Search Results

Search found 804 results on 33 pages for 'dylan wan'.

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 17/33 | < Previous Page | 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  | Next Page >

  • Multi-Role Domain Controllers for Small Offices (< 50 clients)

    - by kce
    Warning: I'm a Linux/*NIX admin so this is all new to me. I understand that it's not considered a good idea to have only a single domain controller, and that it is also probably a good idea for a domain controller to only do AD/DHCP/DNS (Here). We have two offices, location A with 30 users and location B with 10 users. Our two offices are separated by a WAN that is not particularly robust so I have be instructed that we need to have standalone services in each office. This means that according to "best practices" we will need to build a domain controller and a separate file server in each office. Again, I am not knowledgeable in the ways of Windows but this seems a little unnecessary for an organization of 40 users. People have commented that I could "get away with" running file services on the domain controller as long as the "load is light". That just seems to generate more questions than it answers. What constitutes light load? What are the potential consequences of mixing these roles? Ideally I would prefer to only have one physical machine at each location. The one in location A (the location with IT staff) can act as the primary domain controller and the one in the smaller office can act as the backup domain controller. If either domain controller fails we can still use the other one for authentication (albeit with some latency) and if the WAN connection fails each office still has access to their respective "local" domain controller. If the file services are ALSO run on each server (and synchronized with something like DFS), a similar arrangement in terms of redundancy can be had without having to purchase, build and install two additional separate servers. It's not that I'm adverse to that (well, any more adverse than I am to whole thing to begin with) but to my simple mind it just seems, well a bit overkill. I can definitely see the benefits of functional separation when we're talking larger organizations, but I need to consider the additional overhead too. None of this excludes having a DRP setup for the domain controller/s. I assume you can lose two domain controllers just as easily as one.

    Read the article

  • Squid 2.7.STABLE3-4.1 as a transparent proxy on Ubuntu Server 9.04

    - by LOGIC9
    Can't get this to work at all! I'm trying to get this linux box to act as a transparent proxy and, with the help of DHCP, force everyone on the network to gate into the proxy. I have two ethernet connections, both to the same switch. And I'm trying to get 192.168.1.234 to become the default gateway. The actual WAN connection is to a gateway 192.168.1.1. eth0 is 192.168.1.234 eth1 is 192.168.1.2 Effectively I'm trying to make eth0 a LAN only interface and eth1 a WAN interface. I've oi should set the gateway for eth1 to point to 192.168.1.234 my squid.conf file has the following directives added at the bottom: nly set eth0 to have a gateway address in /etc/network/interfaces I'm not sure whether http_port 3128 transparent acl lan src 192.168.1.0/24 acl lh src 127.0.0.1/255.255.255.0 http_access allow lan http_access allow lh i've added the following routing commands: iptables -t nat -A PREROUTING -i eth0 -p tcp -m tcp --dport 80 -j DNAT --to-destination 192.168.1.2:3128 iptables -t nat -A PREROUTING -i eth1 -p tcp -m tcp --dport 80 -j REDIRECT --to-ports 3128 I set a computer with TCP settings 192.168.1.234 as the gateway and opened up google.com, but it comes up with a request error. Any ideas why this isn't working? :( Been searching continuously for a solution to no avail. ----------------------------- EDIT ------------------------------- Managed to get it to route properly to the squid, here's the error I get in the browser: ERROR The requested URL could not be retrieved While trying to process the request: GET / HTTP/1.1 Host: www.google.com User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-GB; rv:1.9.1.2) Gecko/20090729 Firefox/3.5.2 Accept: text/html,application/xhtml+xml,application/xml;q=0.9,*/*;q=0.8 Accept-Language: en-gb,en;q=0.5 Accept-Encoding: gzip,deflate Accept-Charset: ISO-8859-1,utf-8;q=0.7,*;q=0.7 Keep-Alive: 300 Connection: keep-alive Cache-Control: max-age=0 The following error was encountered: * Invalid Request Some aspect of the HTTP Request is invalid. Possible problems: * Missing or unknown request method * Missing URL * Missing HTTP Identifier (HTTP/1.0) * Request is too large * Content-Length missing for POST or PUT requests * Illegal character in hostname; underscores are not allowed Your cache administrator is webmaster. Generated Mon, 26 Oct 2009 03:41:15 GMT by mjolnir.lloydharrington.local (squid/2.7.STABLE3)

    Read the article

  • DDWRT VLAN Without internet

    - by user148888
    Hey i have WRT54G with DD-WRT v24-sp2 firmware. i got this scenario Vlan0 port 2,3,4 172.168.1.1/24 vlan1 Wan port Vlan2 port 1 172.168.2.1/24 i can ping from vlan0 to vlan2 but vlan2 can't ping to vlan0 iptables -I FORWARD -i vlan2 -o vlan1 -j DROP i use this to prevent vlan2 to have internet cuz i don't want to share my internet to vlan2 i just want to share local network betwen vlan1 and vlan2.. any help please :S:S:S

    Read the article

  • Diagnosing and debugging LAN congestion / connection issues

    - by John Weldon
    What are the top N tools / methodologies used to diagnose and repair network issues? Given a LAN, for example, where users are able to consistently ping an outside server, but any data intensive connections are flaky; how would you begin solving the network issues? I imagine issues like congestion, bandwidth constraints, throughput constraints, etc. are all factors, but I don't know how to diagnose those issues. I'm especially interested in LAN environments (rather than WAN)

    Read the article

  • WiFi N Gigabit Router

    - by SLaks
    I'm looking for a WiFi N Gigabit router. I'll be using an iPod Touch 2G and a 2009 17" MacBook Pro over WiFi, and I need at least 4 gigabit ethernet ports plus a WAN port. What do people recommend? In particular, are there any compatibility issues between different WiFi N drafts that would limit the speed of the MacBook, and is it worth getting dual-band?

    Read the article

  • Internet connection sharing between Windows XP and Windows 7

    - by Dave
    I bought my lil sister's netbooks for Christmas and I've been having a heck of a time trying to get Internet Connection Sharing to work. The host computer is a Windows XP box and it uses a US Cellular 3G modem dongle thingy to set it's Internet access. Additionally I have a hard wire plugged into the LAN1 port of the router described below. (I tried the WAN port out of desperation but things didn't seem happy that way.) Additionally they have a linksys router (can't remember specific model number, I will find this out) that I was using to take advantage of it's wireless capabilities. Originally thought about updating the router to use dd-wrt, but after reading the instructions it looked like to much of a pita (had to downgrade firmware, then install dd-wrt) to set up, eventually I caved, out of desperation, and ended up successfully installing dd-wrt on the router. I have DHCP turned off on the router, actually all I could select was DHCP forwarder. The netbooks both have windows 7 starter installed on them. Initially, I had the networks joined to a homegroup but I dropped that and everyone is able to see everyone in their respective network explorers. When I turn on Internet Connection Sharing on the host, its IP on the LAN changed to 192.168.0.1, so I arbitrarily decided to assign the router to port 192.168.0.100. When I connect the netbooks they get IPs dynamically. As I stated before, everyone can see everyone in the network explorer, and shares can be accessed. The weird thing is that everyone can ping the router but they cannot ping each others IPs. The status on the netbooks says that there is no Internet Connectivity. Another thing I tried was manually setting the DNS servers on the netbooks to the DNS servers that the host computer has. The funny thing is when I ping an outside domain such as google.com the IP address resolves, however I get no responses from the pings. When I tried plugging the host into the WAN port I could ping the router, nor could I access the router's web access admin. Another thing I tried was turning off the firewall on the netbooks and the firewall off on the host computer for the LAN connection, and they still could not ping each other. Also I thought I should be able to start a remote desktop connection but I couldn't do that either, I also checked to make sure that computers would in fact accept a request for remote desktop connections.

    Read the article

  • Experiences with hosted (off-site) Microsoft Dynamics CRM?

    - by Beau
    We're currently testing Microsoft Dynamics CRM hosted by Fpweb. I've been asked by the lead on the project how we can increase the speed at which CRM pages in IE load. The delay seems reasonable to me for a virtual server located across the country. Has anyone succeeded in speeding things up with aggressive caching (i.e. a WAN accelerator) or by some other means? Do your employees complain about the speed of hosted Dynamics CRM?

    Read the article

  • Block Skype on Cisco IOS

    - by ensnare
    I'm trying to block skype via policy routing but it's not working ... here's my configuration: class-map match-any block match protocol skype policy-map QoS-Priority-Input class block police 1000000 31250 31250 conform-action drop exceed-action drop violate-action drop policy-map QoS-Priority-Output class block police 1000000 31250 31250 conform-action drop exceed-action drop violate-action drop interface FastEthernet4 description WAN service-policy input QoS-Priority-Input service-policy output QoS-Priority-Output

    Read the article

  • networking related problem

    - by abhay
    i have installed two LAN cards in my PC. one is used for local networking and other is for Wide area networking( both have a different gateways). But when i need to browse in WAN for that i have to disable my LAN and vice versa. so i don't know the technical / logical reason behind that. so could you please give me reason why this happens.

    Read the article

  • Configuration Manager sub site codes

    - by NA Slacker
    I have two sub-sites set up in configuration manager. When the SCCM agent installs on the client machines within the boundaries of those sub sites they are assigned the site code of the Primary site, not the sub site code. As a result their management server remains the main server not the sub site server. I am setting up thes sub sites on cross WAN locations to cut down on traffic. What could be preventing the clients from getting associated with the proper sub site code.

    Read the article

  • Setting a Preferred Network Adapter for browsing

    - by ala
    My PC at work is connected to 2 networks; LAN: local corporate network for remote desktop access and very slow internet connection WAN: wireless faster internet browsing Is there a way to setup the default/preferred network adapter for the internet browsing?

    Read the article

  • Which linux-based firewall?

    - by Atlas
    We are looking to replace our current aging firewall/router with a new one. We would prefer it to be free/opensource if possible. Our minimum requirements would be: 1) Site-to-site VPN 2) Web URL/IP filtering 3) 2 WAN connections with load-balancing 4) Easy-to-use web inferface Any suggestions? and why you chose yours.

    Read the article

  • Why might one host be unable to access the Internet, when it can ping the router and when all other hosts can?

    - by user1444233
    I have a Draytek Vigor 2830n. It's kicking out a 192.168.3.0 LAN. It performs load-balancing across dual-WAN ports, although I've turned off the second WAN to simplify testing. There are many hosts on the LAN. All IPs are allocated through DHCP, most freely allocated from the pool, but one or two are bound to NIC MAC addresses. All hosts can access the Internet, save one. That host (192.168.3.100 or 'dot100' for short) gets allocated an IP address (and the right gateway address, DNS server addresses, subnet etc.) dot100 can ping itself. It can ping the gateway, and access the latter's web interface via port 80. It's responsive and loss-free (sustained ping over a couple of minutes reports no data loss). Yet, for some reason that evades me, dot100 can't ping an external IP address or domain name. I suspect it's never been able to, because it was getting some Internet access from a second adaptor (different subnet), but that's now been turned off, which exposed the problem. In dot100, I've tried: two operating systems (Windows 8 and Knoppix), to rule out anti-virus programs etc. two physical adaptors two cables, on each adaptor two IPs (e.g. .100 and .103 assigned by Mac and .26 from the pool) both dynamic and assigned (MAC-bound) DHCP-allocated IPs but none of this experiments yielded any variation in the result. dot100 is a crucial host. It's a file server for the network, so I need it to be reliably allocated a consistent IP. Can anyone offer a potential solution or a way forward with the analysis please? My guess My analysis so far leads me to believe it's a router issue. I've checked the web interface very carefully. There are no filters setup in Firewall - General Setup or Filter Setup. I suspect it's a corrupted internal routing table, but the web UI shows this as the Routing table: Key: C - connected, S - static, R - RIP, * - default, ~ - private * 0.0.0.0/ 0.0.0.0 via 62.XX.XX.X WAN1 * 62.XX.XX.X/ 255.255.255.255 via 62.XX.XX.X WAN1 S 82.YY.YYY.YYY/ 255.255.255.255 via 82.YY.YYY.YYY WAN1 C 192.168.1.0/ 255.255.255.0 directly connected WAN2 C~ 192.168.3.0/ 255.255.255.0 directly connected LAN2

    Read the article

  • pix 501, static route to d-link router (different subnet)

    - by ra170
    I have pix 501 cisco firewall with internal ip 192.168.10.1. I have connected d-link router (dir-655) to pix 501. The d-link router has internal ip 192.168.0.1 The picture would like something like that: |pix 501| has 192.168.10.1 ip |DIR-655| has 192.168.0.1 ip 1. |cable modem|----|pix 501|-------|DIR-655|-----PC 2. PC--------|pix 501|---------|DIR-655| | | |cable modem| When I'm on the wireless network (dir-655) with assigned ip of 192.168.0.x I can cross the subnet and connect to my firewall 192.168.10.1. (pic. 1) The problem is that if I'm on the 192.168.10.x network I can't connect to anything over at 192.168.0.x network. (pic.2) I've tried entering a static route like this: `route inside 192.168.0.0 255.255.255.0 192.168.10.1 1` I also tried assigning static ip to wan interface on DIR-655 to 192.168.10.30 and then tried this: route inside 192.168.0.0 255.255.255.0 192.168.10.30 1 But still, can't connect to 192.168.0.1 or anything on that subnet. Is there a way to setup a static route? Would adding a separate router between PIX 501 and DIR-655 help? I would think that static route like this should take care of it, but it doesn't. This is my route config and nat: (config)# sh route outside 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 (outside_IP) 1 DHCP static outside (outside_IP) 255.255.248.0 (outside_IP) 1 CONNECT static inside 192.168.0.0 255.255.255.0 192.168.10.1 1 OTHER static inside 192.168.10.0 255.255.255.0 192.168.10.1 1 CONNECT static or (route inside 192.168.0.0 255.255.255.0 192.168.10.30 1) (config)# sh nat nat (inside) 1 192.168.1.0 255.255.255.0 0 0 nat (inside) 1 192.168.10.0 255.255.255.0 0 0 nat (inside) 1 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 0 0 I ended up turning DIR-655 into an Access Point (turning off DHCP and pluging cable from PIX lan interface into one of the LAN interfaces on DIR-655, and leaving WAN port empty), that works as far as DIR-655 being on the same subnet now, and I can access every machine. However the question is, why can't I simply route between those two? would router between these two help? One of the reasons is, that the PIX 501 has only 10 licences, so now I'm using almost all of them. (I have few computers, iphones, ps3, print server, etc.) I would really appreciate some help! Thanks.

    Read the article

  • OpenWRT LAN clients don't see each

    - by Valentin Galea
    I'm a beginner at using OpenWRT but I'm loving it already. Everything is running fine (internet, wifi) on all clients except one thing: the computers running in my LAN don't see each other. Pings to them or between them gives "destination host unreachable". This happens when using either the machine's IP's or their assigned hostnames. Running Backfire 10.03.1 - default settings everywhere except of course for the specific ISP stuff in the WAN. What's going on?

    Read the article

  • Wireless router DSL connection problem help

    - by infoquad
    I recently bought a wireless DSL router to replace my wired one. After quick setup however, the router does not connect to the Internet. Wireless connection between laptop and router exists and Internet can be connected through laptop(manually) by using router as WAN miniport(PPPoE). What I want to do is connect the wireless router to Internet so that when laptop connects to router, I can start using the Internet. How do I do this? Please help.

    Read the article

  • How to configure an isa server to allow a OPENvpn client to connect to an outside server?

    - by rmarimon
    I'm trying to configure an ISA server (not really my area of expertise) to allow an openvpn client (in the lan) access to an outside openvpn server (in the wan). The openvpn configuration I'm using has worked everywhere. In fact if I take the client outside the lan where the isa server is located, it works perfectly. Inside the isa server lan nothing. The question is what configuration do I need to put on the isa server to allow openvpn traffic to go through?

    Read the article

  • Port forwarding not working properly

    - by sudo work
    I'm trying to host a small web server from my home network; however, I have not been able to successfully port forward ports to the local server. My current network topology looks like this: Cable Modem/Router - Secondary Wireless Router - Many computers (including server) The modem/router I'm using is a Cisco (Scientific Atlantic) DPC2100, provided by my ISP. The wireless router that I'm using as the central hub to my home network is a Linksys E3000. The computer being used as a server is running Ubuntu 10.04 Server Edition. The main issue is that I can't access the server remotely, using my WAN IP address. I have port forwarded my wireless router; however, I believe that I need to somehow set my modem to bridge mode. As far as I can tell though, this isn't possible. Here are the various IP address settings: DPC2100 WAN: 69.xxx.xxx.xxx Internal IP: 192.168.100.1 Internal Network: 192.168.7.0 E3000 IP Address: 192.168.7.2 Gateway: 192.168.7.1 Internal IP: 192.168.1.1 Internal Network: 192.168.1.0 Server IP Address: 192.168.1.123 Gateway: 192.168.1.1 Now I can do an nmap at various nodes, and here are the results (from the server): nmap localhost: 22,25,53,80,110,139,143,445,631,993,995,3306,5432,8080 open nmap 192.168.7.2: 22,25,80 (filtered),110,139,445 open (ports I have forwarded in the E3000)* nmap 69.xxx.xxx.xxx: 1720 open *For some reason, I can SSH into the server at 192.168.7.2, but not view the website. Here are also some other settings: /etc/hosts/ 127.0.0.1 localhost 127.0.1.1 servername ::1 localhost ip6-localhost ip6-loopback fe00::0 ip6-localnet ff00::0 ip6-mcastprefix ff02::1 ip6-allnodes ff02::2 ip6-allrouters /etc/apache2/sites-available/default snippet <VirtualHost *:80> DocumentRoot /srv/www/ <Directory /> Options FollowSymLinks AllowOverride None </Directory> <Directory /var/www/> ... </Directory> ScriptAlias /cgi-bin/ /usr/lib/cgi-bin/ <Directory "/usr/lib/cgi-bin"> ... </Directory> ErrorLog /var/log/apache2/error.log LogLevel warn CustomLog /var/log/apache2/access.log combined Alias /doc/ "/usr/share/doc/" <Directory "/usr/share/doc/"> ... </Directory> </VirtualHost> Let me know if you need any other information; some stuff probably slipped my mind.

    Read the article

  • Which VPN-Software for Road-Worriors

    - by Phoibe
    Hello, I am using Unix (Debian) as my server platform and want to configure the following: A remote user can connect to a secure VPN server and use its IP to access the Internet, mostly for browsing and e-mail. I read a lot about OpenS/WAN+L2PT and OpenVPN but I am still confused how I should configure it. I would prefer IPSec+PPTP/L2PT since the road warrior doesn't have to install any extra software on iPhone/Windows7. Is there a good how-to for IPSec or what would you suggest?

    Read the article

  • How to configure DD-WRT routing table when creating an isolated network segment for PCI C VT compliance

    - by tetranz
    I'm the volunteer support and system admin person at a small private school. We need to setup a PCI compliant Windows PC as a virtual terminal for credit card processing. I've read questionnaire SAQ C-VT and, to quote, this computer needs to be accessed: "via a computer that is isolated in a single location, and is not connected to other locations or systems within your environment (this can be achieved via a firewall or network segmentation to isolate the computer from other systems)" Our setup is as follows: DSL modem from ISP is setup to be a "transparent pipe" with no extra services. That goes into the WAN port of Linksys WRT54-GL running a DD-WRT. The LAN is 192.168.1.x. There are a couple of other WRT54-GL / DD-WRT devices. One is used as a wireless AP and another is a client bridge. To isolate the VT (virtual terminal) machine, I have another DD-WRT device. Its WAN is connected to a port on the 192.168.1.x LAN. The virtual terminal machine is connected to its LAN which is at 192.168.10.x. The SPI Firewall etc is turned on. It's basically the default DD-WRT gateway setup where the "ISP" is our own LAN. That's working. All incoming traffic to the VT machine is blocked, including from our own LAN. The VT can access the internet BUT, and here's the problem, it can also ping any of the computers on the 192.168.1.x LAN. I think I need to stop that. I'm guessing that I could do something with the Static Routing table in the VT machine's DD-WRT device. I need to route anything going to 192.168.1.x other than the gateway which is 192.168.1.1 to 0.0.0.0 or something like that. That's where I'm stuck at the end of my knowledge. Or ... do I need to get yet another DD-WRT so the network is "balanced". Maybe I need to have the internet from the DSL going into a DD-WRT which has only two devices on its LAN i.e., two other DD-WRTs, one for the main LAN and one for the VT. I think that would do but I'd like to avoid the extra cost and complexity if I don't need it. Thanks

    Read the article

  • Cisco NAT vs Bridge vs BVI

    - by cjavapro
    The only devices on this particular LAN will all have public IP addresses. Also the public IP address will be configured directly on the machine,,, so we will not translate private/public IP addresses. If we use NAT,, we would have to translate the public IP on the WAN to the public IP on the LAN. The only security feature I expect on the gateway is an access list. I don't really know much about networking, so I am sorry if this question is generic.

    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 | 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  | Next Page >