Search Results

Search found 6523 results on 261 pages for 'route planning'.

Page 184/261 | < Previous Page | 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191  | Next Page >

• VPN Client solution

  - by realtek

  I have several VPN's that I need to establish on a daily basis but from multiple workstations. What I would like to do it have either a server or vpn router that can perform this connection itself and that I can then route traffic through this device or server depending on the subnet I am trying to reach. The issue is that I only use VPN Clients to connect, so I am basically trying to achieve almost a site to site VPN but by using basically a VPN Client type connection from my network. The main VPN Client I use is the Sonicwall Global VPN Client where I initially use a Preshared Key and then it always prompts me for a username and password (not RSA key). My question is, is there any type of linux distro or even a hardware vpn router that can do this and connect to a Sonicwall device as if it were a client? I have tried pfSense which is very good but it fails to connect, probably due to a mismatch of settings. I have tried many others. Even dd-wrt on my router but it does not support whatever protocol Sonicwall uses. (I thought L2TP/IPSec) but it appears it may not be that. Any advice would be great! The other other thing I have thought of that I have not tried yet is Windows Server Routing and Remote Access but I have a feeling that won't work either. Thanks

  Read the article

• EC2 instance is blocking all outbound connections, how to diagnose/fix?

  - by Fraggle

  My EC2 instance is blocking all outbound connections. wget http://www.google.com ==> Hangs ping google.com ==>hangs ssh user@anyserver ==>hangs I ran : sudo iptables -F to eliminate all rules to no avail AWS Management console shows Security Group for that instance has Inbound rule allowing ssh and port 80. Can't find anything about Outbound rules there. Rebooted instance, no change. If anyone knows how to diagnose or fix, please help. Adding info: [ec2-user@ip-10-112-62-73 ~]$ ifconfig eth0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 12:31:3D:06:31:BB inet addr:10.112.62.73 Bcast:10.112.63.255 Mask:255.255.254.0 inet6 addr: fe80::1031:3dff:fe06:31bb/64 Scope:Link UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 RX packets:1933 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:1764 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:1000 RX bytes:164075 (160.2 KiB) TX bytes:343256 (335.2 KiB) Interrupt:9 lo Link encap:Local Loopback inet addr:127.0.0.1 Mask:255.0.0.0 inet6 addr: ::1/128 Scope:Host UP LOOPBACK RUNNING MTU:16436 Metric:1 RX packets:8 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:8 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:0 RX bytes:672 (672.0 b) TX bytes:672 (672.0 b) [ec2-user@ip-10-112-62-73 ~]$ ip route show 10.112.62.0/23 dev eth0 proto kernel scope link src 10.112.62.73 default via 10.112.62.1 dev eth0

  Read the article

• Intranet Setup for Small business any resources?

  - by Rogue

  Want to setup an intranet for a small business setup. Current Setup 28 computers running Windows ( few older pc's run Windows Xp but most run Windows 7) Spare Dell Pentium 3 which can run as a server. 6 switches spare NIC's and lots of lan cable available for networking. 3 Independent Internet connections Currently we have 3 independent networks which share internet connections, each network uses a different internet connection. Current network is setup solely to share the internet connection. What I need to achieve in this intranet Setup one common network. Instant file transfer via local network (maybe setup a file server?) Local text and voice messenger software Bridge the 3 internet connections and route all the internet connections from the main server Ability to allow or deny internet access to any computer on the network. Remote access from the main server to the client pc's on the network to debug software issues What operating system should I use on the main server? Do I need a hardware firewall? Any setup guides / resources or how-to's on how I can achieve the above requirements.

  Read the article

• Private IP getting routed over Internet

  - by WernerCD

  We are setting up an internal program, on an internal server that uses the private 172.30.x.x subnet... when we ping the address 172.30.138.2, it routes across the internet: C:\>tracert 172.30.138.2 Tracing route to 172.30.138.2 over a maximum of 30 hops 1 6 ms 1 ms 1 ms xxxx.xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.org [192.168.28.1] 2 * * * Request timed out. 3 12 ms 13 ms 9 ms xxxxxxxxxxx.xxxxxx.xx.xxx.xxxxxxx.net [68.85.xx.xx] 4 15 ms 11 ms 55 ms te-7-3-ar01.salisbury.md.bad.comcast.net [68.87.xx.xx] 5 13 ms 14 ms 18 ms xe-11-0-3-0-ar04.capitolhghts.md.bad.comcast.net [68.85.xx.xx] 6 19 ms 18 ms 14 ms te-1-0-0-4-cr01.denver.co.ibone.comcast.net [68.86.xx.xx] 7 28 ms 30 ms 30 ms pos-4-12-0-0-cr01.atlanta.ga.ibone.comcast.net [68.86.xx.xx] 8 30 ms 43 ms 30 ms 68.86.xx.xx 9 30 ms 29 ms 31 ms 172.30.138.2 Trace complete. This has a number of us confused. If we had a VPN setup, it wouldn't show up as being routed across the internet. If it hit an internet server, Private IP's (such as 192.168) shouldn't get routed. What would let a private IP address get routed across servers? would the fact that it's all comcast mean that they have their routers setup wrong?

  Read the article

• AWS VPC ELB vs. Custom Load Balancing

  - by CP510

  So I'm wondering if this is a good idea. I have a Amazon AWS VPC setup with a public and private subnets. So I all ready get the Internet Gateway and NAT. I was going to setup all my web servers (Apache2 isntances) and DB servers in the private subnet and use a Load Balancer/Reverse Proxy to pick up requests and send them into the private subnets cluster of servers. My question then, is Amazons ELB's a good use for these, or is it better to setup my own custom instance to handle the public requests and run them through the NAT using nginx or pound? I like the second option just for the sake of having a instance I can log into and check. As well as taking advantage of caching and fail2ban ddos prevention, as well as possibly using fail safes to redirect traffic. But I have no experience with their ELB's, so I thought I'd ask your opinions. Also, if you guys have an opinion on this as well, would using the second option allow me to only have 1 public IP address and be able to route SSH connections through port numbers to respective instances? Thanks in advance!

  Read the article

• MX setup for a domain registrar and web host with the same domain name

  - by Honus Wagner

  I have a client that has registered their domain through a registrar, then signed up for hosting on through a different provider, but used the same domain for said provider (didn't re-register the domain, I think the declaration of domain on the host was for CNAME records specifically). The registrar properly routes his emails at his domain name (email hosted by Google), but the problem is, on the hosted site, when an administration action occurs, he is supposed to get an email stating so. The site is sending him an email with PHP and he never receives an email when its to his address with the same domain name; all other domain addresses work just fine. I have to imagine its something misconfigured on the host. From what I can assume, I think that the host sees that the to and from domains are the same, and it decides not to route the email externally. Currently, the registrar uses the proper nameservers for the host, and there are MX records on both the registrar and the host (they are identical entries). I hope I've been clear in my question. If you need further clarification, or additional information of any kind, I can provide it. Thanks in advance.

  Read the article

• Can't ping guest OS from Windows XP SP3 host running VIC.

  - by Vittal

  Hi, I am running VMware ESX Server 3i Version 3.5.0 and accessing this server using VMware Infrastructure Client Version 2.5.0 on a Windows XP SP3 machine. I have enabled the Microsoft TCP/IP version 6 stack and assigned an IPv6 address (using the netsh command) to the network adapter. The guest OS'es running on ESX Server (includes Win7, W2K8, WinXP) also have IPv6 addresses enabled on their adapters. The adapters are configured to be in VM Network (Bridged mode) and hence have connectivity to the Internet. The VMs are able to ping each other using IPv6 addresses and are also able to ping a physical Win7 machine using IPv6 addresses. However, the Windows XP SP3 machine on which the Client is running is not able to ping any hosts running on ESX Server while the VMs are able to ping this host. Whenever I try to ping from WXP box I get the "Invalid source route specified." error. The WinXP machine is not able to ping the Win7 physical machine too (the same error as above is thrown). Can someone help me understand why I am receiving this error and what I need to do to resolve this error? Thanks, Vittal

  Read the article

• Preventing DDOS/SYN attacks (as far as possible)

  - by Godius

  Recently my CENTOS machine has been under many attacks. I run MRTG and the TCP connections graph shoots up like crazy when an attack is going on. It results in the machine becoming inaccessible. My MRTG graph: mrtg graph This is my current /etc/sysctl.conf config # Kernel sysctl configuration file for Red Hat Linux # # For binary values, 0 is disabled, 1 is enabled. See sysctl(8) and # sysctl.conf(5) for more details. # Controls IP packet forwarding net.ipv4.ip_forward = 0 # Controls source route verification net.ipv4.conf.default.rp_filter = 1 # Do not accept source routing net.ipv4.conf.default.accept_source_route = 0 # Controls the System Request debugging functionality of the kernel kernel.sysrq = 1 # Controls whether core dumps will append the PID to the core filename # Useful for debugging multi-threaded applications kernel.core_uses_pid = 1 # Controls the use of TCP syncookies net.ipv4.tcp_syncookies = 1 # Controls the maximum size of a message, in bytes kernel.msgmnb = 65536 # Controls the default maxmimum size of a mesage queue kernel.msgmax = 65536 # Controls the maximum shared segment size, in bytes kernel.shmmax = 68719476736 # Controls the maximum number of shared memory segments, in pages kernel.shmall = 4294967296 net.ipv4.conf.all.rp_filter = 1 net.ipv4.tcp_syncookies = 1 net.ipv4.icmp_echo_ignore_broadcasts = 1 net.ipv4.conf.all.accept_redirects = 0 net.ipv6.conf.all.accept_redirects = 0 net.ipv4.conf.all.send_redirects = 0 net.ipv4.conf.all.accept_source_route = 0 net.ipv4.conf.all.rp_filter = 1 net.ipv4.tcp_max_syn_backlog = 1280 Futher more in my Iptables file (/etc/sysconfig/iptables ) I only have this setup # Generated by iptables-save v1.3.5 on Mon Feb 14 07:07:31 2011 *filter :INPUT ACCEPT [1139630:287215872] :FORWARD ACCEPT [0:0] :OUTPUT ACCEPT [1222418:555508541] Together with the settings above, there are about 800 IP's blocked via the iptables file by lines like: -A INPUT -s 82.77.119.47 -j DROP These have all been added by my hoster, when Ive emailed them in the past about attacks. Im no expert, but im not sure if this is ideal. My question is, what are some good things to add to the iptables file and possibly other files which would make it harder for the attackers to attack my machine without closing out any non-attacking users. Thanks in advance!

  Read the article

• Forward mDns from one subnet to another?

  - by user37278

  Is there an ipfw rule that can easily forward mDns packets from one subnet to another? I have a Snow Leopard Server machine serving as the gateway between the two subnets and would like for machines in each subnet to see the services available in the other subnet. The gateway machine is already confirmed as configured correctly such that packets route correctly between the two subnets (ping works, traceroute shows the subnet hop, etc). My problem in designing a ipfw rule is that I don't know how to instruct that I would like multicast packets addressed to 224.0.0.251:5353 on en0 to be addressed to the same ip/port but on fw0 (the other interface). I attempted a rule such as fwd 192.168.10.1 log udp from 192.168.1.0/24 to 224.0.0.251 recv en1 to force the packet to hop over to the other interface (from en1 to fw0), but no dice. The ipfw log shows that the rule is being triggered by packets, but tcpdump isn't showing any packets on the other interface. Also, the only other firewall rules in place are the divert port 8668 and rule #65535 "allow any to any". Any suggestions? Thanks.

  Read the article

• What is the ideal way to set up multiple FTP enabled web accounts on Fedora?

  - by Nicholas Flynt

  I'm setting up a test server for use as a web development platform, and I'd like to mimic as closely as I can a typical shared hosting setup. That is, I'd like my server to have multple user FTP accounts, each of which links to a directory containing the webroot of the site, and I'd like apache to be able to easily see and manupulate these files. I'll admit: I'm not as familiar with Fedora as I'd like, I run Ubuntu on my home box and SElinux is giving me some grief. My initial plan was to have each user FTP into their home directory, and put the web directory there as well, but SElinux throws a hissy fit when apache tries to access anything outside of its web directory, so that plan was a no go. Would it be wise to continue this route, and perhaps mount web directories in user home folders so that FTP could still be used to access them, even though apache saw them in var/www like it expects? Would it make more sense to set up custom FTP accounts and use a single FTP user on the server box? What's the general course of action on something like this? I'm using vsftpd right now to host web directories, which is why I'm liking the home directory approach (it's simple and secure) but of course there's bound to be a better way to go about it. Thanks. (I'll leave other things, like restricted DB access and such, to another post. I'm interested right now with just getting FTP and apache to play nice in a multi-user environment.) PS: For the record, an issue I ran into when doing all of this was that if apache isn't running as the same user as the FTP account is saving as, there are permissions errors when FTP creates files, requiring the remote user to chmod the files to fix it. A logical fix would be to run apache in a special group, put all web users in this group, and have FTP access default to giving this group read/write access to everything like apache would expect, but I never could figure out how to accomplish this. Bonus points and cake if you know a solution.

  Read the article

• How to Install OS without DVD and USB boot

  - by Timothy James Reed

  I just purchased a used Dell F1D 1U rack mount server and would like to install Ubuntu or ESXi with Virtual Disks or anything for that matter. I'v read that Dell's have built in DRAC so you can access it remotely. There are 3 ethernet plugs in the back but I dont know which one to use. In the BIOS it says I can configure Remote access on [com1] or [com2] not sure if that is ethernet 1 & 2. I also set it up so to use a static IP adress. Thats as far as I have gone. Not sure what to do next. I'v Tried to do a PXE server with TFTP but get stuck at Error "cant locate file" or something like that. Not even sure I want to go that route anymore because of all the hassel of editing files. All my computers are OSX or Linux and the only Windows I have is via VMWare. What steps to i do now?

  Read the article

• CLI package to replace Plesk

  - by dotancohen

  Myself and another programmer are tasked with maintaining a few webservers. I prefer CLI tools, she prefers Plesk. However, I am adamant about not installing Plesk for quite a few reasons. I have written a small Python script for adding new domains, and now I am about to add the ability to configure email addresses while abstracting the details of Postfix from her. Before I go that route, I have googled to see if anything already exists, and am surprised that I have come up with nothing! Are there any mature, stable "control panels" or "server admin" tools like Plesk, but which are accessed via the CLI over SSH? I am looking for the following features: Add / remove / configure domains served by Apache. Add / remove / configure email boxes and mail groups. Add / remove MySQL databases, users, and configure users to databases. Provide basic monitoring of "server health", that is: memory usage, disk usage, CPU usage, bandwidth usage. Possibly set up STFP accounts so that only specific FTP users could access specific /var/www/someSite/ directories. Note that I was unsure if this question is OT for ServerFault. As per the ServerFault about page (There seems to be no more FAQ) this question meets two of the "ask about" criterion and zero of the "don't ask about" with the possible exception of being opinion-based. Therefore, to keep on-topic, I would like to know about the available applications but we should be subjective and less opinionated. Thank you!

  Read the article

• OpenSWAN KLIPS not working

  - by bonzi

  I am trying to setup IPSec between 2 VM launched by OpenNebula. I'm using OpenSWAN for that. This is the ipsec.conf file config setup oe=off interfaces=%defaultroute protostack=klips conn host-to-host left=10.141.0.135 # Local IP address connaddrfamily=ipv4 leftrsasigkey=key right=10.141.0.132 # Remote IP address rightrsasigkey=key ike=aes128 # IKE algorithms (AES cipher) esp=aes128 # ESP algorithns (AES cipher) auto=add pfs=yes forceencaps=yes type=tunnel I'm able to establish the connection with netkey but klips doesnt work. ipsec barf shows #71: ERROR: asynchronous network error report on eth0 (sport=500) for message to 10.141.0.132 port 500, complainant 10.141.0.135: No route to host [errno 113, origin ICMP type 3 code 1 (not authenticated)] Tcpdump shows 22:50:20.592685 IP 10.141.0.132.isakmp > 10.141.0.135.isakmp: isakmp: phase 1 I ident 22:50:25.602182 ARP, Request who-has 10.141.0.135 tell 10.141.0.132, length 46 22:50:26.602082 ARP, Request who-has 10.141.0.135 tell 10.141.0.132, length 46 22:50:27.601985 ARP, Request who-has 10.141.0.135 tell 10.141.0.132, length 46 ipsec eroute shows 0 10.141.0.135/32 -> 10.141.0.132/32 => %trap What could be the problem?

  Read the article

• Word Document Turns to Read-Only

  - by Psycho Bob

  I am running into an issue with a user whose Word document is somehow turning itself into Read-Only. The user is using Word 2003 and is accessing a document that is in a Server 2008 share. The document itself starts out as a normal, editable document (user has Full Control permissions), and the user is able to save and do the 'normal' things you would do to a document. However, after a couple of saves, the document turns to Read-Only (according to the title bar) even though the Read-Only attribute is not checked on the document's properties. Here is some additional information about the situation: *User has approximately 5-8 Word documents open at a time *User saves the document frequently (sometimes at a frequency of once per minute) *Once the document is closed it will open as a normal document if reopened *When the document does turn to Read-Only the user will do a "Save As" on the document and save it as FILENAME # where # is some increment of how many times this has happened (some documents are up to their 30th iteration) I understand that there is probably some room for user education here and that they could just be copying the RO document to a new one, closing and opening the RO doc, then copying all the information back. However, I would like to get to the route cause of the problem and try to stop it from happening in the first place. UPDATE: Apparently the reinstall did not fix the issue. I researched the issue a bit more and found that disabling the background save may take care of it, but I haven't had a chance to try it yet. Does anyone else have any other ideas?

  Read the article

• Remote Desktop Connection issues

  - by stead1984

  I have a server at a remote site, the sites are connected to each other a site-to-site VPN connection using Cisco ASA 5510 firewalls. One end is managed by me, the other managed by the remote location's IT, between the 2 of us is another party who manage and route the connections. Remote desktop has been working fine with no problems then recently I noticed it was working for ONE server over the VPN which it previously had done. All the routes seem fine and I can still ping the remote server and even download files from an FTP site on the remote server.... so the VPN seems fine. Remote Desktop works fine to the remote server within the remote location but not over the VPN. I don't understand why it's stopped working, I originally thought it was a rule in place by the other party but they stress it's not them. The only thing that has changed on the server initiating the RDP connection is that it now runs file services sharing a folder. The source server (remote location) may or may not have had updates applied. Any idea's?

  Read the article

• Single m0n0wall - Two LAN Subnets - How To Setup

  - by SnAzBaZ

  I have two LAN subnets that I need to link together they are 192.168.4.0/24 and 192.168.5.0/24 There is a m0n0wall running on 192.168.4.1. It's LAN connection goes out to our network switch, and it's WAN port goes out to our ADSL modem. WAN is connected via PPPoE. The 192.168.4.0 subnet contains all of our office workstations. The 192.168.5.0 subnet contains development servers and test machines that need to obtain internet access and be "managed" by computers on the 192.168.4.0 subnet, but need to be on their own subnet as well. I have a Draytek 2820N configured on 192.168.5.1 with it's WAN2 port configured as 192.168.4.25 and a default gateway of 192.168.4.1. Machines on the 5.0 subnet can connect to the internet via the m0n0wall just fine. I configured a static route on the m0n0wall LAN interface, Network 192.168.5.0/24 and Gateway 192.168.4.25. Machines on the 5.0 subnet can ping machines on the 4.0 network but the reverse does not work. I configured a new firewall rule on the m0n0wall that allows any traffic on the LAN interface with a source IP of 192.168.4.25 to be allowed. The DrayTek firewall is currently configured to pass all traffic regardless. When I try to ping a machine in the 5.0 subnet from 4.0 I see this in my m0n0wall log: BLOCK 14:45:27.888157 LAN 192.168.4.25 192.168.4.37, type echoreply/0 ICMP So the reply is being sent from the 5.0 subnet but is not being allowed to reach my workstation because the firewall is blocking it. Why is the firewall blocking it ? I hope the explanation of my network is clear, please ask if you require further clarification. Thank you.

  Read the article

• Unable to ping gateway via bridge nic

  - by Ara

  I'm trying to install KVM on Ubuntu 12.04 server. We have multiple nic on this server of which we primarily use eth0. The server network runs fine(i'm able to ping gateway, ping dns server and ping servers on internet) with eth0 /etc/network/interfaces auto lo iface lo inet loopback auto eth0 iface eth0 inet static address 192.168.22.194 netmask 255.255.255.0 network 192.168.22.0 broadcast 192.168.22.255 gateway 192.168.22.1 dns-nameservers 10.71.130.58 10.71.130.60 dns-search test.local I installed bridge-utils and configured br0 as below /etc/network/interfaces auto lo iface lo inet loopback auto eth0 iface eth0 inet manual auto br0 iface br0 inet static address 192.168.22.194 netmask 255.255.255.0 network 192.168.22.0 broadcast 192.168.22.255 gateway 192.168.22.1 dns-nameservers 10.71.130.58 10.71.130.60 dns-search test.local bridge_ports eth0 bridge_fd 9 bridge_hello 2 bridge_maxage 12 bridge_stp off Post which i'm able to ping servers on the same ip range 192.168.22.2-254 except for 192.168.22.1 (which is the gateway) also i'm not able to ping any other servers. I'm not able to ping this machine from network. The output for route -n Kernel IP routing table Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref Use Iface 0.0.0.0 192.168.22.1 0.0.0.0 UG 100 0 0 br0 192.168.22.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 br0 192.168.122.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 virbr0 I've been struggling with this issue for past 5 days, would be of help if anyone can point me in the right direction to fix this issue. Thanks in advance

  Read the article

• Linux/hostapd: AP can ping clients, clients can access internet, can't access www@wlan1 with more than 5-6 packets at once

  - by mhambra

  Please edit the title, can't make it sound better. -- OP. Hi all, I have a Wifi USB dongle in a PC, that serves as an AP for laptop. wlan1: 192.168.2.1, netmask 255.255.255.0, routed: route add -net 192.168.2.0 netmask 255.255.255.0 gw 192.168.2.1 ping 192.168.2.2 (laptop): ping was ok for lot of packets. Now, I try to access 192.168.2.1:80/myindex.html (apache) from laptop, and can see that own 1kb test page. But, trying to access 192.168.2.1:80/my.jpg, I see the following: GET /my.jpg HTTP/1.1 200 OK <jpg header, about a kilobyte> <TCP packet retransmisson> <TCP packet retransmisson> <end of stream> It seems to be a hostapd's problem (networked stuff worked fine with Ad-Hoc), but it may be also forwarding/routing problem too. What to google for? Even more strange, SSH to that host works fine.

  Read the article

• Fedora 15: em1 recently dissapeared and hostapd no longer serves internet to wirelessly connected devices

  - by Daniel K

  I have a laptop running hostapd, phpd, and mysql. This laptop uses an Ethernet connection to connect to the internet and acts as a wireless access point for my workplace's wifi devices. After installing some software and reconnecting my Ethernet elsewhere, my "em1" device is no longer present and wirelessly connected devices can no longer reach the internet. The software I recently installed is: pptp, pptpd, and updated some fedora libraries. I have also recently moved my desk and laptop to another location and thus had to reconnect the Ethernet elsewhere. Wifi devices no longer have access to the internet. Wirelessly connected devices are able to successfully log into the laptop, showing full strength, correct SSID, and uses the proper password. However, when I tried to connect to a site like google, the request times out. The device "em1" also no longer appears on my machine. Running: # ifup em1 will give me the following output: ERROR : [/etc/sysconfig/network-scripts/ifup-eth] Device em1 does not seem to be present, delaying initialization. And running: # dhclient em1 has the following output: Cannot find device "em1" When I run # dmesg|grep renamed, I get the following: renamed network interface eth0 to p4p1. I've tried to connect to the internet through p4p1 directly from the laptop and was successful. However, my wireless devices connected to my laptop are not able to connect to the internet. I have uninstalled pptp and pptpd using # yum erase ... but the problem still persists. To install pptp I used: # yum install pptp To install pptpd I did the following: # rpm -Uvh http://poptop.sourceforge.net/yum/stable/fc15/pptp-release-current.noarch.rpm # yum install pptpd To update my fedora libraries I used: # yum check-update # yum update EDIT: Running # route produces the following results: Kernel IP routing table Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref Use Iface default 10.11.200.1 0.0.0.0 UG 0 0 0 p4p1 10.11.200.0 * 255.255.252.0 U 0 0 0 p4p1 172.16.100.0 * 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 wlan0

  Read the article

• VLAN Through Switch Doesn't Work

  - by vcsjones

  I have the following scenario: I have a Cisco Aironet 1040 access point. I have it configured with two SSIDs, each going to a different VLAN. So: SSID internal : VLAN 90 SSID guest : VLAN 70 On the router side, I have a Cisco RV220W (with the radios now turned off) and have setup VLANs with like VLAN IDs. VLAN 90 : 192.168.90.0/24 VLAN 70 : 192.168.70.0/24 As far as DHCP is concerned, each VLAN has a "DHCP Server" in the router's configuration: So with the access point connected directly to the router, everything works great. I connect to the internal network, and I get a 192.168.90.x address, and the guest network gets a 70.xxx address. Next I introduced a Cisco SG200-50 PoE switch between the router and the access point. The port is configured as a trunk port, so the VLAN tags should go right through the switch back to the router. However, when something is connected to the access point, nothing works. It isn't able to get an IP address, and manually assigning one doesn't seem to let any traffic route. Given that the access point works correctly when connected to the router directly, I believe the switch is misconfigured. What am I missing here? What can I use to better diagnose what the problem might be? It's small business equipment, so CLI access is not available. Below are screenshots of the switch's config. The access point is connected to GE2.

  Read the article

• Postfix "mail-to-script" pipe only delivers empty messages

  - by user68202

  i have a problem here. I want that a incoming email is piped to a php script in the system through postfix. My System is running with ispconfig 3, postfix and dovecot (< virtual mailbox users are saved in mysql). I looked already into this one: How to configure postfix to pipe all incoming email to a script? ... the script is executed, but no "message" is delivered to the script. My setup so far: In ISPConfig 3 i have set up the following email route: Active Server Domain Transport Sort by Yes example.com pipe.example.com piper: 5 excerpt from my postfix master.cf: piper unix - n n - - pipe user=piper:piper directory=/home/piper argv=php -q /home/piper/mail.php so far it is working great (mail sent to [email protected]) (mail.log): Jun 21 16:07:11 example postfix/pipe[10948]: 235CF7613E2: to=<[email protected]>, relay=piper, delay=0.04, delays=0.01/0.01/0/0.02, dsn=2.0.0, status=sent (delivered via piper service) ... and no errors in mail.err the mail.php is sucessfully executed (its chmod 777 and chown'ed to piper), but creates a empty .txt file (normally it should contain the email message): -rw------- 1 piper piper 0 Jun 21 16:07 mailtext_1340287631.txt the mail.php script ive used, is the one from http://www.email2php.com/HowItWorks if i use their (commercial) service to pipe an email to the mail.php (in a apache2 environment) through a provided "pipe-email", the message is saved sucessfully and complete. But as you can see, i dont want to use external services. -rw-r--r-- 1 web2 client0 1959 Jun 21 16:19 mailtext_1340288377.txt So, whats wrong here? I think it has something to do with the "delivering configuration" in my system...

  Read the article

• Cisco BVI: Claiming IP addresses

  - by cjavapro

  I would like to make sure I understand this correctly. Given a Cisco ISO router that is set up with a BVI (a variation of a bridge route).. and the following layout "ISP router" \ "Network switch" # nothing special here. | \ | \ | \ | \ "Router 1 with NAT" "Router 2 with BVI" If I understand correctly.. the outside of a BVI will only respond to IP addresses that have already been claimed on the inside of the BVI... example subnet is 123.123.123.??? and servers inside the BVI on 123.123.123.10 and 123.123.123.11, and the NAT router is holding a public IP address of 123.123.123.50. If a connection comes in to 123.123.123.10 it will be received by router 2 but if it is received on 123.123.123.50, it will be received by router 1 and not received by router 2. and if a connection comes in to 123.123.123.90 (does not exist) it will not be received by either router. Am I correct? Is it true that the BVI router will not even receive packets to IP addresses that it does not see as existing on the inside?

  Read the article

• Tomato/DD-WRT router to act as switch & only NAT some port

  - by fseto

  BACKGROUND: I have a device that must use a real IP address. Currently, my ISP uses DHCP and I can have up to 4 real IP address assigned. However, the cable modem only have 1 ethernet port and it's connected to my router (running Tomato, but can run DD-wrt or other Openwrt if required). Question stems from how I can connect the additional device, requiring a real IP? EASY SOLUTION: would be to get a switch and connect to the CM, Router, and Device. But alas, I want to avoid this route, since: my wiring cabinet in my home is drawing lots of power and heat already Device will be unprotected by any firewall unable to monitor the traffic to/from device. Besides, what would be the FUN in that? =) IDEA: So what I want to do is to configure the router, so that one of the switchport is removed from the normal br0 bridge. Instead, I want to make it behave like a switch on the WAN port. What's the best way of doing this? Should I create another bridge on the WAN & the device port? Can a single port belongs to two bridges? or would I need to create a subinterface first? Would I need a DHCP-relay? Am I expecting too much from my poor cheapie router? +------+ | CM | +--++--+ || +----WAN---------------+ | / \ Router | | BR1? BR0 | | | \ | | | {NAT} | | | / | | \ | +-P0----P1-P2-P3-Wifi--+ | +------+ |Device| +------+

  Read the article

• Connect linux server to VPN server via PPTP

  - by wowpatrick

  I'm trying to connect a Linux (Ubuntu 10.04 LST) server to a VPN server via the PPTP client to an VPN server. I configured the PPTP client as said in the documentation. The connection is correctly added as an interface, but somehow the connection dose not work. ping -I ppp0 google.com dose not return anything and traceroute -i ppp0 only shows the first hop, and then displays nothing. Any ideas of what is going wrong? Incorrect routing configuration? ifconfig output for the configured interface: ppp0 Link encap:Point-to-Point Protocol inet addr:xx.x.xxx.xxx P-t-P:10.0.0.1 Mask:255.255.255.255 UP POINTOPOINT RUNNING NOARP MULTICAST MTU:1496 Metric:1 RX packets:415 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:468 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:3 RX bytes:31428 (31.4 KB) TX bytes:32394 (32.3 KB) route output Kernel IP routing table Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref Use Iface xx.x.x.1 * 255.255.255.255 UH 0 0 0 ppp0 xx.xxx.xxx.xx sp.ip 255.255.255.255 UGH 0 0 0 eth1 192.168.3.0 * 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth2 192.168.2.0 * 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth1 default sp.ip 0.0.0.0 UG 100 0 0 eth1

  Read the article

• Is there any way for ME to improve routing to an overseas server? [migrated]

  - by Simon Hartcher

  I am trying to make a connection to a gaming server in Asia from Australia, but my ISP routes my connection through the US. Tracing route to worldoftanks-sea.com [116.51.25.54]over a maximum of 30 hops: 1 <1 ms <1 ms <1 ms 192.168.1.1 2 34 ms 42 ms 45 ms 10.20.21.123 3 40 ms 40 ms 43 ms 202.7.173.145 4 51 ms 42 ms 36 ms syd-sot-ken-crt1-ge-6-0-0.tpgi.com.au [202.7.171.121] 5 175 ms 200 ms 195 ms ge5-0-5d0.cir1.seattle7-wa.us.xo.net [216.156.100.37] 6 212 ms 228 ms 229 ms vb2002.rar3.sanjose-ca.us.xo.net [207.88.13.150] 7 205 ms 204 ms 206 ms 207.88.14.226.ptr.us.xo.net [207.88.14.226] 8 207 ms 215 ms 220 ms xe-0.equinix.snjsca04.us.bb.gin.ntt.net [206.223.116.12] 9 198 ms 201 ms 199 ms ae-7.r20.snjsca04.us.bb.gin.ntt.net [129.250.5.52] 10 396 ms 391 ms 395 ms as-6.r20.sngpsi02.sg.bb.gin.ntt.net [129.250.3.89] 11 383 ms 384 ms 383 ms ae-3.r02.sngpsi02.sg.bb.gin.ntt.net [129.250.4.178] 12 364 ms 381 ms 359 ms wotsg1-slave-54.worldoftanks.sg [116.51.25.54] Trace complete. Since I think it will be unlikely that my ISP will do anything, are there any ways to improve my routing to the server without them having to intervene? NB. The game runs predominately over UDP, so I believe most low ping services are out of the question, as they rely on TCP traffic.

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191  | Next Page >