totally uninstall Connectify, but after that, neither Virtual Router Manager nor the command prompt could create a viable network either. My phone and even my iPod now encounter the same problem. Neither can successfully connect. So evidently there is something wrong with the laptop's virtual wifi feature, and I have no idea what that could be. I've tried enabling certain services that virtual wifi supposedly relies on, but some of them don't start, namely Remote Access Connection Manager. But I also have read that these enable on their own and that if they are normally not enabled it's fine. Furthermore, I even uninstalled and reinstalled the drivers for my wireless card. Any ideas as to why my virtual wifi won't function? Anything? I really would love to get this working...

  Read the article

• Is it possible to provide a wired ethernet connection to external devices with an extra LAN card?

  - by Ben McCormack

  I'm trying to provide a wired ethernet connection (wireless is not an option for this device) to a device (Samsung blu-ray player) without running Cat5 cable all over the home. I have a PC sitting next to this device and the PC is connected to the network via a wireless USB adapter. Is it possible to provide a wired connection from the PC to the wired device using the (currently unused) ethernet port in the back of the computer? Here's how I envision the device getting connected to the internet via my network: Linksys WRT54G v8 Wireless Router | ``--> Windows 7 PC connected via wireless | ``--> Blu-ray player connected via wired connection to the ethernet port on the PC. If so, how is this done? Will I need a crossover cable? What settings will I need to change in Windows 7 so that the device can connect? NOTE: I'm trying to avoid having to buy a wireless bridge and/or hacking a router with an open-source firmware to get this to work. See my previous question for more details.

  Read the article

• Measure Total Bandwidth for Billing

  - by TonyZ

  I am setting up a new network which customers will host their applications on. It needs to be able to scale out to a few hundred servers and each server will have several VMs on it. Right now in my test environment, after the telco router, we are using a Linux router/firewall which is then connected to a Layer 2 switch. Could be a layer 3 in the future. I need to track total bandwidth per VM for each machine, and I need to do it in a way that it is not part of the VM. Each VM will have a private class ip address which is Natted by the gateway, or we may eventually run more than firewall/reverse proxy off a layer 3 switch. So my thinking is that I can do it off of a promiscuous port on the switches, or at the gateway firewall. I would like to have an out of the box solution, preferably open source. Does anyone have suggestions on the easiest way to set this up, and the easiest tool to use. I have looked at the web sites for Nagios, Zenoss, Zabbix, ntops on the firewall, etc. It is hard to ascertain just from the web sites if they do exactly this or not. Obviously, performance is also somewhat key here. Anything running on the gateway should not drag it down doing traffic accounting. Thanks for any thoughts. Tony Zakula

  Read the article

• Can I autoregister my clients/servers in local DNS?

  - by Christian Wattengård

  Right now I have a W2k12 server at home that I run as a domain controller. This has the extra benefit of registering every "subordinate" computers name in it's DNS so that I don't have to go around remembering IP's all the time. (And it let's me easily run dhcp also on my servers). I need to rework my home network for several odd reasons, and in this new scenario there is no place for a big honking W2k12 server box. I have a RasPI, and I have other smallish linux boxen I can use. (In a worst case scenario I'll use my NUC, but then I'll be forced to use my home cinema's UPnP-client for media... The HORROR!!) Is it possible to set up a DNS-server-"appliance" that somehow autoregisters it's own hostname.. Scenario: Router (N66u) on 172.20.20.1. Runs DHCP on 172.20.20.100-200 range. Server [verdant] of a *nix flavor on 172.20.20.2 Laptop [speedy] of W8 flavor on DHCP assigned Laptop [canary] of W8 flavor on DHCP assigned Desktop [lianyu] of Ubunto flavor on DHCP assigned What I would like is that all of the above servers (except possibly the router) would be available on verdant.starling.lan and canary.starling.lan and so on. This is how it works right now (except the Ubuntu box... I haven't cracked that one yet) because Windows just does this for you.. I would also be able to do this without any manual labor on the server. When I tell my box it's name is smoak it should "immediately" be available as smoak.starling.lan without any extra configuration on my part. How can I do this in a Linux (Ubuntu) environment? (Bonus comment upvote for naming the naming scheme :P )

  Read the article

• Multiple IP's using one NIC connectivity problem - Windows

  - by Vincent

  I have a frame relay network that is directly connected to a GPRS network. I also have a ADSL high speed network and recently I have been trying to achieve the following network configuration using windows 7 (Also tried XP) with no success to date. On one server I have two NIC's NIC1 I would like the following two static IP address's 10.0.1.110 and 10.0.1.200 the cisco router has a default gateway of 10.0.1.1 the ADSL is DHCP. NIC1 and the cisco router do not have access to the internet. NIC2 is setup for DHCP with a primary DNS and secondary DNS configured to enable internet connectivity. With NIC1 all incoming TCP connections are from IP address's starting with 10.192.x.x I cannot establish a TCP connection to both 10.0.1.110 and 10.0.1.200. Its either one or the other. I have a static route implemented in windows of: route -p 10.192.0.0 mask 255.255.0.0 10.0.1.1 metric 1 I have tried leaving out the gateway in the NIC1 and many other combinations with no success. Can anyone please help? What am I doing wrong?

  Read the article

• Is Gmail Being Blocked by my ISP (wait till you read this)?

  - by James

  This is the strangest thing I have ever encountered. I have a desktop on which I cannot access Gmail and also youtube sign in (I believe since youtube is owned by google they both use the same sign in system). So okay, maybe my ISP is blocking these for some reason or maybe my firewall is, or maybe there is something wrong with my connectivity, right? NO. On other computers that uses the same connection via a wireless router I can access both gmail and youtube sign in just fine. On this computer which doesn't have a wireless card and so I have to connect via Ethernet cable (connected to a USB converter since the Ethernet port doesn't work anymore) I can access all sites and services including things like aol and hotmail. But only when it comes to gmail, do I get complete and utter throttling. I even turned off my AV ad Firewall momentarily and no luck. The gmail ages starts to load and by mid point it just stays there loading and loading and loading... never ends. I tried everything, I reset the modem and router multiple times. I reinstalled my operating system from a vista to a windows 7 hoping a complete reinstall would solve the issue, but no luck. So can anyone for the life of them figure out why this could be? And yes, I am going to call my ISP but not to solve this issue, but to cancel them. I want to upgrade to cabel from DSL anyway. I didn't mention my ISP because I'm not sure if that is within the rules (if it's okay some one let me know and I will). P.S. All this happened one day, before gmail was perfectly accessible in this computer. I can't remember anything special that happened on that day prior to this. The only thing I can think of is, my ISP or Google itself is blocking this computer based on it's mac address, but I don't know if that's even done. Additional info: PC: Windows 7 Ultimate 32 bit Connection Type: DSL Connecting Medium: Ethernet cable via USB converter

  Read the article

• How to pipe internet radio into a tuner?

  - by JW

  UPDATE: Thanks everyone for the ideas! This was an area I knew very little about but now I can talk with a little more expertise about it. Much appreciated! Visited my dad this weekend and he wants to pipe some internet radio he's found down to a tuner on quite a distance away in the house. He uses computers for only very basic things: e-mail, getting the Post crossword, checking Yahoo!, checking recipes, etc. There's currently one computer in the house (no router). My initial suggestion (without any research whatsoever) was to get a wireless router and a netbook for downstairs near the tuner, but he initially wasn't too keen about having another computer down there. Anyway, is there any computer hardware that could magically pipe the audio output from the computer down to one set of (RCA) audio inputs on the tuner? Wireless isn't necessary but it probably would be easier. Anyway, thanks for your suggestions! UPDATE Thanks everyone! Voted up all of your suggestions now that I have 15 rep. Much appreciated.

  Read the article

• Windows 7 VPN Error 619

  - by TravisPUK

  So I am running Windows 7 Enterprise. This morning I was able to VPN using the built in VPN (Connect to Work Network etc). I had to change my network's IP address range and now the VPN will not work. It just stalls on the Verifying user name and password... message. But then it returns the 619 error. Anybody know why changing my machine's IP address would cause this problem? Where should I be looking to try and fix this issue? I have tried this on a Windows XP machine that also had the IP address range change and this still connects fine using exactly the same connection details. EDIT The internal network range changed from 192.x.x.x to 10.x.x.x. This was done on the entire Active Directory. All machines are running fine and the Windows XP machine, that works going to the same client VPN mentioned above is on the same network. Both the XP and the Win 7 machines are using DHCP served by the Domain Controller. The client domain is not performing any IP range checks/restrictions. The VPN is outside the internal network, connection is being made via the Internet and not passing through any other machine, other than the normal domain machines, ie DNS etc. This is passing through a router and the router has the relevant VPN passthrough options configured. All internal machines are working correctly with other forms of VPN, ie Cisco, Sonic etc (these were tested on other machines, they are not installed on the Vista or Win7 machines). After further testing, this is occurring on all Win7 and Vista machines where they can no longer connect to the client VPN, however all XP machines can still connect fine. This has been tested on three Vista, two Win7 and five XP machines. All machines are on DHCP and tests have been done with both the firewalls turned on and off, as well as with fixed IPs being used. Thanks Travis

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155  | Next Page >