Search Results

Search found 14837 results on 594 pages for 'duplicate ip'.

Page 174/594 | < Previous Page | 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181  | Next Page >

• 553-Message filtered - HELO Name issue?

  - by g18c

  I am having major issues sending from my SBS2011 machine to Message labs server-13.tower-134.messagelabs.com #553-Message filtered. Refer to the Troubleshooting page at 553-http://www.symanteccloud.com/troubleshooting for more 553 information. (#5.7.1) ## I have changed the IP and hostnames from the below. I am not on any IP or domain blacklists. I have setup SPF (which includes mailchimp servers): v=spf1 mx a ip4:95.74.157.22/32 a:remote.mydomain.com include:servers.mcsv.net ~all I am sure i have setup my HELO names correctly under the Exchange Management console, sending a test email from the SBS server and looking at the header shows the following: X-Orig-To: [email protected] X-Originating-Ip: [95.74.157.22] Received: from [95.74.157.22] ([95.74.157.22:52194] helo=remote.mydomain.com) by smtp50.gate.ord1a.rsapps.net (envelope-from <[email protected]>) (ecelerity 2.2.3.49 r(42060/42061)) with ESMTP id 11/90-10010-E529C835; Mon, 02 Jun 2014 11:04:09 -0400 Received: from MYSBSSVR.mydomain.local ([fe80::3159:95a6:23f:1bef]) by MYSBSSVR.mydomain.local ([fe80::3159:95a6:23f:1bef%10]) with mapi id 14.01.0438.000; Mon, 2 Jun 2014 19:03:56 +0400 Is is the main helo name there OK and do i need to worry about the second Received block where the MYSBSVR.mydomain.local is mentioned? I have asked the ISP to set the reverse DNS for my IP to remote.mydomain.com but they have instead put remote.MYDOMAIN.com - would this case cause HELO lookups to classify this as not matching? Anything else I can do to find out why i am being filtered?

  Read the article

• Network Load Balancing, intermittent port problem on Windows Server 2008

  - by Jimmy Chandra

  Trying to troubleshoot an intermittent problem on a Windows Server 2008 NLB. I think it might be related to an NLB issue. We are using Windows Network Load Balancing to balance load for our multiserver SharePoint front ends. Say... Web Front End 1 IP is 192.168.1.100 and Web Front End 2 IP is 192.168.1.101, the NLB is setup to load balance both WFE servers on any incoming traffic to the IP 192.168.1.200. Sometimes we got an intermittent issue where when we try to access the SharePoint site using 192.168.1.200:8080 (say the site is set up to run on port 8080) from a remote client, it will display page not found. Pinging the 192.168.1.200 will give responses, but when trying to telnet to 192.168.1.200:8080 it just won't connect. However, browsing the SharePoint site directly on individual WFE (192.168.1.100 and 192.168.1.101) show no problem whatsoever. My guess also (we didn't get a chance to try it yet, but I think it should work), if I try connecting remotely to individual server, it will respond just fine. But any attempt on trying to connect using the virtual IP (192.168.1.200) will fail miserably. Funny thing is, after a while it will return back to normal. Anyone had similar experience with this type of problem while implementing NLB before? We are doing this in a virtual environment.

  Read the article

• Is iptable capable of this or should I go with mod_proxy?

  - by Jesper

  I'm trying to configure my network to receive an incoming connection on one device and then redirect it to another device on a specific port. Right now I'm on about port 80 and a device running apache. The problem I'm facing is that when the forwarding is done it also sets the source ip to the first device instead of the source ip the user that connects to the service has. Let me illustrate it: [Internet User] = 7.7.7.7 connects to [Device 1] = 1.1.1.1:80 [Device 1] forwards it to [Device 2] = 1.1.1.2:80 [Device 2] outputs response that [Internet User] sees So on [Device 2] I will naturally see [Device 1]s IP in the logs, but I wanna see if there is a way to connect the internet user through [Device 1] to [Device 2] while seeing the real source IP in the logs on [Device 2]. Is that possible? My rule-set looks like this at the moment: (on Device 1) iptables -P FORWARD ACCEPT iptables -t nat -I PREROUTING -j DNAT -p tcp --dport 80 --to-destination 1.1.1.2:80 iptables -t nat -I POSTROUTING -j SNAT -p tcp -d 1.1.1.2 --to-source 1.1.1.1 On [Device 2] it accepts all incoming on port 80 from [Device 1] as well as accepts all related and established connections. So, would there be any way to get the real source onto [Device 2]? Let me know if you need more information!

  Read the article

• How to prioritize openvpn traffic?

  - by aditsu

  I have an openvpn server, with one network interface. VPN traffic is extremely slow. I tried to do traffic control with this configuration (currently): qdisc del dev eth0 root qdisc add dev eth0 root handle 1: htb default 12 class add dev eth0 parent 1: classid 1:1 htb rate 900mbit #vpn class add dev eth0 parent 1:1 classid 1:10 htb rate 1500kbit ceil 3000kbit prio 1 #local net class add dev eth0 parent 1:1 classid 1:11 htb rate 10mbit ceil 900mbit prio 2 #other class add dev eth0 parent 1:1 classid 1:12 htb rate 500kbit ceil 1000kbit prio 2 filter add dev eth0 protocol ip parent 1:0 prio 1 u32 match ip sport 1194 0xffff flowid 1:10 filter add dev eth0 protocol ip parent 1:0 prio 2 u32 match ip dst 192.168.10.0/24 flowid 1:11 qdisc add dev eth0 parent 1:10 handle 10: sfq perturb 10 qdisc add dev eth0 parent 1:11 handle 11: sfq perturb 10 qdisc add dev eth0 parent 1:12 handle 12: sfq perturb 10 But it's still extremely slow. I have an imaps connection that keeps transferring data continuously (I successfully limited the rate) but with openvpn I can't seem to get more than about 100kbit/s The internet connection speed is about 3mbit/s (symmetric) What could be the problem? Does the sport filter work for udp?

  Read the article

• Options for small windows network setup without dedicated server?

  - by Mitch

  I'm very weak on networking and hope someone can point me in the right direction: I have written some windows client/server software which incorporates a database which is located on a windows server. I have a test installation running at a customer's office where the server has a static IP address. In this case its easy for the clients to access the database because of the fixed IP address. Also, customers with network servers generally have specialist support staff to set up my software, so its not such a problem for me. However I also need to offer the software to customers who have small offices with less than 10 PCs and no dedicated network server. In this case I want the customer to be able to nominate one PC as the database "server" and install my software and have the clients access it. But in this situation I believe the "server" PC may not have a dedicated IP address. Q1: What is the best way to set this up simply and make it work? Can I reliably reference the "server" by using its name, or is there a way to assign dummy fixed IP addresses? Ideally this needs to be workable on small networks running a mixture of XP/Vista/Windows7 as my target market may well have mixed OSes etc. I guess this would be akin to home networking? Many thanks Mitch

  Read the article

• Windows 2008 R2 Servers Sending Arp Requests for IPs outside Subnet

  - by Kyle Brandt

  By running a packet capture on my my routers I see some of my servers sending ARP requests for IPs that exist outside of its network. For example if my network is: Network: 8.8.8.0/24 Gateway: 8.8.8.1 (MAC: 00:21:9b:aa:aa:aa) Example Server: 8.8.8.20 (MAC: 00:21:9b:bb:bb:bb) By running a capture on the interface that has 8.8.8.1 I see requests like: Sender Mac: 00:21:9b:bb:bb:bb Sender IP: 8.8.8.20 Target MAC: 00:21:9b:aa:aa:aa Target IP: 69.63.181.58 Anyone seen this behavior before? My understanding of ARP is that requests should only go out for IPs within the subnet... Am I confused in my understanding of ARP? If I am not confused, anyone seen this behavior? Also, these seem to happen in bursts and it doesn't happen when I do something like ping an IP outside of the network. Update: In response to Ian's questions. I am not running anything like Hyper-V. I have multiple interfaces but only one is active (Using BACS failover teaming). The subnet mask is 255.255.255.0 (Even if it were something different it wouldn't explain an IP like 69.63.181.58). When I run MS Network Monitor or wireshark I do not see these ARP requests. What happens is that on the router capturing I see a burst of about 10 requests for IPs outside of the network from the host machine. On the machine itself using wireshark or NetMon I see a flood of ARP responses for all the machines on the network. However, I don't see any requests in the capture asking for those responses. So it seems like maybe it is maybe refreshing the arp cache but including IPs that outside of the network. Also when it does this NetMon doesn't show the ARP requests?

  Read the article

• Issues with VPN functionality

  - by Xorandor

  I've been working on setting up VPN connectivity to our office location. We bought a Cisco WRV210 which have a builtin VPN server. Cisco has some software QuickVPN, which is not as quick and easy as I had thought. I've had mixed experiences on different machines with connecting. Instead I configured an IPSec VPN tunnel following a guide from TheGreenBow here http://www.thegreenbow.com/doc/tgbvpn_cg_linksys_wrv200_en.pdf I followed their instructions and tried out an evaluation of their software, and VPN connection should be working ok. I'm able to do RDP to a machine on the network (using IP address, not machine name) and ping the router etc. What I'm trying to solve are two things: It's not like I'm "really" on the network. Or at least I'm restricted to some degree when going through the VPN. I can't access a machine on the network using machine name, only IP. I can't ping a machine, but the router just fine. Could this be that something is not set up properly? If so, I can ofcourse supply additional information. Second, when I log onto the VPN, I would really like my outgoing connection to go through the internet connection of the remote location. Basically if I connect to the VPN I want my outgoing IP to be that of the remote location's (needed for some IP resctrictions on some of our servers). At a previous work location it worked like this when we connected to our office VPN over PPTP and the builtin windows VPN client. I'm not a huge expert on the topic, so any hints will be appreciated.

  Read the article

• TCP Handshake and port numbers

  - by Guido

  (I have a question about the TCP handshake and how port numbers are assigned, if this does not belong here, let me know.) Hi, I'm studying TCP/IP from the book "Internetworking with TCP/IP" by Douglas Comer. In the TCP chapter it mentions that TCP defines an "endpoint" as a pair (IP address, port number), and a connection is defined by two endpoints. This has a few implications, such as, a local TCP port could be in several connections at once, as long as there are no two from the same IP and the same remote port. This also means that the amount of established connections is almost limitless (2^16 for every IPv4 address. 2^48 in total). Now, in class, I was told that when one connects to a listening port, both sides agree on a different port to use, so the communication can happen and the listener socket remains free. This was also my belief before reading the book. Now I feel like I should obviously trust the book (It's Comer!), but is there any truth to the other explanation? Thanks

  Read the article

• Port Forwarding failing only to Ubuntu servers from Draytek router

  - by Rufinus

  I know this is a kinda unusal question, but Draytek support (..which is very eager to solve the issue) seems to reach its limits. Scenario: Draytek Vigor Multiwan router with current firmware. Multiple WAN IP Aliases on one of the wan ports DMZ (or port forwarding doesnt matter) from wan ip alias to internal host currently i have two internal hosts: 192.168.0.51 (Ubuntu) 192.168.0.53 (Debian) both should be accessible from outside via one of the wan ip aliases. both are accessible with their internal ip's at all times (!) If the router gots restartet, both external ips are forwarding to its internal hosts. But after a few minutes up to 2 hours, the ubuntu host is no longer reachable via its external interface. The debian hosts on the other hand is reachable. In what does ubuntu differs from debian ? I know at least of one user with the exact same problem. see http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?p=10994279 Any ideas ? TIA EDIT: via ping diagnostics directly on vigor, 192.168.0.53 is pingable, 192.168.0.51 is not. but both hosts are perfectly reachable from anywhere inside the network. if i restart ubuntu networking it works again for a short time.... i'm out of ideas.. EDIT 2: after further investigation, i noticed a ping from .51 to the network (or a host in the internet) is enough to make the port-forwarding working again. So i will add an Cronjob as a "keep-alive" ping. This will solve the problem, but the reason for this behaivor is still in the dark. Thanks to all commentors.

  Read the article

• Debian/Ubuntu - No network connection

  - by leviathanus

  I have a very weird situation on my Ubuntu 12.04 LTS Server. I can not access (ping) my gateway, although I believe my config is ok - I attach the outputs. Any hints where to look? (I changed the beginning of the IP to something different, just obfuscation) ping 5.9.10.129 PING 5.9.10.129 (5.9.10.129) 56(84) bytes of data. From 5.9.10.129 (5.9.10.129) icmp_seq=2 Destination Host Unreachable From 5.9.10.129 (5.9.10.129) icmp_seq=3 Destination Host Unreachable From 5.9.10.129 (5.9.10.129) icmp_seq=4 Destination Host Unreachable uname -r 3.2.0-29-generic ifconfig eth0 eth0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 3c:97:0e:0e:54:d7 inet addr:5.9.10.142 Bcast:5.9.10.159 Mask:255.255.255.224 inet6 addr: fe80::8e70:5aff:feda:c4ac/64 Scope:Link UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 RX packets:1216 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:490 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:1000 RX bytes:107470 (107.4 KB) TX bytes:34344 (34.3 KB) Interrupt:17 Memory:d2500000-d2520000 ip route default via 5.9.10.129 dev eth0 metric 100 5.9.10.128/27 via 5.9.10.129 dev eth0 5.9.10.128/27 dev eth0 proto kernel scope link src 5.9.10.142 route -n Kernel IP routing table Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref Use Iface 0.0.0.0 5.9.10.129 0.0.0.0 UG 1000 0 0 eth0 5.9.10.128 5.9.10.129 255.255.255.224 UG 0 0 0 eth0 5.9.10.128 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.224 U 0 0 0 eth0 iptables -L Chain INPUT (policy ACCEPT) target prot opt source destination Chain FORWARD (policy ACCEPT) target prot opt source destination Chain OUTPUT (policy ACCEPT) target prot opt source destination UPD: Eric, this is how routing information looks on a working server: 0.0.0.0 78.47.198.49 0.0.0.0 UG 100 0 0 eth0 78.47.198.48 78.47.198.49 255.255.255.240 UG 0 0 0 eth0 78.47.198.48 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.240 U 0 0 0 eth0 As I understand it, Hetzner tries to ensure security by this, so I can not take over an IP by changing my MAC. But this is another server, which has another netmask (255.255.255.240) UPD2: BatchyX, on the working server: 78.47.198.49 dev eth0 src 78.47.198.60 cache on the broken: 5.9.10.129 dev eth0 src 5.9.10.142 cache

  Read the article

• Can I use a Windows Server 2003 Domain Controller but my home router for DNS?

  - by NetworkingWannabie

  Hi All Probably easiest to start with a description of my current setup, which works (oh, and this is a home setup not an office or anything): I have an ADSL modem with a static IP address (192.168.128.1), and its DHCP capability is disabled. I have a permanently powered up Windows Server 2003 machine with a fixed IP (192.168.128.2) which provides my domain controller, dhcp, and dns. The default gateway for everything is my ADSL modem everything is setup to use the WS2003 machine as the primary DNS with the ADSL modem as Secondary DNS just in case the server goes down (everything includes the server itself). Lastly, just in case it's relevant, I have my DHCP leases set to infinite (or whatever the right term is). Everything is pretty hunky dory. Except, that is, for the fact that my server is ALWAYS on, and it isn't always used, so I'm burning juice that I don't need to - my server burns around 120W which isn't immense but isn't irrelevant either, so I'd like to put it into a stand-by state when it isn't being used (the more standby the better) and then get the clients to wake it up. Am I correct in assuming that this won't work at the moment - A given client would need an IP address to wake the machine up, and it needs to machine to be awake to get an IP - catch 22? Assuming I'm correct, can I move to using my router (which is always on) for DHCP? What impact will this have on DC and DNS? Alternatively, does anyone have a better way for me to achieve this? Can I get the server to wake up when it sees clients look for a DHCP server, etc? Wow, that came out longer than expected! Thanks for your help.

  Read the article

• Enabling NAT forwarding using a second WAN interface and a second gateway on ubuntu

  - by nixnotwin

  I have 3 interfaces: eth0 192.168.0.50/24 eth1 10.0.0.200/24 eth2 225.228.123.211 The default gateway is 192.168.0.1 which I want to keep as it is in the changes I want to make. I want to masquerade eth1 10.0.0.200/24 and enable NAT forwarding to eth2. So I have done this: ip route add 225.228.123.208/29 dev eth2 src 225.228.123.211 table t1 ip route add default via 225.228.123.209 dev eth2 table t1 ip rule add from 225.228.123.211 table t1 ip rule add to 225.228.123.211 table t1 Now I can receive ping replies from any internet host if I did: ping -I eth2 8.8.8.8 To enable NAT forwarding I did this: sudo iptables -A FORWARD -o eth2 -i eth1 -s 10.0.0.0/24 -m conntrack --ctstate NEW -j ACCEPT sudo iptables -A FORWARD -m conntrack --ctstate ESTABLISHED,RELATED -j ACCEPT sudo iptables -t nat -A POSTROUTING -o eth1 -j MASQUERADE But it isn't working. To test I used a client pc and put it on 10.0.0.0/24 network and gateway was set as 10.0.0.200. I want to have 192.168.0.1 as default gateway. And the traffic that comes in via eth1 10.0.0.200/24 should be forwarded to eth2 225.228.123.211. I have enabled forwarding on ubuntua also.

  Read the article

• Win7 VM @ ESXi Server @ VMWorkstation (Win7) - ping works only from VM -> HostOS, not vice versa

  - by DK2000

  right now I'm toying around with VM Ware stuff and not having any pcs then my laptop I decided to run an ESXi Server inside of VWmware Workstation. I was just curios to see if the server would allow to setup and run a VM. And after some tweaking there it was, working like a charm. Okay not that fast but startin' the VM from vSphere and "opening a console" gave my direct access to that VM. Now I wanted to see if I could ping the host from the VM (VM Workstation Network is set to "host only"). And it worked, at least from the VM I could ping the ESXi server and the host. From the host I am able to ping the ESXi Server but I can't ping the VM! I asked myself anyway where the VM got its ip adress from. At the DCHPs IP there is at no machine after all. I even tried to use that DHCP adress for my Host and it didn't work out. You can see my settings from the screenshot here (it's pretty wide so just a link): http://yfrog.com/n4desktopfeop The only thing that got me thinking was when I once changed the ESXi's IP from 192.168.92.137 to 192.168.0.137. I still was able to connect to the ESXi server via its new IP but when I tried to run the VM console from vSphere I got an error after a while that said "couldnt connect to 192.168.92.137:903". So vSphere connects just through a port of the ESXi server to the VM?!? Could I setup a Linux VM to use it as a DHCP that I'd at least have control over the IPs that are given. Which lowest end linux could be used for this purpose?!? Thank you for your time! :)

  Read the article

• How can I configure multiple default gateways on a CISCO Router?

  - by Spirit

  Does any one knows a way to configure a cisco router with multiple gateways - multiple gateways of last resort? I've tried adding a gateway of last resort twice (with different metric) but only one is shown: Router(config)# ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 2.2.2.2 10 Router(config)# ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 3.3.3.3 100 And the show ip route output was: Router# show ip route Gateway of last resort is 2.2.2.2 to network 0.0.0.0 2.0.0.0/24 is subnetted, 1 subnets C 2.2.2.0 is directly connected, FastEthernet0/0 3.0.0.0/24 is subnetted, 1 subnets C 3.3.3.0 is directly connected, FastEthernet0/1 32.0.0.0/30 is subnetted, 1 subnets C 32.2.2.0 is directly connected, Serial0/2/0 S* 0.0.0.0/0 [10/0] via 2.2.2.2 The point is that i cannot see the other route with higher distance metric? Anyone has a sugestion? I mean will this config work if the link on 2.2.2.2 fails? Will the router choose the other network 3.3.3.3, if the link 2.2.2.2 fails?

  Read the article

• apache httpd.conf - virtualhost configuration

  - by Adam

  I'm new to apache and httpd.conf The problem I'm having is I need different website to go to different vhost configs and if only the IP is requested it needs to go to the root index.html This works fine for the virtualhosts: <VirtualHost *:80> DocumentRoot /var/www/html/bali-accommodation.co ServerName www.bali-accommodation.co </VirtualHost> <VirtualHost *:80> DocumentRoot /var/www/html/balibeach.co ServerName www.balibeach.co </VirtualHost> <VirtualHost *:80> DocumentRoot /var/www/html/dating-website.co ServerName www.dating-website.co </VirtualHost> However when I just specify the IP it does to www.XXX.XXX.XXX.XXX (appends the www). I know in the websites there is a .htaccess redirect that adds the www but I didn't want the IP to go into the vhosts config. I tried adding this to the top of the Vhost config: <VirtualHost *:80> DocumentRoot /var/www/html ServerName localhost </VirtualHost> with above it shows the index.html perfectly but all the websites go into this catch all. I've also tried this for the websites vhosts: DocumentRoot /var/www/html/bali-accommodation.co ServerName www.bali-accommodation.co I've tried the above with and without the 'www' in the first line unsuccessfully. Is there a way to have the vhosts work for the domains and if someone just enters the IP it goes to the root index.html? /var/www/html/index.html? thankyou so much Adam

  Read the article

• Tomcat Solr times out

  - by user568458

  (Plesk 10.4 centos 5.8 linux apache2 server, with Tomcat5 on port 8080 and Apache Solr) I get "The connection has timed out" on requesting domain.com:8080 or www.domain.com:8080 or ip.ad.dr.ess:8080 Every reason I can find why this might be seems not to be the case: Plesk thinks Tomcat is running fine and lists it as an active service. The firewall currently has an accept all rule on port 8080. There's nothing relevant in the catalina tomcat logs (/var/log/tomcat5) - just some stuff from last time tomcat was started. There's no record at all of the requests that fail. netstat -lnp | grep 8080 gives the following, which I beleive means Tomcat is listening to requests to port 8080 on all ip addresses from any ip and any port (please correct me if I'm wrong): : tcp 0 0 0.0.0.0:8080 0.0.0.0:* LISTEN 4018/java This covers every cause of this time out that I can find - so I must be missing something fundamental. It seems Tomcat is running, listening to the right port, is getting an appropriate IP address, is not obstructed by a firewall and is not failing after receiving a request in a way which would be recorded in the logs (so I believe it can't be out of memory, or anything like that). I'm all out of ideas on how to continue debugging this. I must have overlooked something obvious. Can anyone help?

  Read the article

• How to configure CISCO switch 2960 for port-based address allocation on a single port only?

  - by Jack

  CISCO 2960 allows you to configure so-called Port-Based address allocation. It makes the switch to associate IP address it is giving out via DHCP with port-identifier, which is random, switch created identifier. In practice it means that any machine connected to such configured port will always get the same IP address, regardless of what that machine's MAC address is. I want to have that feature configured on --some ports-- only. But no matter what commands I try it seems that this can only be done for all ports, all for none. Even though CISCO manual seems to indicate there's both global and per-port command to enable that. Here are relevant commands from CISCO manual: configure terminal ip dhcp use subscriber-id client-id (this configures the DHCP server to globally use the subscriber ID as the client ID on all incoming DHCP messages) interface FastEthernet0/1 ip dhcp server use subscriber-id client-id (Optional: Configures the DHCP server to use the subscriber ID as the client ID on all incoming DHCP messages on the interface) but it appears if I configure only per-interface than there's no effect at all, if I configure globally and per interface - CISCo behaves as if all ports were configured to use that feature. Any ideas?

  Read the article

• Network Load Balancing and AnyCast Routing

  - by user126917

  Hi All can anyone advise on problems with the following? I am planning on installing the following setup on my estate: I have 2 sites that both have a large amount of users. Goals are to keep things simple for the users and to have automatic failover above the database level. Our Database will exist at the primary site and be async mirrored to the secondary site with manual failover procedures.The database generate sequential ID's so distributing it is not an option. I plan to site IIS boxes at both sites with all of the business logic on them and heavy operations. The connections to SQL will be lightweight and DB reads will be cached on IIS. On this layer I plan to use Windows network load balancing and have the same IP or IPs across all IIS boxes at both sites. This way there will be automatic failover and no single point of failure. Also users can have one web address regardless of which site they are in automatically be network load balanced to their local IIS. This is great but obviously our two sites are on different subnets and as this will be one IP address with most of our traffic we can't go broadcasting everything across the link between the sites. To solve this problem we plan to use AnyCast routing over our network layer to route the traffic to the most local box that is listening which will be defined by the network load balancing. Has anyone used this setup before? Can anyone think of any issues with this? Also some specifics I can't find anywhere at the moment. If my Windows box is assigned an IP and listening on that IP but network load balancing is not accepting specific traffic then will AnyCast route away from that? Also can I AnyCast on a socket level?

  Read the article

• Problems installing GIT on Ubuntu through SSH

  - by jamadri

  I'm having trouble installing git using this command: sudo apt-get install git-core It's giving me the problems below and I'm not quite sure how to get this to work correctly. I try running sudo apt-get update and after it just gives me problems. If anyone knows how to solve this or a possible way of getting GIT on your machine differently it would be of much help. I've never had a problem with using apt-get. Do you want to continue [Y/n]? y WARNING: The following packages cannot be authenticated! liberror-perl git-core patch Install these packages without verification [y/N]? y Err http://us.archive.ubuntu.com jaunty/main git-core 1:1.6.0.4-1ubuntu2 404 Not Found [IP: 91.189.92.183 80] Err http://us.archive.ubuntu.com jaunty/main patch 2.5.9-5 404 Not Found [IP: 91.189.92.183 80] Failed to fetch http://us.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/pool/main/g/git-core/git-core_1.6.0.4- 1ubuntu2_amd64.deb 404 Not Found [IP: 91.189.92.183 80] Failed to fetch http://us.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/pool/main/p/patch/patch_2.5.9- 5_amd64.deb 404 Not Found [IP: 91.189.92.183 80] E: Unable to fetch some archives, maybe run apt-get update or try with --fix-missing? Anything reply that can help fix this would be helpful. I'm not sure if it's the git servers or my connection that might be the problem. I've used apt-get to pull other things, it's just failing with git.

  Read the article

• Hyper-V: Dedicated NIC for Guests VMs

  - by TheLizardKing

  I have two NIC cards and created a private virtual network for my virtual machines and unchecked "Allow management operating system to share this network adapter" which basically turns my Guest NIC into this sorta shell of a NIC card on the host machine and the only thing checked in it's properties is "Microsoft Virtual Network Switch Protocol" which I am fine with. Everything works and everything is connected. My issue is that for some reason my guest (Ubuntu Server with legacy network drivers) is not talking properly to my DHCP server. Specifically my DHCP server reserves the guest's IP address using it's MAC address but the guest isn't picking it up. It's picking up any old IP it can get and I can't even ping the hostname from another PC on the network but it pings fine if I use the IP. I see the guest showing up in my DHCP table but I can't get the reservation to stick. Is there some reason it's only partially communicating with my DHCP server? Pinging it's hostname on itself reveals it's using 127.0.0.1 instead of it's network IP. Is this an issue with the legacy drivers used in Hyper-V?

  Read the article

• cannot reach munin port on other AWS instance

  - by Amedee Van Gasse

  2 AWS instances, in the same region but different availability zones, one is in regular EC2 and the other is in VPC, both have an Elastic IP, both are 64bit Amazon Linux AMI 2014.03.1. Both are running munin-node. The instance in the VPC is running munin-cron. I have added incoming TCP and UDP port 4949 to the security groups of both instances. On the munin node, I added an allow-line with the IP address (regular expression) of the munin server to /etc/munin/munin-node.conf. I bind munin-node to any interface using host *. Then I did sudo service munin-node restart. Then I ran netstat. $ sudo netstat -at | grep munin tcp 0 0 *:munin *:* LISTEN So the port is open there. On the munin server AND on the munin node: $ nmap AMAZON-IP -p 80,4949 | grep tcp 80/tcp open http 4949/tcp closed munin On the munin node: $ nmap localhost -p 80,4949 | grep tcp 80/tcp open http 4949/tcp open munin So from the outside, the http port is open (Apache is running) but the munin port is closed. The node can't even reach the munin port on it's own public IP address, but it can on localhost. I added port 80 as a sanity check, to be sure that there is network connectivity at all. So what am I overlooking here?

  Read the article

• Load balancing with puppet

  - by Gonçalo Queirós

  Hi there. Im trying to setup a loadbalancing system. My load balancer (nginx) has a conf file where i should list all IP's of the upstream servers. I could put the IP's on the conf manually, but this ways i would need to change the conf file every time i add/remove an upstream server. For now i came up with two different ideas, but i don't like much of neither: 1 - Have every upstream machine to use Exported Resources to create a file with it's IP..Then the load balancer server will have an "include conf_directory/*", and load all the files created by the upstrem servers. Since the load balancer is using nginx this can be done, but if i wan't latter on to configure something that doesn't have the "include" on the conf files, this solution will not work. 2 - If the config doesn't support the "include" command, then we could have again, every upstream server use the Exported Resources to create a filw with its IP, and latter on, the load balancer execute a command that would pick every file and generate the config Both versions addopt the same techinque, the difference is that version 2 is used when the server (that needs to have a conf generated) doesn't recognize a command like "include" inside its own conf. Now, my question is, is there any way to do this in a different form? I suspect that there is, since puppet is made to manage multiple servers, it seems a bit strange not have a easy way to configure load balancers.

  Read the article

• hosts.deny ignored by MacOSX 10.8

  - by David Holm

  I have been trying to set up my MacOS X Server, which I recently upgraded to Mountain Lion, to use denyhosts as I need to open port 22 to it. denyhosts is set up and adds entries to /etc/hosts.deny so I decided to add my laptops IP to it in order to verify that it actually works but I can still log in and my IP shows up in /private/var/log/system.log. I even rebooted the server once just to be sure there wasn't some service that had to be restarted. I tried the following entries: ALL: <my laptop's IP> sshd: <my laptop's IP> sshd: 127.0.0.1 My /etc/sshd_config has the following parameters set: UsePAM yes UseDNS no I Googled if deny.hosts has been deprecated in OSX 10.7 or 10.8 but I couldn't find any indications that it has. Any ideas of what is going wrong or if there is an alternative way to achieve the same result? Yes, a private key would solve this problem but for the time being I would like to stick to using password authentication. I also like the idea of denyhosts actually blocking access to all services running on the server and not just ssh.

  Read the article

• Port Forwarding to put my web server on The Internet

  - by Chadworthington

  I went to http://canyouseeme.org/ to check to see what my external IP address. Regardless of what port I enter, it tells me that the port is blocked. I have a LinkSys router that basically has the default settings with the exception that I have WEP encrptin setup and I have forwarded a few ports, including 80 and 69. I forwarded them to the 192.x.x.103 IP address of the PC which is running IIS. That PC runs Symantec Endpoint Protection, which I right mouse clicked in the tray to Disable. These steps used to make my PC visible so I could host my own web site in IIS on port 80, or some other port, like 69. Yet, the Open Port tool cannot see my IP when it checks eiether port and when I navigate to http://my external ip/ I get "page cant be displayed" At first I was thinking that maybe Comcast is blocking port 80, but 69 doesnt work eiether. I do not see any other blockking set up in my router and, as I mentioned, I went with teh defaults except where discussed. This is a corporate PC and Symantec End Point Protecion is new to it (this previously worked on teh same PC with Symantec Protection Agent), but I thought that disabling Sym End Pt from the tray, that that would effectively neutralize it. I do not have the rights to kill the program itself. Any suggestions on what else to try to make my PC externally visible?

  Read the article

• UDP blocked by Windows XP Firewall when sending to local machine

  - by user36367

  I work for a software development company but the issue doesn't seem to be programming-related. Here is my setup: Windows XP Professional with Service Pack 3, all updated Program that sends UDP datagrams Program that receives UDP datagrams Windows Firewall set to allow inbound UDP datagrams on a specific port (Scope: Subnet) If I send a UDP datagram on any port to other, similar machines, it goes through. If I send the UDP datagram to the same computer running the program that sends (whether using broadcast, localhost IP or the specific IP of the machine), the receiver program gets nothing. I've traced the problem down to the Windows XP Firewall, as Windows 7 does not have this problem (and I do not wish to sully my hands with Vista). If the exception I create for that UDP port in the WinXP firewall is set for a Scope of Subnet the datagram is blocked, but if I set it to All Computers or specifically enter my network settings (192.168.2.161 or 192.168.2.0/255.255.255.0) it works fine. Using different UDP ports makes no difference. I've tried different programs to reproduce this problem (ServerTalk to send and either IP Port Spy or PortPeeker to receive) to make sure it's not our code that's the issue, and those programs' datagrams were blocked as well. Also, that computer only has one network interface, so there are no additional network weirdness. I receive my IP from a DHCP server, so this is a straightforward setup. Given that it doesn't happen in Windows 7 I must assume it's a defect in the Windows XP Firewall, but I'd think someone else would have encountered this problem before. Has anyone encountered anything like this? Any ideas?

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181  | Next Page >