Search Results

Search found 467 results on 19 pages for 'outbound'.

Page 15/19 | < Previous Page | 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19  | Next Page >

• Slow transfer speed between two servers

  - by Linux Guy

  I have two servers both network cards speed is 10Gbps The inbound bandwidth between two servers is 10Gbps , the outbound bandwidth internet bandwidth is 500Mpbs Both servers using public ip addresses in public and private network Both servers transfer and connection on nginx port , and the server B used for streaming media , like youtube stream videos I check the transfer speed using iperf utility From Server A to Server B # iperf -c 0.0.0.1 -p 8777 ------------------------------------------------------------ Client connecting to 0.0.0.1, TCP port 8777 TCP window size: 85.3 KByte (default) ------------------------------------------------------------ [ 3] local 0.0.0.0 port 38895 connected with 0.0.0.1 port 8777 [ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth [ 3] 0.0-10.8 sec 528 KBytes 399 Kbits/sec My Current Connections in Server B # netstat -an|grep ":8777"|awk '/tcp/ {print $6}'|sort -nr| uniq -c 2072 TIME_WAIT 28 SYN_RECV 1 LISTEN 189 LAST_ACK 139 FIN_WAIT2 373 FIN_WAIT1 3381 ESTABLISHED 34 CLOSING Server A Network Card Information Settings for eth0: Supported ports: [ TP ] Supported link modes: 100baseT/Full 1000baseT/Full 10000baseT/Full Supported pause frame use: No Supports auto-negotiation: Yes Advertised link modes: 10000baseT/Full Advertised pause frame use: No Advertised auto-negotiation: Yes Speed: 10000Mb/s Duplex: Full Port: Twisted Pair PHYAD: 0 Transceiver: external Auto-negotiation: on MDI-X: Unknown Supports Wake-on: d Wake-on: d Current message level: 0x00000007 (7) drv probe link Link detected: yes Server B Network Card Information Settings for eth2: Supported ports: [ FIBRE ] Supported link modes: 10000baseT/Full Supported pause frame use: No Supports auto-negotiation: No Advertised link modes: 10000baseT/Full Advertised pause frame use: No Advertised auto-negotiation: No Speed: 10000Mb/s Duplex: Full Port: Direct Attach Copper PHYAD: 0 Transceiver: external Auto-negotiation: off Supports Wake-on: d Wake-on: d Current message level: 0x00000007 (7) drv probe link Link detected: yes The problem is : as you can see from iperf utility, the transfer speed from server A to server B slow when i restart network service the connection will be ok , after 2 minutes , it's getting slow How could i troubleshoot slow speed issue and fix it in server B ? Notice : if there any other commands i should execute in servers for more information, so it might help resolve the problem , let me know in comments

  Read the article

• samba4 dc "network location cannot be reached"

  - by mitchell babies peters

  to clear the air centos 6.4? (maybe 6.3) as the server, running samba 4.0.10, trying to add a windows 7 client that has connectivity to the server. this is what windows shouts as me as it mocks my dependence on network infrastructure. "the network location cannot be reached." i have access to the domain contoller (dc) im using the dc as the domain name server (dns) already, and the name is correctly resolving, and it is correctly forwarding outbound traffic. i have nothing but self taught experience with active directory(ad) so if i am missing something obvious, please shout it out, but keep the verbal abuse to a minimum. i checked samba4DC + my error and found nothing relevant to my issue, if i missed something please point me in that direction. the weekend is just starting as i write this so i probably wont be back on to check this post for a day or three, but i might because this mystery is killing me. i followed the samba4 as a dc guide here and i supplimented gaps with this i have tested kerberos, ntp, and set my DC as the clock to sync to in my windows client and it appears to be a very small fraction of a second off so that shouldn't be it. also, firewall and selinux are both off for testing. i have also tried disabling ipv6, and cleared the registry of ipv6 records (allegedly the default samba4 as a DC runs as windows server 2003 which allegedly does not support or tolerate the existence of ipv6, fair warning, i heard this on the internet so it is probably a lie) i have tried a few other things that i have forgotten because i have been doing this for a day and a half now. ideas welcome. suggestions for alternatives are also welcome, as long as they are free. i was given a budget of $0 dollars and told to implement active directory (no prior knowledge of active directory at that point).

  Read the article

• Vyatta masquerade out bridge interface

  - by miquella

  We have set up a Vyatta Core 6.1 gateway on our network with three interfaces: eth0 - 1.1.1.1 - public gateway/router IP (to public upstream router) eth1 - 2.2.2.1/24 - public subnet (connected to a second firewall 2.2.2.2) eth2 - 10.10.0.1/24 - private subnet Our ISP provided the 1.1.1.1 address for us to use as our gateway. The 2.2.2.1 address is so the other firewall (2.2.2.2) can communicate to this gateway which then routes the traffic out through the eth0 interface. Here is our current configuration: interfaces { bridge br100 { address 2.2.2.1/24 } ethernet eth0 { address 1.1.1.1/30 vif 100 { bridge-group { bridge br100 } } } ethernet eth1 { bridge-group { bridge br100 } } ethernet eth2 { address 10.10.0.1/24 } loopback lo { } } service { nat { rule 100 { outbound-interface eth0 source { address 10.10.0.1/24 } type masquerade } } } With this configuration, it routes everything, but the source address after masquerading is 1.1.1.1, which is correct, because that's the interface it's bound to. But because of some of our requirements here, we need it to source from the 2.2.2.1 address instead (what's the point of paying for a class C public subnet if the only address we can send from is our gateway!?). I've tried binding to br100 instead of eth0, but it doesn't seem to route anything if I do that. I imagine I'm just missing something simple. Any thoughts?

  Read the article

• How can I setup apache+mod_proxy so when I connect to mod_proxy on interface X, it sends the traffic

  - by aspitzer

  We use a service that allots us X number of requests per IP and has allows us to setup 5 IPs with such a limit (I know.. it seems stupid they could not just up the limit 5x on one IP). Pretend I have a linux box with the following address on the internet: 66.249.90.104 - that is an Google IP and not mine... so feel free to try to hack into it :) I setup apache+mod_proxy as a forwarding proxy (ProxyRequests On). i.e. you can setup firefox to use 66.249.90.104:8080 as a proxy, and all firefox traffic comes out as 66.249.90.104. So far so good. Problem: Now I add more alias interfaces so the total looks like this: eth0: 66.249.90.104 eth0:1 66.249.90.105 eth0:2 66.249.90.106 eth0:3 66.249.90.107 eth0:4 66.249.90.108 I run apache+mod_proxy (single apache instance) which binds to all interfaces, but no matter which address I connect to use the forwarding proxy, all traffic goes out to the internet as 66.249.90.104 I have also tried running 5 different apaches, each binding to its own interface only, but that still sends the outbound request through 66.249.90.104. I was hoping to get it to work as follows: I connect to 66.249.90.108 and make a proxy request, and it goes out as 66.249.90.108. I connect to 66.249.90.107 and make a proxy request, and it goes out as 66.249.90.107. etc. Has anyone else had to deal with this issue? The fall back solution would be to just run apache on 5 separate boxes, but I would prefer it to all work on one box. Thanks!

  Read the article

• Connect to Postgres remotely, open port 5432 for Postgres in iptables

  - by Victor

  I am trying to connect to Postgres remotely but I need to open port 5432 in iptables. My current iptables configuration is as follows: *filter # Allows all loopback (lo0) traffic and drop all traffic to 127/8 that doesn't use lo0 -A INPUT -i lo -j ACCEPT -A INPUT ! -i lo -d 127.0.0.0/8 -j REJECT # Accepts all established inbound connections -A INPUT -m state --state ESTABLISHED,RELATED -j ACCEPT # Allows all outbound traffic # You can modify this to only allow certain traffic -A OUTPUT -j ACCEPT # Allows HTTP and HTTPS connections from anywhere (the normal ports for websites) -A INPUT -p tcp --dport 80 -j ACCEPT -A INPUT -p tcp --dport 443 -j ACCEPT # Allows SSH connections # # THE -dport NUMBER IS THE SAME ONE YOU SET UP IN THE SSHD_CONFIG FILE # -A INPUT -p tcp -m state --state NEW --dport 30000 -j ACCEPT # Allow ping -A INPUT -p icmp -m icmp --icmp-type 8 -j ACCEPT # log iptables denied calls -A INPUT -m limit --limit 5/min -j LOG --log-prefix "iptables denied: " --log-level 7 # Reject all other inbound - default deny unless explicitly allowed policy -A INPUT -j REJECT -A FORWARD -j REJECT COMMIT What would I have to add in iptables to open the port? I'm trying to install phppgadmin on a different server to access the postgres database. Thank you.

  Read the article

• Connecting to IPv6 hosts when mobile and on a Surface?

  - by Cerebrate

  Specifically, at my usual location, I have an IPv6 network which connects to the Internet via a static tunnel set up to Hurricane Electric's tunnel broker ( http://www.tunnelbroker.net/ ). This works essentially perfectly, allowing inbound and outbound connectivity. Now, however, I need to connect back to host(s) on that network over IPv6 from mobile tablet(s); meaning the conditions are such that there is no guarantee or even likelihood of native IPv6 support where it happens to be at any given time, and the IPv4 address of the tablet will change on a fairly regular basis. The native Teredo support, as configured by default, functions well enough to let me ping my target hosts, but appears to have neither the reliability nor the throughput to support anything else; I have been unable to make any actual connections (trying a number of TCP-based protocols) using it. I had considered setting up an independent tunnel for the tablet(s), and using scripts to update the client endpoint IP address when it changes, but since both (a) many of the locations will be behind NAT devices over which I have no control, and (b) the option over which I do have control is an AT&T Unite hotspot which does not offer protocol 41 forwarding or respond to ICMP on its public address, this approach does not seem viable. I am additionally constrained as the mobile tablet(s) in question are Surface RTs, and as such are incapable of running, for example, AICCU client software. What is my best option to pursue to obtain IPv6 connectivity in this scenario?

  Read the article

• Emails sent to outlook.com not being delivered

  - by imukcedup

  I'm having an issue that is a little strange. I have a cPanel webserver that I own and have root. I was testing out emailing and noticed some issues. When I send an email to outlook.com address the email sends ok but nothing is recieved at the outlook mailbox. I also dont get an 'email delivery failure notification' in any mailbox. 2014-06-12 09:53:47 SMTP connection from [127.0.0.1]:45334 (TCP/IP connection count = 1) 2014-06-12 09:53:47 1Wv5Rr-0003rA-2K <= [email protected] H=localhost (ourdomain.com) [127.0.0.1]:45334 P=esmtpa A=dovecot_login:joe S=667 [email protected] T="This is a test message" for [email protected] 2014-06-12 09:53:47 SMTP connection from localhost (ourdomain.com) [127.0.0.1]:45334 closed by QUIT 2014-06-12 09:53:50 cwd=/var/spool/MailScanner/incoming/1029481 5 args: /usr/sbin/exim -C /etc/exim_outgoing.conf -Mc 1Wv5Rr-0003rA-2K 2014-06-12 09:53:50 1Wv5Rr-0003rA-2K SMTP connection outbound 1402581230 1Wv5Rr-0003rA-2K ourdomain.com [email protected] 2014-06-12 09:53:50 1Wv5Rr-0003rA-2K => Test Account <[email protected]> R=archive_outgoing_email T=archiver_outgoing 2014-06-12 09:53:52 1Wv5Rr-0003rA-2K => [email protected] R=dkim_lookuphost T=dkim_remote_smtp H=mx1.hotmail.com [65.54.188.110] X=UNKNOWN:AES128-SHA256:128 C="250 <[email protected]> Queued mail for delivery" 2014-06-12 09:53:52 1Wv5Rr-0003rA-2K Completed I have checked the outlook.com's spam folders and its not in there either. This is a new IP address allocation from our ISP and there was a block on gmail addresses, so we know it was used for spam. But with gmail we got a notifaction of failure and I know outlook/microsoft also send out notification. Does anyone know what could be happening here? Thanks

  Read the article

• MS DNS lookup issue

  - by 3molo

  Hi, Got two AD/DNS servers, and on the secondary I can't seem to lookup the external site www.iis.se (or any other hostname that their name servers control). The central firewall at this office allows any any outbound, tcp and udp. The DNS server has no local firewall nor antivirus. My windows client, located in the same subnet as the DNS server can do the lookup by asking the nameservers that are in control of www.iis.se. 'dig NS iis.se' shows iis.se. 2517 IN NS ns2.nic.se. iis.se. 2517 IN NS ns.nic.se. iis.se. 2517 IN NS ns3.nic.se. on AD/DNS server C:\Users\Administratornslookup www.iis.se 212.247.7.228 Server: UnKnown Address: 212.247.7.228 Name: www.iis.se Addresses: 2a00:801:f0:80::80 212.247.7.221 C:\Users\Administratornslookup www.iis.se 194.17.45.54 Server: UnKnown Address: 194.17.45.54 Name: www.iis.se Addresses: 2a00:801:f0:80::80 212.247.7.221 C:\Users\Administratornslookup www.iis.se 212.247.3.83 Server: UnKnown Address: 212.247.3.83 Name: www.iis.se Addresses: 2a00:801:f0:80::80 212.247.7.221 And still: C:\Users\administratornslookup www.iis.se Server: UnKnown Address: 127.0.0.1 DNS request timed out. timeout was 2 seconds. DNS request timed out. timeout was 2 seconds. * Request to UnKnown timed-out

  Read the article

• Amazon VPC NAT not working

  - by rpkelly

  I'm trying to create a NAT instance for my VPC to allow instances on private subnets connect to the internet (most importantly, S3). I tried following the instructions here: http://docs.amazonwebservices.com/AmazonVPC/2011-07-15/UserGuide/index.html?VPC_NAT_Instance.html . Unfortunately, the instances in the private subnet (call it 10.10.2.0/24) cannot reach the internet. I have done the following: Create a NAT instance (Amazon's ami-vpc-nat-1.0.0-beta.i386-ebs (ami-d8699bb1)) in public subnet (call it 10.10.1.0/24). Changed "Source / Dest Check" to disabled. Created a new entry in the default routing table (which is used by 10.10.2.0/24) and had it point to the ID of the newly created instance. Associated an Elastic IP address with the NAT instance. Allowed all outbound traffic on the security group of the NAT instance. Ensured that all traffic could pass between the two subnets. I've tried also doing this with an existing instance using iptables, but had no luck. And I have verified that sys.net.ipv4.ip_forward is 1, just in case anyone was wondering. And I still have no internet connectivity from the instances on 10.10.2.0/24. Does anyone have any suggestions?

  Read the article

• HTB.init / tc behind NAT

  - by Ben K.

  I have an Ubuntu 10 box that I'm trying to set up as a bandwidth-shaping router. The machine has one WAN interface, eth0 and two LAN interfaces, eth1 and eth2. NAT is configured using MASQUERADE as described at InternetConnectionSharing. I'm mostly concerned with shaping outbound traffic from the LAN interfaces -- in the end, I'd like to end up with a hard 768Kbps limit per-LAN-interface (rather than a limit on eth0 pooled across all interfaces). I installed HTB.init, and riffing on the examples, tried to set this up on eth1 by putting three files into /etc/sysconfig/htb: /etc/sysconfig/htb/eth1 DEFAULT=30 R2Q=100 /etc/sysconfig/htb/eth1-2.root RATE=768Kbps BURST=15k /etc/sysconfig/htb/eth1-2:30.dfl RATE=768Kbps CEIL=788Kbps BURST=15k LEAF=sfq I can /etc/init.d/htb start and /etc/init.d/htb stats and see information that /seems/ to suggest it's working...but when I try pulling a large file via the WAN interface the shaping clearly isn't in effect. Any suggestions? My guess is it has something to do with where the shaping falls in the NAT chain, but I really have no idea where to begin troubleshooting this. ---- Update: Here's my /etc/init.d/htb list output, it seems to make sense -- the default rate for eth1 is 768Kbps? ### eth0: queueing disciplines qdisc htb 1: root refcnt 2 r2q 100 default 30 direct_packets_stat 0 qdisc sfq 30: parent 1:30 limit 127p quantum 1514b perturb 10sec ### eth0: traffic classes class htb 1:2 root rate 768000bit ceil 768000bit burst 1599b cburst 1599b class htb 1:30 parent 1:2 leaf 30: prio 0 rate 6144Kbit ceil 6144Kbit burst 15Kb cburst 1598b ### eth0: filtering rules filter parent 1: protocol ip pref 100 u32 filter parent 1: protocol ip pref 100 u32 fh 800: ht divisor 1 filter parent 1: protocol ip pref 100 u32 fh 800::800 order 2048 key ht 800 bkt 0 flowid 1:30 match 00000000/00000000 at 12 match 00000000/00000000 at 16 ### eth1: queueing disciplines qdisc htb 1: root refcnt 2 r2q 100 default 30 direct_packets_stat 0 qdisc sfq 30: parent 1:30 limit 127p quantum 1514b perturb 10sec ### eth1: traffic classes class htb 1:2 root rate 768000bit ceil 768000bit burst 1599b cburst 1599b class htb 1:30 parent 1:2 leaf 30: prio 0 rate 6144Kbit ceil 6144Kbit burst 15Kb cburst 1598b

  Read the article

• Trouble with IIS SMTP relaying to Gmail

  - by saille

  I appreciate that similar questions have been asked about how to setup SMTP relaying with IIS's virtual SMTP server. However I'm still completely stumped on this problem. Here's the setup: IIS 6.0 SMTP server running on Win2k3 box with a NAT'ed IP. Company uses Gmail for all email services. An app on the box needs to send email, so normally we'd just set the app up to talk to smtp.gmail.com directly, but this app doesn't support TLS. Easy, we just setup a local SMTP relay right? So I thought. What we have done so far: Setup IIS SMTP server to relay to smtp.gmail.com, as per these excellent instructions: http://fmuntean.wordpress.com/2008/10/26/how-to-configure-iis-smtp-server-to-forward-emails-using-a-gmail-account/ The local SMTP relay allows anonymous access. Both the local IP and the loopback IP have been explicitly allowed in the Connection and Relay dialogs. Tried sending email from 2 different apps via the local SMTP server, but failed (the emails end up in the Queue folder, but never get sent). The IIS logs show the conversation with the local app, but zero conversation happening with smtp.gmail.com. The port used by gmail is open outbound, and indeed the apps we have that support TLS can send email directly via smtp.gmail.com, so there is no problem with the network. At this point I changed the smtp settings in IIS SMTP server to use a different external SMTP server and hey-presto, the local apps can send email via local IIS SMTP relay. So smtp.gmail.com fails to work with our IIS SMTP relay, but another 3rd party SMTP service works fine. We need to use smtp.gmail.com, so how to troubleshoot this one?

  Read the article

• RRAS Public Address Pool on Windows Server 2008

  - by Art

  I have a Windows 2008 server with two NICs running RRAS and a small public website. It also does NAT for several other PCs on my network and everything works great. I have a block of 5 public static IPs from my ISP, one of which is bound to the public NIC in the Windows 2008 server. I would like to assign one of the remainging 4 public IPs to a machine on my private network. I thought I could do this by going into RRAS, selecting NAT under IPv4 and then adding the public IP address to the address pool and specifying a reservation for the machine I would like to use that address by adding its private ip address. When I do this, the machine I reserved the public IP address for seems to loose all outside network connectivity. I can still ping other PCs on my 192.168.0.* net, but anything outside is no longer reachable. When I remove the reservation, everything seems to work. After setting the reservation and right clicking on the external public interface and selecting 'Show Mappings' I can see outbound requests from my private address with the desired associated private address, however I do not see any inbound requests. What am I doing wrong/missing?

  Read the article

• Remote Desktop *from* Windows 2008 R2 Server

  - by freefaller

  Summary: how do I create an RDC connection from a Windows 2008 server to another server? Our client will only allow us to connect to their server via a static IP address (which is fair enough), but unfortunately as we're a very small company we don't have one in the office. As a work around, we had the connection working through our old Windows 2003 server (dynamic-cloud from 1and1). .. however we have just rebuilt the server to run under Windows 2008 R2 (don't ask, but it was necessary), and now I simply cannot get the connection working. I have added an "Outbound Rule" to Windows Firewall with Advanced Security (TCP, All local ports, 3389 remote port - I have also tried the other way around). I have added a packet filter IP security rule with the same details. The 1and1 firewall rules (through their online control panel) allows for 3389 TCP and UDP. But it is simply not connecting (yes, the server is definitely on and able to accept connections) with the general error of... Remote Desktop can’t connect to the remote computer for one of these reasons: 1) Remote access to the server is not enabled 2) The remote computer is turned off 3) The remote computer is not available on the network Is there anything obvious I've missed - or something I can use to find out where the request is being blocked? The new server is using the exact same IP address as before, so I don't believe that would be an issue. Unless it's trying to use an IPv6 address rather than the old IPv4 address that it was before? I apologise that I am not a network person by trade, but I know more than anybody else in my office!!

  Read the article

• Slow network file transfer (under 20KB/s) on newly built x64 Win7

  - by Mangoshake

  I am getting <20KB/s for local network file transfer. If I transfer a very small file (less than 100KB) it would start quickly then slow down to <20KB/s. all subsequently network file transfer would be slow, a reboot is needed to reset this. If I transfer a large file it would be stuck on calculating for a long time and then begin with <20KB/s immediately. This is a newly built desktop running Windows 7 x64 SP1. Realtek gigabit LAN from the motherboard (ASRock Extreme3 gen3). Problematic speed is observed on the private LAN, both through ethernet and WiFi. The Router is D-Link DIR-655. Remote Differential Compression is off. Drivers are up-to-date from ASRock's website. I have tested network file transfer to and from another Windows 7 laptop and a MacBook Pro, so I am fairly certain it is the desktop's problem. The slow speed only happens with one direction also, outbound from the desktop, regardless of whether I initiate the file transfer action from the origin or the destination. Inbound network file transfer and internet speeds are fine, so I don't think this is a hardware issue. I am getting 74.8MB/s internet upload speed from speedtest.net (http://www.speedtest.net/result/1852752479.png). Inbound network file transfer I can get around 10-15MB/s. I am hoping this community has some insight for me to troubleshoot this. I don't see anything obviously related from the Event Viewer, and beyond that I just don't know where else to look. Any suggestions are greatly appreciated, thank you in advance.

  Read the article

• Spammer relaying via Postfix mail server

  - by Paddington

  I have a Plesk 9.5 mail server (cm.snowbarre.co.za) on Ubuntu 8.04 LTS which forwards all SMTP traffic to an anti-spam server cacti.snowbarre.co.za. Many times I see the headers on the anti-spam server to contain from addresses not hosted on the mail server and I have checked and confirmed that my server is not an open relay server. How can a spammer be using my server to relay spam traffic? How can I stop this? Open relay test: paddington@paddington-MS-7387:~$ telnet cm 25 Trying 196.201.x.x... Connected to cm. Escape character is '^]'. 220 cm.snowbarre.co.za ESMTP Postfix (Ubuntu) mail from:[email protected] 250 2.1.0 Ok rcpt:[email protected] 221 2.7.0 Error: I can break rules, too. Goodbye. Connection closed by foreign host. paddington@paddington-MS-7387:~$ A typical headers is: *Received from cm.snowbarre.co.za (cm.snowbarre.co.za[196.201.x.x]) by cacti.snowbarre.co.za (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 00B601881AD; Mon, 27 Aug 2012 14:03:29 +0200 (SAST) Received from cm.snowbarre.co.za (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cm.snowbarre.co.za (Postfix) with ESMTP id 81627367E007; Mon, 27 Aug 2012 14:02:50 +0200 (SAST) Received from User (ml82.128.x.x.multilinksg.com [82.128.x.x]) by cm.snowbarre.co.za (Postfix) with ESMTP; Mon, 27 Aug 2012 14:02:49 +0200 (SAST) Reply-To <[email protected]> From "Ms Nkeuri Aguiyi"<[email protected]> Subject Your Unpaid Fund. Date Mon, 27 Aug 2012 05:03:22 -0700 MIME-Version 1.0 Content-Type text/html; charset="Windows-1251" Content-Transfer-Encoding 7bit X-Priority 3 X-MSMail-Priority Normal X-Mailer Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 X-Antivirus avast! (VPS 120821-0, 08/21/2012), Outbound message X-Antivirus-Status Clean Message-Id <[email protected]> To undisclosed-recipients:;*

  Read the article

• internet-based sync software that will keep running after Windows Live Sync stops doing PC-to-PC-syncs?

  - by Warren P

  According to the wikipedia page, Microsoft Live Sync will shortly stop offering the PC-to-PC sync service. There are lots of apps to sync two PCs on the same LAN, but I want to sync two PCs that are in different cities, across the internet, traversing two different NATs, and that requires some kind of service running in the internet that both connect into. There is already a few questions about syncing folders and files, but this is not a duplicate because none of them answer this basic question: Microsoft Live Sync works better than RSYNC, or any of the linked SYNC solutions in any of the "not really duplicates" because it works even when the two PCs have NAT and firewalls between them that forbid direct connectivity, because Windows Live Sync has a free always-on internet server that all the client PCs connect into. I'm looking for a FREE (no-fees) Microsoft Live Sync work-alike PC-to-PC sync solution that works between PCs and Macs, at least, as well as between PCs, and works behind NAT and firewalls at least as well as Microsoft's solution. (Note that Microsoft's solution makes only outbound socket calls to a microsoft server, so this solution must necessarily include a server-hub component that is hosted publically on a free site and which does not require that I set up and manage and pay for my own public internet hosting site) Hint: None of the answers in the linked duplicate are equivalent (PureSync,FreeFileSync,BestSync 2010,SyncButler,Comodo BackUp,QuickShadow,Gbridge) in that none of them work for the PC to Mac situation, where firewalls and nats prevent direct connection, or else they require money to be paid. When Microsoft Live Sync / Live Mesh finally kills direct PC-to-PC mode, the limitation will be that you will have to pay for more than 25 GB of cloud service, and you can then only sync PC #1 to PC #2 if you first sync to the cloud, then down to other clients. I can currently sync 100 gb of data from one computer to another, only temporarily "moving the data" through Microsoft's data servers without using up my Skydrive storage quota.

  Read the article

• Cisco ASA user authentication options - OpenID, public RSA sig, others?

  - by Ryan

  My organization has a Cisco ASA 5510 which I have made act as a firewall/gateway for one of our offices. Most resources a remote user would come looking for exist inside. I've implemented the usual deal - basic inside networks with outbound NAT, one primary outside interface with some secondary public IPs in the PAT pool for public-facing services, a couple site-to-site IPSec links to other branches, etc. - and I'm working now on VPN. I have the WebVPN (clientless SSL VPN) working and even traversing the site-to-site links. At the moment I'm leaving a legacy OpenVPN AS in place for thick client VPN. What I would like to do is standardize on an authentication method for all VPN then switch to the Cisco's IPSec thick VPN server. I'm trying to figure out what's really possible for authentication for these VPN users (thick client and clientless). My organization uses Google Apps and we already use dotnetopenauth to authenticate users for a couple internal services. I'd like to be able to do the same thing for thin and thick VPN. Alternatively a signature-based solution using RSA public keypairs (ssh-keygen type) would be useful to identify user@hardware. I'm trying to get away from legacy username/password auth especially if it's internal to the Cisco (just another password set to manage and for users to forget). I know I can map against an existing LDAP server but we have LDAP accounts created for only about 10% of the user base (mostly developers for Linux shell access). I guess what I'm looking for is a piece of middleware which appears to the Cisco as an LDAP server but will interface with the user's existing OpenID identity. Nothing I've seen in the Cisco suggests it can do this natively. But RSA public keys would be a runner-up, and much much better than standalone or even LDAP auth. What's really practical here?

  Read the article

• Cisco ASA 5510 Time of Day Based Policing

  - by minamhere

  I have a Cisco ASA 5510 setup at a boarding school. I determined that many (most?) of the students were downloading files, watching movies, etc, during the day and this was causing the academic side of our network to suffer. The students should not even be in their rooms during the day, so I configured the ASA to police their network segment and limit their outbound bandwidth. This resolved all of our academic issues, and everyone was happy. Except the resident students. I have been asked to change/remove the policing policy at the end of the day, to allow the residents access to the unused bandwidth at night. There's no reason to let bandwidth sit unused at night just because it would be abused during the day. Is there a way to setup Time of Day based Policies on the ASA? Ideally I'd like to be able to open up the network at night and all day during weekends. If I can't set Time based policies, is is possible to schedule the ASA to load a set of commands at a specific time? I suppose I could just setup a scheduled task on one of our servers to log in and make the changes with a simple script, but this seems like a hack, and I'm hoping there is a better or more standard way to accomplish this. Thanks. Edit: If there is a totally different solution that would accomplish a similar goal, I'd be interested in that as well. Free/Cheap would be ideal, but if a separate internet connection is my only other option, it might be worth fighting for money for hardware or software to do this better or more efficiently.

  Read the article

• iptables-restore: line 1 failed

  - by Doug

  Hello, I am new to servers, and I was following this guide and it failed on the first command instructed. Could anyone give me a hand? http://wiki.debian.org/iptables ~ZORO~:/etc# iptables-restore < /etc/iptables.test.rules iptables-restore: line 1 failed Edit: iptables.test.rules ~ZORO~:/etc# cat /etc/iptables.test.rules *filter # Allows all loopback (lo0) traffic and drop all traffic to 127/8 that doesn't use lo0 -A INPUT -i lo -j ACCEPT -A INPUT -i ! lo -d 127.0.0.0/8 -j REJECT # Accepts all established inbound connections -A INPUT -m state --state ESTABLISHED,RELATED -j ACCEPT # Allows all outbound traffic # You could modify this to only allow certain traffic -A OUTPUT -j ACCEPT # Allows HTTP and HTTPS connections from anywhere (the normal ports for websites) -A INPUT -p tcp --dport 80 -j ACCEPT -A INPUT -p tcp --dport 443 -j ACCEPT # Allows SSH connections for script kiddies # THE -dport NUMBER IS THE SAME ONE YOU SET UP IN THE SSHD_CONFIG FILE -A INPUT -p tcp -m state --state NEW --dport 30000 -j ACCEPT # Now you should read up on iptables rules and consider whether ssh access # for everyone is really desired. Most likely you will only allow access from certain IPs. # Allow ping -A INPUT -p icmp -m icmp --icmp-type 8 -j ACCEPT # log iptables denied calls (access via 'dmesg' command) -A INPUT -m limit --limit 5/min -j LOG --log-prefix "iptables denied: " --log-level 7 # Reject all other inbound - default deny unless explicitly allowed policy: -A INPUT -j REJECT -A FORWARD -j REJECT COMMIT

  Read the article

• Multiple Servers + One MailServer

  - by theomega

  Hy, I got several Linux-Servers (running Debian) where different services run: Database-Servers, Webservers, Applicationsservers, Tools and so on. All Servers are connected to the same internal network. There is also one special Server which is the Mail-Server: All Mailaccounts are stored on this server, it is also the outbound Mailserver for all the other servers. I want all Mails for all servers to get saved on the Mailserver. For example if an cron-job fails on one of the web-servers the mail should not be delivered to the local user but instead to the Mailserver so I get a centralized place for mail storage. How do you set up this scenario? My current setup is: Using postfix as MTA on the Mailserver and using ssmtp on all the other servers. SSMTP is configured to send the mails to the Mailserver. The Mailserver is configured to allow the whole internal network to relay mails using itself. Is this the right way to choose? I also thought about setting up a MTA (postfix) on every server and configure it somehow to forward the mails. What would be the advantage of this solution?

  Read the article

• Recommendation on remote access setup for accessing customer systems

  - by gregmac

  I'm looking for a product recommendation (open or commercial) that will allow remote access to customer sites for tech support purposes. We need to be able to gain access to help troubleshoot problems on servers. Currently end up using anything from RDP on public IP, to various VPNs that clients happen to have, to webex-type sessions that require lots of interaction from both sides to get things working. This often means a problem that could take 10 minutes to solve takes an extra 30+ minutes messing around trying to get a connection up. There are multiple customer sites, which should NOT have access to each other. At each site, there is anywhere from 1 to 8 servers (Windows 2003 or 2008) that need to be accessed. Support connection to machines even if they're behind a firewall/router with no public IP Be able to selectively allow/deny access from customer site. Customer site should not be able to connect outbound to anywhere else (our systems, or other customer sites) Support multiple users from our end If not a VPN connection (where RDP could be used over top), should support: Remote desktop access, including copy/paste File transfers Preferably would have some way to list all remote systems, showing online/offline. Anyone have any suggestions?

  Read the article

• Vyatta internet connection + hosted site on same IP

  - by boburob

  Having a small issue setting up a vyatta. The company internet and two different websites are both on the same IP. Server 1 - Has websites hosted on ports 1000 and 3000 and also has a proxy server installed to provide internet connection to the domain Server 2 - Has a website hosted on ports 80 and 433 The vyatta is correctly natting the appropriate traffic to each server, and allowing the proxy to get internet traffic, however I have a problem getting to the websites hosted on these two servers inside the domain. I believe the problem is that the HTTP request is being sent with an IP, eg: 12.34.56.78. The request will reach the website and the server will attempt to send the request back to the IP, however this is the IP of the Vyatta, so it has nowhere else to go. I thought the solution would be something like this: rule 50 { destination { address 12.34.56.78 port 1000 } inbound-interface eth1 inside-address { address 10.19.2.3 } protocol tcp type destination } But this doesnt seem to do it! UPDATE I changed the rules to the following: rule 50 { destination { address 12.34.56.78 port 443 } outbound-interface eth1 protocol tcp source { address 10.19.2.3 } type masquerade } rule 51 { destination { address 12.34.56.78 port 443 } inbound-interface eth1 inside-address { address 10.19.2.2 } protocol tcp type destination } I am now seeing traffic going between the two with Wireshark, but the website will still fail to load.

  Read the article

• How to limit SMTP delivery to hourly batches

  - by Jeremy W

  Moved over from StackOverflow. Sorry if you saw it there first In an effort to keep us from being labeled spammers by major ISPs (in addition to SPF records, privacy policies, CANSPAM compliance and the like) - I wanted to limit the amount of mail we send out an hour. Is this possible in W2K3 SMTP server? I was looking at outbound connection properties in the SMTP virtual server config screens...It's just not that clear if tinkering with those settings are going to do what I want. In a nutshell, I'd love mail being sent by this server to queue up and send for example, 5,000 messages every 10 minutes or so. Mail is being sent via ASP.Net. Also, I wouldn't be sending 1 million a day. Probably 30,000 tops - and doing that only a few times a month. I'm just trying to avoid a tidal wave of 30k going out in 1 minute and setting off every network spam monitoring alarm in North America. I know I could do it with a combination console app / scheduled job. My question was if there was an easier way to accomplish this with the Virtual SMTP Server settings on Win2k3 Is this possible?

  Read the article

• Best all in one linux based proxy,firewall, dhcp and wins server.

  - by BeStRaFe

  I help to run a lan in Sydney. We have a need for a proxy/gateway solution to allow those pesky games that require internet to work. I have been doing this with an ISA server and it has worked quite well. However now i wish to port this over to run on the same hardware as our cacti / nagios box under a vmware VM. ISA server is horridly nad due to the massive ram and i/o requirement for something is basically port blocking and handing out IP's. The needs are as follows. 1. DHCP 2. WINS (otherwise network devices fight over who is the WINS master) 3. Filtering based in PORT for outbound traffic. 4. Ability to whitelist IP/MAC's for internet access. 5. Web Interface. I had been thinking to use PFSENSE however there is no option for a WINS server and i cbf working my way around bsd.

  Read the article

• Amazon AWS VPN how to open a port?

  - by Victor Piousbox

  I have a VPN with public and private subnets; I am considering only public subnet for now. The node 10.0.0.23, I can ssh into it. Let's say I want to connect to MySQL on the node using its private address: ubuntu@ip-10-0-0-23:/$ mysql -u root -h 10.0.0.23 ERROR 2003 (HY000): Can't connect to MySQL server on '10.0.0.23' (111) ubuntu@ip-10-0-0-23:/$ mysql -u root -h localhost Welcome to the MySQL monitor. Commands end with ; or \g. --- 8< --- snip --- 8< --- mysql> The port 3306 is not reachable if I use the private IP? My security group allows port 3306 inbound from 0.0.0.0/0 AND from 10.0.0.0/24. Outbound, allowed all. The generic setup done by Amazon through their wizard does not work... I add ACL that allows everything for everybody, still does not work. What am I missing?

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19  | Next Page >