Search Results

Search found 13082 results on 524 pages for 'ip camera'.

Page 155/524 | < Previous Page | 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162  | Next Page >

  • forward all ports via htaccess to new address

    - by user875933
    I have a chat server running on my local machine that listens to different ports. I want to use the sub-domain of one of my accounts to access it. I intend to manually change the redirect whenever my local machine gets a different ip address. So: chat.example.com:123 would redirect to dynamic.ip.address:123 I am trying to accomplish this with .htaccess and RewriteRule I have tried: RewriteEngine on RewriteRule ^(.*) http://dynamic.ip.address/ [L, R=302] but this doesn't work. When I try chat.example.com:123 nothing happens. When I input chat.example.com into the web browser, I get dynamic.ip.address Is .htaccess the right tool for this? I am using a simple web host that gives me ssh access, but not much more.

    Read the article

  • Smoothwall: How to stop live network traffic displayed in terminal?

    - by Jakobud
    For our network we are working on building a new firewall box and we just installed Smoothwall on it to test it out. When I start up the box, before the login prompt even appears, all of the live IP traffic is appearing in the terminal (source/destination IPs, MACs, Ports, etc). I wait for the boot sequence to finish, but all I see is this IP traffic. The login prompt never comes up. I finally get sick of waiting and press CTRL + C and it says "Entering Run Level 3" and then I get a login prompt finally. Once I login, the IP traffic continues to fly through the terminal even as I'm trying to type commands. How do I turn this stuff off? Is this the default setting for Smoothwall to have all this IP traffic going by on the screen? It essentially renders using the terminal to being useless.

    Read the article

  • basic help for Nat configuration needed

    - by Klaes S.
    I have a server with a IP 1.0.0.5/24. This is the main IP address of the server, and now I have two other IP addresses for the server, they are 1.0.2.30/24 and 1.0.2.31/24. I want to make a VirtualBox running another OS accessible through the Internet, and only allow the specified IP to reach the virtual box. I'm new to iptables and therefore I need some basic help and getting started information about this. The hosting provider does not allow more than on MAC address per switch port, which means that I'm not able to make bridge as far as I know. Futhermore I want the host, to reject the extra IPs so its only the VirtualBox / virtual machine that accepts the request's on the extra IPS.

    Read the article

  • How to configure my web server for public and development service

    - by Steve
    I have one and only one web server, which runs Windows Server 2008 and wamp. Now I would like to setup SVN on the server so I can program the trunk version of the website. Every time I branch a version and put it to public. While developing on the trunk version, I also want to be able to test it. The web server has 5 IPs so I can use one IP for public website(the branch) and another IP for trunk development test. I believe one wamp server can only handle one 80 port request thus can only handle one website. How can I configure the server so it can handle one IP request and direct to my branch and handle another IP request and direct to my trunk?

    Read the article

  • RDC not working from outside

    - by Cotten
    I've set up Remote Connection according to : http://windows.microsoft.com/is-IS/windows7/allow-remote-desktop-connections-from-outside-your-home-network That is, Allow remote connections to the computer you want to access. Make sure Remote Desktop is able to communicate through your firewall. Find the IP address of the computer on your home network that you want to connect to. Open your router's configuration screen and forward TCP port 3389 to the destination computer's IP address. Find your router's public IP address so that Remote Desktop can find it on the Internet. When I'm inside the LAN, RDC works flawlessly. When I try to connect to the ip given by my ISP it cannot connect. I've setup port forwarding for 3389 on my netgear router. Thanks!

    Read the article

  • How to setup VPN on home network

    - by Tone
    I am a software developer. I travel and sometimes have a need to access my files at home and tweak other family members computers. I would like to connect to my home network via VPN and then RDP into whatever machine i need to. Currently i have a Windows Server 08 machine, which is my file server, database server, web server (for development work), source control repository, etc. (and also somewhat of a workstation when i need it to be). I want to use this same machine to run my VPN through. I have a linksys WRTG54 router. My ISP is AT&T DSL, with a dynamic IP address - so i'm assuming I'll either need to request a static IP or sign up with one of those static ip services.. where it keeps your dynamic ip synced up with a static one. While I do understand software engineering I am no expert in networking. What do i need to do to setup my VPN?

    Read the article

  • Forward my http requests blindly through to a new server

    - by Jason
    I need to forward any http request from my old server IP to my new IP. I migrated servers and there are a few domains that have a high TTL and I could not update. Is it possible to take all HTTP requests from one server running centos/whm/php/apache 2+ and forward them to the new ip? Since I have hundreds of domains I'd prefer a solution that involves running an app on the linux box that will push requests automatically to the new box. Thoughts? Cheers

    Read the article

  • Route outbound connections from local network through VPN

    - by Sharkos
    I have a server A running OpenVPN, an OpenVPN client B (a rooted Android phone as it happens) and a third party C (a laptop, tablet etc.) tethered to B. B can use the VPN to access the internet via A; C can use the tethered connection WITHOUT the VPN to access the internet via B. However, with the VPN on B active, I cannot load information from the internet on C. A appears to log similar traffic inbound and outbound when B or C attempt to load a webpage, say, but the VPN on device B reports no inbound traffic when the connection originated from C. Where should I look for packets being dropped, and what ip rules should I use to make sure they are passed back through the VPN and into the local network B <- C? (I'll obviously post whatever further information is needed.) Further info Without VPN: root@android:/ # ip route default via [B's External Gateway] dev rmnet0 [B's External Subnet] dev rmnet0 proto kernel scope link src [B's External IP] [B's External Gateway] dev rmnet0 scope link 192.168.43.0/24 dev wlan0 proto kernel scope link src 192.168.43.1 With VPN: root@android:/ # ip route 0.0.0.0/1 dev tun0 scope link default via [B's External Gateway] dev rmnet0 [B's External Subnet] dev rmnet0 proto kernel scope link src [B's External IP] [B's External Gateway] dev rmnet0 scope link [External address of A] dev tun0 scope link 128.0.0.0/1 dev tun0 scope link 172.16.0.0/24 dev tun0 scope link 172.16.0.8/30 dev tun0 proto kernel scope link src 172.16.0.10 192.168.43.0/24 dev wlan0 proto kernel scope link src 192.168.43.1 192.168.168.0/24 dev tun0 scope link

    Read the article

  • Windows NLB + IIS - Stops serving pages

    - by Ye Ol Developer
    We are currently running Windows NLB and IIS7 load balanced across two servers. What happens is randomly and sporadically the servers stop serving web pages. What we have noticed is that if we run the sites on a dedicated IP on either of the servers, these issues do not exist. As soon as we switch back to the load balanced IP, then everything goes awry. When the servers stop serving pages, we can still TS into the server and surf them internally without issues, or switch to the dedicated IP. However the internal network cannot even access the files from the load balanced IP. We are running out of idea's here. Has anyone had a similar problem?

    Read the article

  • Route all traffic of home network through VPN

    - by user436118
    I have a typical semi advanced home network scenario: A cable modem - eth A wireless router (netgear n600) eth and wlan A home server (Running ubuntu 12.04 LTS, connected over wlan) A bunch of wireless clients (wlan) Lying around I have anoher cheaper wlan router, and two different USB wlan NIC's that are known to work with Linux. ACTA struck. I want to route ALL of my WAN traffic through a remote server through a VPN. For sake of completition, lets say there is a remote server running debian sqeeze where a VPN server is to be installed. The network is then to behave so that if the VPN is not operative, it is separated from the outside world. I am familiar with general system/network practices, but lack the specific detailed knowledge to accomplish this. Please suggest the right approach, packages and configurations you'd use to reach said solution. I've also envisioned the following network configuration, please improve it if you see fit: ==LAN== Client ip:10.1.1.x nm:255.0.0.0 gw:10.1.1.1 reached via WLAN Wlan router 1: ip: 10.1.1.1 nm:255.0.0.0 gw: 10.10.10.1 reached via ETH Homeserver: <<< VPN is initiated here, and the other endpoint is somewhere on the internet. eth0: ip:10.10.10.1 nm: 0.0.0.0 gw:192.168.0.1 reached via WLAN Homeserver: wlan0: ip: 192.168.0.2 nm: 255.255.255.0 gw: 192.168.0.1 reached via WLAN ==WAN== Wlan router 2: ip: 192.168.0.1 nm: 0.0.0.0 gw: set via dhcp uplink connector: cable modem Cable Modem: Remote DHCP. Has on-board DHCP server for ethernet device that connects to it, and only works this way. All this WLAN fussery is because my home server is located in a part of the house where a cable link isnt possible unfortunately.

    Read the article

  • remote desktop access

    - by pnp
    I have my work system on the ip range 172.16.xx.yy, and I have my personal system on the ip range 10.0.xx.yy. Both of them, however, are on the same network of my University, but on different LANs/VLANs (i hope i used the right word here). How can I remotely connect to my work system from my PC, given that both use private IP addresses? If such a thing is not possible with current set up, what minimal changes are required for it?

    Read the article

  • ubuntu 12.04 kvm virtual server network setup, can't get the machine to be connectable

    - by xyious
    I have worked on my Ubuntu Server host for weeks now and I just can not manage to get the virtual machines into the network.... here's what I need to do: I need to be able to create virtual machines that have IP addresses that can be reached from the outside (192.168 network). I need to be able to connect to the virtual machines through ssh, ftp, http and preferably https, anything else doesn't matter that much. So far everything seems simple enough and I have a lot of leeway in terms of IP address range and server/client configuration. I have the option of taking part of a /24 net as most IPs aren't used, and if it's absolutely necessary I have the option of creating a new /24 subnet. Also have the option of reformatting and reinstalling OS on the host and recreating the virtual machines as nothing has been done other than trying to get virtual machines to work. I would prefer if the virtual machines were just part of the normal network which would be 192.168.5.0/24. The host machine has 2 network cards so I don't even necessarily need the Host to be connectable in the same /24 network. I have tried (I think) just about everything from about 5 different tutorials on bridging (giving br0 the same IP that eth0 used to have (Host is able to connect to VM and vice versa, VM doesn't have outside network access), having eth0 set up like it always was and having br0 have a different IP (same as above), NAT with port forwarding (which I would have preferred not to use but will if it works), turning off one of the hosts network cards and just using one of them, different subnets.... etc. I do know my way around iptables fairly well.... Host is 64bit Ubuntu Server 12.04, using libvirt/kvm. edits: Local network is 192.168.5.0/24, host has static ip 192.168.5.254, GW .5.1 which is also nameserver. We have a second Local network at 192.168.10.0/24 with .10.1 GW, but both hosts and VMs were supposed to go into the .5 subnet. The .10 subnet isn't required, but it wouldn't be horrible if the Host were only accessible in the .10 subnet.

    Read the article

  • Route all traffic of home network through VPN [migrated]

    - by user436118
    I have a typical semi advanced home network scenario: A cable modem - eth A wireless router (netgear n600) eth and wlan A home server (Running ubuntu 12.04 LTS, connected over wlan) A bunch of wireless clients (wlan) Lying around I have anoher cheaper wlan router, and two different USB wlan NIC's that are known to work with Linux. ACTA struck. I want to route ALL of my WAN traffic through a remote server through a VPN. For sake of completition, lets say there is a remote server running debian sqeeze where a VPN server is to be installed. The network is then to behave so that if the VPN is not operative, it is separated from the outside world. I am familiar with general system/network practices, but lack the specific detailed knowledge to accomplish this. Please suggest the right approach, packages and configurations you'd use to reach said solution. I've also envisioned the following network configuration, please improve it if you see fit: Client ip:10.1.1.x nm:255.0.0.0 gw:10.1.1.1 reached via WLAN Wlan router 1: ip: 10.1.1.1 nm:255.0.0.0 gw: 10.10.10.1 reached via ETH Homeserver: <<< VPN is initiated here, and the other endpoint is somewhere on the internet. eth0: ip:10.10.10.1 nm: 0.0.0.0 gw:192.168.0.1 reached via WLAN Homeserver: wlan0: ip: 192.168.0.2 nm: 255.255.255.0 gw: 192.168.0.1 reached via WLAN Wlan router 2: ip: 192.168.0.1 nm: 0.0.0.0 gw: set via dhcp uplink connector: cable modem Cable Modem: Remote DHCP. Has on-board DHCP server for ethernet device that connects to it, and only works this way. All this WLAN fussery is because my home server is located in a part of the house where a cable link isnt possible unfortunately.

    Read the article

  • Server 2012r2 VPN DNS

    - by Tyron Gower
    Have an issue where onsite clients cannot resolve VPNusers. but VPN users can resolve onsite machines. example. USER! uses LAPTOP1 USER1 connects to VPN gets internal IP address of 10.243.0.200 USER1 pings SERVER1 - resolve to ip and gets reply USER1 RDP into SERVER1 (inside VPN) USER1 pings LAPTOP1 from SERVER1 resolves to ip address last assigned by DHCP (10.243.0.139) ping fails USER1 pings 10.243.0.200 from SERVER1 gets reply. Running Server 2012r2 It is a domain controller, DNS and VPN server. VPN is just configured with basic default settings. All VPN users have static IP setup in AD. Not sure where to go from here.

    Read the article

  • Can't connect my server outside my wireless network. server is openERP running on ubuntu 12.04 desktop router is ciso small business router

    - by user2613541
    I've looked on the internet regarding port forwarding. I've successfully fowarded port 8069 to my server's ip address. I can access openERP when I'm connected to the network of my office but not when I'm outside my office's network. What am I missing? my computer's ip address starts with 192... Do I have to first up the router's ip address and then my server's ip address to get to my server from the outside? what should I type in my internet browser? I've looked all day yesterday.

    Read the article

  • LAN full of public ipv4 addresses - How to filter it?

    - by sparc86
    The answer to my question maybe is not that hard but anyways, I do not know what to do. So, I just got in a new job in a Univerisity and I found out that the network (the LAN) is full of public IP addresses. Seriously, the whole LAN (probably more than 150 hosts) has it' own internet IP address and I don't know how to manage it. I have a very good experience using iptables (Linux firewall) in a NAT'ed environment. But then how should I proceed in an environment where all my LAN is working with a bunch of public IP addresses? Should I just use the "forward" rules and ignore the NAT rules or is there any other issue in such environment which I should take care? Can I add a firewall between the router and the LAN in order to produce packet filtering for these public IP addresses in my LAN or will this just not work? Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Website is not accessible from server which is using proxy

    - by Bhoot
    I hosted a website in a win 2008 R2 server which runs in private domain. I set up bindings for port 80 and 443 for http & https respectively. Created inbound rule for port 80 and 443 also in windows firewall. After doing all this, i am still not able to access my website from remote machine. IE : Internet Explorer cannot display the webpage. Chrome : Oops! Google Chrome could not find xxxxxx Tried accessing website by ip address but no luck. I tried to ping that server but it says TTL expired in Transit. Now i found some more information over internet to check if the server is using any kind of proxy in between. I found my IP address at www.getip.com, but ipconfig/all gives me a different IP address. Is it really a problem if we use proxy ? I am not sure if i have concluded it correctly. But is there any way out to resolve this issue? Update ::: I figured it out. I have to call that website with external IP address. due to the proxy settings i was not able to call that website by the server's IP or name of that machine.

    Read the article

  • Destination host unreachable

    - by user1010101
    I have 2 router connected to 1 switch which contains two vlans, 1 router has the ip table of vlan1 and the other router have the ip table of vlan2 I have trunked both router cable to the switch. I have set 1 ip table per router which correspond to the ip address of the PC that have this router address as a gateway. When I ping from 192.168.100.2 to 192.168.200.2 it tells me that destination host is unreachable and the message is from the router 192.168.100.1. So I guess router for 192.168.100.x does not see the router for 192.168.200.x , right ? Or am I wrong ? What are good troubleshooting steps ? http://i.imgur.com/b94Ir.png is the representation of the network, i cannot post image since im not reputated enough.

    Read the article

  • Site down, SSH and FTP work fine

    - by Euskadi
    I cannot access my site through my web browser, using either the domain name or IP address (which also pings fine). My site was working last night when I went to bed, so I can't think what might have done it. I have tried restarting apache to no avail. update: I've noticed that http://[IP Address]/phpymyadmin works but [domain name]/phpmyadmin does not, and the same happens for webmin (https://[IP]:1000). Could this be a problem with BIND?

    Read the article

  • Port forwarding with router in bridged mode

    - by jipje44
    let say R1 and R2. R1 is in bridged mode and connected to R2. R2 is a dhcp server. To R2 is an internet camera connected. When i am on R2 and i do enter the ip of the camera then it will work without a problem. However i want to acces the camera from the outside. So in R2 i forwarded a port (done this one other networks without problems). However I can't connect from the outside. Can R1 blocking the port? I cant log in on R1 as long as it is in bridged mode.

    Read the article

  • A really unique case of Load Balancing

    - by Shamshun
    I have an internet connection which has limited up/down bandwidth per IP address. What I want to do is to get multiple IP addresses on a "single" LAN interface, and use a load balancer to distribute traffic through them. I was successful at getting 100 ip addresses on a single interface. my problem is that Linux and Windows use the first ip address of an interface by default, so my bandwidth is not increased. I would appreciate if someone tells me what Load Balancing software has the ability to distribute load between multiple IPs on a single interface. I have tried to do so on both Win7 and Backtrack-LinuxR2

    Read the article

  • How to set up vpn tunnel (ipsec) connection

    - by Alfwed
    I'm working with a client who wants to set up a vpn tunnel between their network and ours. They're in charge of the tunnel and to give us the access they are asking me my public IP and my LAN IP. This is what i've got when i do an ifconfig on the server i will use to connect to the vpn $ ifconfig eth0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr d4:ae:52:cd:xx:xx inet adr:62.210.xxx.xxx Bcast:62.210.xxx.xxx Masque:255.255.255.0 adr inet6: fe80::d6ae:52ff:xxxx:xx/64 Scope:Lien UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 Packets reçus:55255032 erreurs:0 :779628 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:5419527 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 lg file transmission:1000 Octets reçus:5598164393 (5.5 GB) Octets transmis:1034297288 (1.0 GB) Interruption:16 Mémoire:c0000000-c0012800 lo Link encap:Boucle locale inet adr:127.0.0.1 Masque:255.0.0.0 adr inet6: ::1/128 Scope:Hôte UP LOOPBACK RUNNING MTU:16436 Metric:1 Packets reçus:45923382 erreurs:0 :0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:45923382 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 lg file transmission:0 The inet adr:62.210.xxx.xxx is my public IP but it seems like i dont have any LAN IP. Can the connection work without LAN IP or should I create a private network somehow?

    Read the article

  • Iptables and counters

    - by mehturt
    I'm trying to use iptables counters with munin to monitor traffic of hosts on my local subnet. For each host I set up a rule like this: iptables -I OUTPUT -d $ip This should count the packets going from firewall to $ip, correct? I found out that this does not seem to count all packets. I start tcpdump on my router (Linux) and I see packets to $ip that are not counted. For example I check number of packets for rule to my phone IP. I start tcpdump, refresh Gmail on my phoone, I see packets in tcpdump's output but iptables rule counters are not incremented. Then I open a web page on the same phone and the counters are incremented. What could be the reason?

    Read the article

  • 2 servers, high availability and faster response

    - by user17886
    I recently bought a second webserver because I worry about hardware failure of my old server. Now that I have that second server I wish to do a little more then just have one server standby and replicate all day. As long as it's there I might as well get some advantage our of it ! I have a website powered by ubuntu 12.04, nginx, php-fpm, apc, mysql (5.5) and couchdb. Im currently testing configurations where i can achieve failover AND make good use of the extra harware for faster responses / distributed load. The setup I am testing nowinvolves heartbeat for ip failover and two identical servers. Of the two servers only one has a public ip adress. If one server crashes the other server takes over the public ip adress. On an incoming request nginx forwards the request tot php-fpm to either server a of server b (50/50 if both servers are alive). Once the request has been send to php-fpm both servers look at localhost for the mysql server. I use master-master mysql replication for this. The file system is synced with lsyncd. This works pretty well but Im reading it's discouraged by the (mysql) community. Another option I could think of is to use one server as a mysql master and one server as a web/php server. The servers would still sync their filesystem, would still run the same duplicate software (nginx,mysql) but master slave mysql replication could be used. As long as bother servers are alive I could just prefer nginx to listen to ip a and mysql to ip b. If one server is down, the other server could take over the task of the other server, simply by ip switching. But im completely new at this so I would greatly value your expert advice. Is either of the two setups any good ? If you have any thoughts on this please let me know ! PS, virtualisation, hosting on different locations or active/passive setups are not solutions im looking for. I find virtual server either too slow or too expensive. I already have a passive failover on another location. But in case of a crash I found the site was still unreachable for too long due to dns caching.

    Read the article

  • surfaceDestroyed called out of turn

    - by Avasulthiris
    I'm currently developing on minimum sdk version 3 (Android 1.5 - cupcake) and I'm having a strange unexplained issue that I have not been able to solve on my own. It is now becoming a rather urgent issue as I've already missed 1 deadline... I'm writing a high-level library to make long term android development easier and quicker. The one specific module has to capture images for a application... I've gotten everything right so far over the last couple months, except this one little thing and I don't know what to do any more: When I use the Camera object and implement a SurfaceHolder.Callback, the methods surfaceCreated() and surfaceChanged() are called one after the other. Then when the activity finishes, surfaceDestroyed() is called. This is how it should be, but when I stick the exact same code in my library (plain Java library that references the Android API - not in an activity), surfaceDestroyed() is called directly after created and changed. As a result - the camera object is closed before I can use it and the application force closes. What a pain. I can't do anything! This method call is controlled by the device.. Why does the surface close for no reason? Even when I post it to run on the activity thread through my own invokeAndWait(Runnable) method, like I do for many other things. I have 5 different working examples of different ways and implementations of capturing images in android but I still get the same issue when I plug it into my library. I don't understand what the difference is. The code is pretty much the same - and I post all the related code to the UI thread so its not a thread handling issue or anything like that. I've rewritten it about 20 times in different ways - same issue every time.. The only other way to approach it that I know of is creating a new Camera and setting it to the VideoView. The android source (c++ native code) however provides no Camera constructor, only an open() method which automatically forwards the camera's state to 'prepared' but I can only set the camera to the VideoView from the 'initialized' state. Pretty silly, I know, but there is no way around it unless I modify the Android library source code haha. not an option! The API does not allow for this method - you are expected to use it like my first example. So essentially - i just need to understand exactly why surfaceDestroyed() is called out of turn and if there is anything I can do to avoid it closing? If i can just understand the exact logic behind it and how it works! The documentation isn't much help! Secondly, if someone knows of any alternative ways to do it, as my second example, but hopefully one which the API actually allows for? haha Thanks guys. I would post code, but its fairly complicated, a couple thousand lines for this specific class and it would probably take a couple days to explain with all the threading and event listeners and what not. I just need help with this 1 single thing. Please let me know if you have any questions.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162  | Next Page >