Search Results

Search found 24609 results on 985 pages for 'private ip'.

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

Page 16/985 | < Previous Page | 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23  | Next Page >

  • VPS with Plesk, one ip, and godaddy (definely need help)

    - by Francesco
    Hi there, here's my situation : i've Plesk 8.3.0 with one IP and i've registered my domains at godaddy.com My problem : i cannot figure out how to configure plesk and godaddy to have my domains (6) properly working into the VPS. i've only one IP, so i can't have my personal NS and need to use godaddy ns. But.. how do i set all the stuff ? I've made a try but it's not working. Please take a look : This is an example of how the domain i'm actually working on is configured On Plesk : Host Record type Value 1.2.3.4 / 24 PTR mydomain.com. ftp.mydomain.com. CNAME mydomain.com. mail.mydomain.com. A 1.2.3.4 ns.mydomain.com. A 1.2.3.4 mydomain.com. NS ns.mydomain.com. mydomain.com. A 1.2.3.4 mydomain.com. MX (10) mail.mydomain.com. webmail.mydomain.com. A 1.2.3.4 www.mydomain.com. CNAME mydomain.com. On godaddy,(Total DNS Control) for the same domain i have this setup : A (Host) Host Points To TTL Actions * 1.2.3.4 1 Hour CNAMES (Aliases) Host Points To TTL Actions e email.secureserver.net 1 Hour email email.secureserver.net 1 Hour ftp @ 1 Hour imap imap.secureserver.net 1 Hour mail pop.secureserver.net 1 Hour mobilemail mobilemail-v01.prod.mesa1.secureserver.net 1 Hour pda mobilemail-v01.prod.mesa1.secureserver.net 1 Hour pop pop.secureserver.net 1 Hour smtp smtp.secureserver.net 1 Hour webmail webmail.secureserver.net 1 Hour www @ 1 Hour MX (Mail Exchange) Priority Host Goes To TTL Actions 10 @ mailstore1.secureserver.net 1 Hour 0 @ smtp.secureserver.net Host Points To TTL Actions @ ns53.domaincontrol.com @ ns54.domaincontrol.com What should i correct ? Thanks for helping me Francesco

    Read the article

  • Varnish configuration, NamevirtualHosts, and IP Forwarding

    - by Brent
    I currently have a bunch of NameVirtualHost based websites, load balanced between 3 apache2 servers using ldirectord. I would like to insert varnish as a reverse-web-proxy between ldirectord and apache in the following way: a request comes in to ldirectord it is then load balanced between the 3 apache2 servers and varnish, with a weight of 1 for the webservers, and 99 for varnish (so if varnish is rebooted, the webservers will take over seamlessly) varnish will then load balance its requests between my apache2 servers. However, the varnish part is not working. I wonder whether this has to do with the fact that my apache servers use x.x.x.x:80 for their NameVirtualHosts, instead of *:80? (they have to do this, since each server hosts multiple IP addresses) Or perhaps it has to do with the need for IP Forwarding to be set up on the varnish server? (I did echo 1 /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_forward on this server, is that sufficient?) How can I debug this problem? ldirectord doesn't produce logs of what it does with each request (and if it did, I would be overwhelmed with information since I'm serving hundreds of requests per second) varnish log shows the ldirectord server connecting to it every 5 seconds, but nothing else. I have set up a test site using this configuration, but it fails - no apache access logs, no applicable varnish logs.

    Read the article

  • Running two different websites domains one one IP address

    - by Akshar Prabhu Desai
    Here is my apache configuration file. I have two domain names running on same ip but i want them to point to different webapps. But in this case both point to the one intended for e-yantra.org. If I copy paste akshar.co.in part before E-yantra.org both start pointing to akshar.co.in I have two A DNS entries (one per domain name) pointing to the same IP. NameVirtualHost *:80 <VirtualHost *:80> ServerName www.e-yantra.org ServerAdmin [email protected] DocumentRoot /var/www <Directory /> Options FollowSymLinks AllowOverride All </Directory> <Directory /var/www/> Options Indexes FollowSymLinks MultiViews AllowOverride All Order allow,deny allow from all </Directory> <Directory /var/www/ci/> Options Indexes FollowSymLinks MultiViews AllowOverride All Order allow,deny allow from all </Directory> <Directory /var/www/db2/> Options Indexes FollowSymLinks MultiViews AllowOverride All Order allow,deny allow from all </Directory> ScriptAlias /cgi-bin/ /usr/lib/cgi-bin/ <Directory "/usr/lib/cgi-bin"> AllowOverride None Options +ExecCGI -MultiViews +SymLinksIfOwnerMatch Order allow,deny Allow from all </Directory> ErrorLog /var/log/apache2/error.log # Possible values include: debug, info, notice, warn, error, crit, # alert, emerg. LogLevel warn CustomLog /var/log/apache2/access.log combined Alias /doc/ "/usr/share/doc/" <Directory "/usr/share/doc/"> Options Indexes MultiViews FollowSymLinks AllowOverride None Order deny,allow Deny from all Allow from 127.0.0.0/255.0.0.0 ::1/128 </Directory> </VirtualHost> <VirtualHost *:80> ServerName www.akshar.co.in ServerAdmin [email protected] DocumentRoot /var/akshar.co.in <Directory /var/akshar.co.in/> Options Indexes FollowSymLinks MultiViews AllowOverride All Order allow,deny allow from all </Directory> </VirtualHost>

    Read the article

  • Force local IP traffic to an external interface

    - by calandoa
    I have a machine with several interfaces that I can configure as I want, for instance: eth1: 192.168.1.1 eth2: 192.168.2.2 I would like to forward all the traffic sent to one of these local addresses through the other interface. For instance, all requests to an iperf, ftp, http server at 192.168.1.1 should be not just routed internally, but forwarded through eth2 (and the external network will take care of re-routing the packet to eth1). I tried and looked at several commands, like iptables, ip route, etc... but nothing worked. The closest behavior I could get was done with: ip route change to 192.168.1.1/24 dev eth2 which send all 192.168.1.x on eth2, except for 192.168.1.1 which is still routed internally. May be I could then do NAT forwarding of all traffic directed to fake 192.168.1.2 on eth1, rerouted to 192.168.1.1 internally? I am actually struggling with iptables, but it is too tough for me. The goal of this setup is to do interface driver testing without using two PCs. I am using Linux, but if you know how to do that with Windows, I'll buy it!

    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

  • Get Internal IP Address From DHCP Hostname

    - by ell
    I would like to try and get an internal ip address of one of the computers on my network. The reason for this is I have a little home server box downstairs but every time I want to SSH into it I have to open my router configuration and go on the DHCP client table and look at the IP address. For example I would like to be able to go ssh ell-sever instead of ssh 192.168.1.105 or whatever it happens to be. My network configuration is like so: Router downstairs that is connected to the Internet and is running a DHCP server My server computer (ell-server) is a headless pc connected to the router via ethernet cable. Running Ubuntu 11.04 Server Edition My laptop upstairs (ell-laptop) that is running Ubuntu 11.10 Desktop Edition connected wirelessly Other (irrelevant) computers - 2 x Windows XP, 1 x Xubuntu - all connected with cables. (It seemed to me the method of connection isn't useful information but I put it in anyway - just in case. If I have missed any information please tell me) Do I have to run a DNS server on one of my computers? If so which one? And does that mean I will have to run a DDNS client on each computer? Thanks in advance, ell.

    Read the article

  • Closest Ruby representation of a 'private static final' and 'public static final' class variable in

    - by Hosh
    Given the Java code below, what's the closest you could represent these two static final variables in a Ruby class? And, is it possible in Ruby to distinguish between private static and public static variables as there is in Java? public class DeviceController { ... private static final Device myPrivateDevice = Device.getDevice("mydevice"); public static final Device myPublicDevice = Device.getDevice("mydevice"); ... public static void main(String args[]) { ... } }

    Read the article

  • Error code while trying to use private variables in a function

    - by Cortopasta
    I get an error that says Parse error: syntax error, unexpected T_PRIVATE in E:\PortableApps\xampp\htdocs\SN\AC\ACclass.php on line 6 while trying to run my script. I'm new to classes in PHP and was wondering if someone could point out my error. Here's the code for that part. <?php class ac { public function authentication() { private $plain_username = $_POST['username']; private $md5_password = md5($_POST['password']); $ac = new ac();

    Read the article

  • functional test for rails controller private method

    - by mohit
    I have a private method in my controller. which is used for some database update. this method i am calling from another controller method. and it works fine. But when i am trying to write a test case for that method then It is tripping on accessing (session variable and params) in my functional all other methods are working fine the problem is only with private method? In my setup method in functional test, I am setting session also.?

    Read the article

  • final and private static

    - by xdevel2000
    I read that doing: public final void foo() {} is equals to: private static void foo() {} both meaning that the method is not overridable! But I don't see the equivalence if a method is private it's automatically not accessible...

    Read the article

  • Are private members inherited in C#?

    - by Petr
    Just seen one tutorial saying that: Class Dog { private string Name; } Class SuperDog:Dog { private string Mood; } Then there was an UML displaying that SuperDog will inherit Name as well. I have tried but to me it seems that only public members are inherited. At least I could not access Name unless it was declared as public.

    Read the article

  • C# - are private members inherited?

    - by Petr
    Hi, Just seen one tutorial saying that: Class Dog { private string Name; } Class SuperDog:Dog { private string Mood; } Then there was an UML displaying that SuperDog will inherit Name as well. I have tried but to me it seems that only public members are inherited. At least I could not access Name unless it was declared as public. Thanks

    Read the article

  • Two network interfaces and two IP addresses on the same subnet in Linux

    - by Scott Duckworth
    I recently ran into a situation where I needed two IP addresses on the same subnet assigned to one Linux host so that we could run two SSL/TLS sites. My first approach was to use IP aliasing, e.g. using eth0:0, eth0:1, etc, but our network admins have some fairly strict settings in place for security that squashed this idea: They use DHCP snooping and normally don't allow static IP addresses. Static addressing is accomplished by using static DHCP entries, so the same MAC address always gets the same IP assignment. This feature can be disabled per switchport if you ask and you have a reason for it (thankfully I have a good relationship with the network guys and this isn't hard to do). With the DHCP snooping disabled on the switchport, they had to put in a rule on the switch that said MAC address X is allowed to have IP address Y. Unfortunately this had the side effect of also saying that MAC address X is ONLY allowed to have IP address Y. IP aliasing required that MAC address X was assigned two IP addresses, so this didn't work. There may have been a way around these issues on the switch configuration, but in an attempt to preserve good relations with the network admins I tried to find another way. Having two network interfaces seemed like the next logical step. Thankfully this Linux system is a virtual machine, so I was able to easily add a second network interface (without rebooting, I might add - pretty cool). A few keystrokes later I had two network interfaces up and running and both pulled IP addresses from DHCP. But then the problem came in: the network admins could see (on the switch) the ARP entry for both interfaces, but only the first network interface that I brought up would respond to pings or any sort of TCP or UDP traffic. After lots of digging and poking, here's what I came up with. It seems to work, but it also seems to be a lot of work for something that seems like it should be simple. Any alternate ideas out there? Step 1: Enable ARP filtering on all interfaces: # sysctl -w net.ipv4.conf.all.arp_filter=1 # echo "net.ipv4.conf.all.arp_filter = 1" >> /etc/sysctl.conf From the file networking/ip-sysctl.txt in the Linux kernel docs: arp_filter - BOOLEAN 1 - Allows you to have multiple network interfaces on the same subnet, and have the ARPs for each interface be answered based on whether or not the kernel would route a packet from the ARP'd IP out that interface (therefore you must use source based routing for this to work). In other words it allows control of which cards (usually 1) will respond to an arp request. 0 - (default) The kernel can respond to arp requests with addresses from other interfaces. This may seem wrong but it usually makes sense, because it increases the chance of successful communication. IP addresses are owned by the complete host on Linux, not by particular interfaces. Only for more complex setups like load- balancing, does this behaviour cause problems. arp_filter for the interface will be enabled if at least one of conf/{all,interface}/arp_filter is set to TRUE, it will be disabled otherwise Step 2: Implement source-based routing I basically just followed directions from http://lartc.org/howto/lartc.rpdb.multiple-links.html, although that page was written with a different goal in mind (dealing with two ISPs). Assume that the subnet is 10.0.0.0/24, the gateway is 10.0.0.1, the IP address for eth0 is 10.0.0.100, and the IP address for eth1 is 10.0.0.101. Define two new routing tables named eth0 and eth1 in /etc/iproute2/rt_tables: ... top of file omitted ... 1 eth0 2 eth1 Define the routes for these two tables: # ip route add default via 10.0.0.1 table eth0 # ip route add default via 10.0.0.1 table eth1 # ip route add 10.0.0.0/24 dev eth0 src 10.0.0.100 table eth0 # ip route add 10.0.0.0/24 dev eth1 src 10.0.0.101 table eth1 Define the rules for when to use the new routing tables: # ip rule add from 10.0.0.100 table eth0 # ip rule add from 10.0.0.101 table eth1 The main routing table was already taken care of by DHCP (and it's not even clear that its strictly necessary in this case), but it basically equates to this: # ip route add default via 10.0.0.1 dev eth0 # ip route add 130.127.48.0/23 dev eth0 src 10.0.0.100 # ip route add 130.127.48.0/23 dev eth1 src 10.0.0.101 And voila! Everything seems to work just fine. Sending pings to both IP addresses works fine. Sending pings from this system to other systems and forcing the ping to use a specific interface works fine (ping -I eth0 10.0.0.1, ping -I eth1 10.0.0.1). And most importantly, all TCP and UDP traffic to/from either IP address works as expected. So again, my question is: is there a better way to do this? This seems like a lot of work for a seemingly simple problem.

    Read the article

  • How can I change the location of my ip address to Orlando, FL from other city where I live and using forum/chat-room? [on hold]

    - by MSEUCF
    I live in West Palm Beach, Florida. However, I am attending to school at University of Center Florida for materials science and engineering. Right now, I am on vacation and live in WPB, FL. There is one certainly problem when I login at private forum I'm getting error for not same the ip-address so I had to make new account with false information in city and still unable to success. Of course, it won't do that due to policy from forum required the ip-address has to be same in Orlando, FL. local only. How can I change the location of my ip address to Orlando? Also, in chat-room from forum it would show my ip-address so I'd be in trouble if they find out that I am not live in Orlando. Please help with me. Tell me how to change ip adress step and step. Thank you. *I use AT&T and Belkin Router Wifi. Forgiven me for my English is not very well. ESL. I am a foreign student.

    Read the article

  • Calculating and billing IP multicast usage on the Internet

    - by obvio171
    I've been searching for the reasons why IP multicast isn't widely supported on the Public Internet, and a commonly-cited reason is the difficulty ISPs have in tracking Multicast usage for later billing. Given this difficulty, since ISPs control the routers and they're not forced to support Multicast (as per IPv4), they just disable it. I couldn't find what this difficulty was though. Since an ISP has full control of any inbound and outbound traffic, be it Unicast or Multicast, what's the difficulty in tracking and billing the latter that does not exist in the former?

    Read the article

  • Ubuntu 12.04: apt-get "failed to fetch"; apt is trying to fetch via old static IP

    - by gabe
    Sample error: W: Failed to fetch http://security.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/dists/precise-security/universe/i18n/Translation-en Unable to connect to 192.168.1.70:8118: Now this was working just fine until I changed the IP this morning. I have the server set to a static IP of 10.0.1.70 and for years it has been 192.168.1.70 - the IP apt-get is trying to use right now. I use privoxy and tor thus the 8118 port. Like I said it all worked until I changed the static IP from 192.168.1.70 to 10.0.1.70. I was forced to do so because of router issues. (Long and involved story, I didn't really want to change the IP because I know something like this would happen.) The setup for TOR/Privoxy requires that has you point Privoxy at TOR via 127.0.0.1:9050. Then point curl, etc to Privoxy via $HOME/.bashrc. Typically you would set the listen to IP for Privoxy to 127.0.0.1 but if you want it accessible to the rest of the LAN you set the IP to the server's LAN IP. Which I did a long time ago and was working fine until this morning. I have changed all instances of 192.168.1.70 to 10.0.1.70 in both /etc/privoxy/config and $HOME/.bashrc. What makes this really strange for me is that curl is working fine. I curl icanhazip.com and voila I get a new IP every 10 minutes or so. I curl CNN.com and I get the short but sweet permanently moved to www.cnn.com message I expect. Firefox works fine. Ping works fine. And I've tested all of this via Remote Desktop over my LAN. So the connection appears to be fine for everything except apt. I've also rebooted hoping that would clear 192.168.1.70 from apt. So the connection to the internet and DNS aren't an issue for these programs. And they are, as far as I can tell, using Privoxy/TOR just fine. The real irony here is that I've tried to open up Privoxy to go to Ubuntu's servers directly without going through TOR to speed up the downloads from Ubuntu (did this months ago). So somewhere that I have not been able to find, apt has stored the IP 192.168.1.70. And 192.168.1.70 is no longer valid. Thanks for the help

    Read the article

  • Restrict VPN client traffic to certain domains/IP

    - by mr-euro
    Hi Is there any way to restrict a VPN client to only route certain traffic via the VPN and the rest via their local gateway? For example: traffic to a certain IP or domain gets routed across the VPN and all other requests do not. Let me know if you need more details. Thank you.

    Read the article

  • Issues with static IP (Ubuntu Server 10.04)

    - by letseatfood
    I am following this tutorial for setting up a testing server for my web development projects. When I attempt setting up a static IP address (using the configuration below), I receive the error "ping: unknown host www.google.com" when I attempt using ping. auto eth0 iface eth0 inet static address 192.168.0.100 netmask 255.255.255.0 network 192.168.0.0 broadcast 192.168.0.255 gateway 192.168.0.1 Ping works fine when the configuration is: auto eth0 iface eth0 inet static I am a novice to server setup and administration.

    Read the article

  • Windows Server 2008 - one MAC Address, assign multiple external IP's to VirtualBoxes running as guests on host

    - by Sise
    Couldn't find any help @ google or here. The scenario: Windows Server 2008 Std x64 on i7-975, 12 GB RAM. The server is running in a data centre. One hardware NIC - RealTek PCIe GBE - one MAC Address. The data centre provides us 4 static external IP's. The first is assigned to the host by default of course. I have ordered all 4 IP's, the data centre can assign the available IP's to the physical MAC address of the given NIC only. This means one NIC, one MAC Address, 4 IP's. Everything works fine so far. Now, what I would like to have: Installed VirtualBox with 1-3 guests running, each gets it's own external IP assigned. Each of it should be an standalone Win Server 2008. It looks like the easiest way would be to put the guests into an virtual subnet and routing all data coming to the 2nd till 4th external IP through to this guests using there subnet IP's. I have been through the VirtualBox User Manuel regarding networking. What's not working: I can't use bridged networking without anything else, because the IP's are assigned to the one MAC address only. I can't use NAT networking because it does not allow access from outside or the host to the guest. I do not wanna use port forwarding. Host-only networking itself would not allow internet access, by sharing the default internet connection of the host, internet is granted from the guest to the outside but not from outside or the host to the guest. InternalNetworking is not really an option here. What I have tried is to create an additional MS Loopback adapter for a routed subnet, where the Vbox guests are in, now the idea was to NAT the internet connection to the loopback 'subnet'. But I can't ping the gateway from the guests. By using route command in the command shell or RRAS (static route, NAT) I didn't get there as well. Solutions like the following do work for the one way, but not for the way back: For your situation, it might be best to use the Host-Only adapter for ICS. Go to the preferences of VB itself and select network. There you can change the configuration for the interface. Set the IP address to 192.168.0.1, netmask 255.255.255.0. Disable the DHCP server if it isn't already and that's it. Now the Guest should get an IP from Windows itself and be able to get onto the internet, while you can also access the Host. Slowly I'm pretty stucked with this topic. There is a possibility I've just overlooked something or just didn't getting it by trying, especially using RRAS, but it's kinda hard to find useful howto's or something in the web. Thanks in advance! Best regards, Simon

    Read the article

  • How to access an IP address as if on a different network using SSH

    - by NT3RP
    In preparation for a lengthy business trip, I set up my router such that I can access my home computer over the internet via port forwarding over SSH. One thing I neglected to do was setup access to my router remotely. Normally, I can just access the router configuration page via 192.168.1.1. I know that it's possible to tunnel traffic through SSH, but how do I access an IP address as if I were on my home network using SSH?

    Read the article

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

< Previous Page | 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23  | Next Page >