Search Results

Search found 12281 results on 492 pages for 'ip blocking'.

Page 187/492 | < Previous Page | 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194  | Next Page >

  • Automated Linux VMs on Hyper-V 2012

    - by Mick
    I have a requirement to create a ton of linux VMs for our customers (we run managed infrastructure) on Hyper-V 2012 in the coming months and I have an issue with automating it. Here is how I need it to work: User accesses their web page and creates a VM. VM is created with a unique IP and name User logs in over SSH I know Hyper-V quite well and can work with powershell and am a C# programmer so the development side of things is taken care of. I also know enough about Linux to be at least competent: I have used it on and off for a number of years but not done anything Enterprise-level with it. All this can be done easily by manual processes but I need to be able to script or program this to automate it as there could be hundreds of them being created but I don't know how. My first thought is to have a database with random-generated names and IPs already created but I don't know how to get a Linux VM to boot up and grab one from the database... I suppose a Kickstart script would take care of it but I don't know what to do from there. Here is what is bouncing around in my head: Create a std linux build. - Easy to do Someone clicks "Create VM" and I pull a name and IP from the database and write it to a kickstart script. - Easy to do I could then open the template VHDX file and copy in the script and then save it. - Not sure if possible User boots up new VM and the kickstart script gives it the name and IP I assigned it. My problem is that I don't know how to open a VHDX file and insert a kickstart script into it... can't figure it out. I am reaching here and this solution may be miles off... I am more used to creating Windows VMs with scripts and so on which i am more familiar with... any help would be appreciated. Thanks Mick

    Read the article

  • System and Router configuration for setting up a home firewall based on Zentyal

    - by Ako
    I am not much of a system administrator, so please be patient if this looks too simple for you. I have a several computers at home, and all of them connect using an ADSL modem/router (and Wireless AP). I have been attacked several times (mainly from Russia and Ukraine), so I thought I should have some kind of firewall, besides the ESET firewall on my Windows 7. So now I have these (new) configuration: I have a small ADSL modem (Zyxel brand) which has only one Ethernet port. This modem is used to connect to internet and is configured in NAT mode. The interface has is configured with IP address 192.168.1.1. I have an old PC and I have installed zentyal on it. It has two Ethernet ports, eth0 and eth1. Eth0 is connected to the Zyxel modem with IP 192.168.1.2 and is checked as the WAN interface (external). I have another ADSL modem which is also a router with 4 Ethernet ports and Wireless AP. One of the Ethernet ports is connected to eth1 on Zentyal box. The Ethernet port's IP is 192.168.2.1 and Zentyal's eth1 is 192.168.2.2. Now, I want to enable other computers to connect to internet through the router both using Wireless and Ethernet. The problem is that I don't know how to configure the router so it routes connections to the Zentyal box. Does anyone have any clue? Again I am sorry if this looks stupid. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Why do I need a managed switch and which one should I buy?

    - by ascanio1
    I bought a 2nd router and I want both routers to have direct WAN access to the modem. One of the 2 routers directs VOIP traffic to a telephone line port. This VOIP service is provided by the cable carrier which also leases the modem & the router. The cable company technician told me that this VOIP line uses IPv6 addressing and therefore I must employ an IPv6 capable/compliant Giga Hub/Switch or my telephone line won't work anymore. Pls advise me (brand/model) an IPv6 compliant, 2 port, switch to purchase. Pls educate me: By reading this forum I thought that hubs broadcast traffic to all ports, regardless of which input/output is being used and so, theoretically, they have nothing to do with IP. Correct? Same story for unmanaged switches, where the only difference is that these latter devices route traffic only to those ports which are detected to be in use. Correct? I also understood that unmanaged switches route traffic simply by detecting hardware use and not by selecting specific IP traffic. Correct? Finally, there are managed switches which DO select traffic based on IP and, therefore, only these managed switches are involved with IPv6... Why would my cable company explicitly tell me, over and over, that I must use an IPv6 compliant switch? Why would they need a managed switch instead of an unmanaged one? Thanks in advance for helping me understand!

    Read the article

  • DNS resolve .com domain on local domain

    - by Joost Verdaasdonk
    I'm building a local 2008 R2 domain as a test case to be able to write a roadmap for the real new domain that needs to be created soon. What I would like to know if I'm able to make a record in DNS that will point the domain name: www.example.com and example.com to one of the servers in my network. I tried creating an a-record for it but that doesn't work. To be honest I'm not even sure if this is possible? So can I do this? That way I would be able to fully test all our services (and webb app) offline before I build the real domain and switch the DNS records at the provider. Some advice if possible and where to start is appreciated. The solution (Thanks Brent): Create new Forward lookup zone pointing to example.com Create empty A record pointing to IP of the webserver you are targeting If www is needed create A record with Name: www and IP of your webserver sub domains repeat the process but then with names for example: sub or www.sub (and ip your webserver) Be aware of the DNS Cache while you are in this process. Things can take time or do the following: Right click the server and choose clear cache in CMD: ipconfig /flushdns (to flush the client cache)

    Read the article

  • What's going on with traceroute?

    - by Kevin
    The following is what happens when I run traceroute from a certain location: # traceroute google.com traceroute to google.com (74.125.227.39), 30 hops max, 60 byte packets 1 gateway.local.enactpc.com (10.0.0.1) 0.138 ms 0.101 ms 0.084 ms 2 * * * 3 * * * 4 * * * 5 * * * 6 * * * 7 * * * 8 * * * 9 * * * 10 * * * 11 * * * 12 * * * 13 * * * 14 * * * 15 * * * 16 * * * 17 * * * 18 * * * 19 * * * 20 * * * 21 * * * 22 * * * 23 * * * 24 * * * 25 * * * 26 * * * 27 * * * 28 * * * 29 * * * 30 * * * Absolutely nothing of interest... Now, originally I thought this was just a fact of the location's network set up. (I assume they block pings or something...) However, watch what happens when I use nmap to run a traceroute... # nmap -sP --traceroute google.com Starting Nmap 5.21 ( http://nmap.org ) at 2012-09-25 22:18 CDT Nmap scan report for google.com (74.125.227.40) Host is up (0.034s latency). Hostname google.com resolves to 11 IPs. Only scanned 74.125.227.40 rDNS record for 74.125.227.40: dfw06s06-in-f8.1e100.net TRACEROUTE (using proto 1/icmp) HOP RTT ADDRESS 1 0.19 ms gateway.local.enactpc.com (10.0.0.1) 2 1.93 ms 99-20-92-1.lightspeed.austtx.sbcglobal.net (99.20.92.1) 3 25.61 ms 99-20-92-2.lightspeed.austtx.sbcglobal.net (99.20.92.2) 4 ... 6 7 23.68 ms 12.83.68.137 8 31.30 ms gar23.dlstx.ip.att.net (12.122.85.73) 9 ... 10 31.82 ms 72.14.233.65 11 32.27 ms 209.85.250.77 12 32.98 ms dfw06s06-in-f8.1e100.net (74.125.227.40) Nmap done: 1 IP address (1 host up) scanned in 3.29 seconds When using nmap I get A LOT more results than with traceroute, why? Note, I checked, and the difference in target IP addresses is not related...

    Read the article

  • Trouble with port 80 nating (XenServer to WebServer VM)

    - by Lain92
    I have a rent server running XenServer 6.2 I only have 1 public IP so i did some NAT to redirect ports 22 and 80 to my WebServer VM. I have a problem with the port 80 redirection. When i use this redirection, i can get in the WebServer's Apache but this server lose Web access. I get this kind of error : W: Failed to fetch http://http.debian.net/debian/dists/wheezy/main/source/Sources 404 Not Found [IP: 46.4.205.44 80] but i can ping anywhere. XenserverIP:80 redirected to 10.0.0.2:80 (WebServer). This is the port 80 redirection part of my XenServer iptables : -A PREROUTING -i xenbr1 -p tcp -m tcp --dport 80 -j DNAT --to-destination 10.0.0 .2:80 -A INPUT -i xenbr1 -p tcp -m state --state NEW -m tcp --dport 80 -j ACCEPT COMMIT What is wrong in my configuration? Is there a problem with XenServer? Thanks for your help ! Edit : Here is my iptables full content : *nat :PREROUTING ACCEPT [51:4060] :POSTROUTING ACCEPT [9:588] :OUTPUT ACCEPT [9:588] -A PREROUTING -p tcp -m tcp --dport 1234 -j DNAT --to-destination 10.0.0.2:22 -A PREROUTING -i xenbr1 -p tcp -m tcp --dport 80 -j DNAT --to-destination 10.0.0 .2:80 -A POSTROUTING -s 10.0.0.0/255.255.255.0 -j MASQUERADE COMMIT *filter :INPUT ACCEPT [5434:4284996] :FORWARD ACCEPT [0:0] :OUTPUT ACCEPT [5014:6004729] -A INPUT -i xenbr1 -p tcp -m state --state NEW -m tcp --dport 80 -j ACCEPT COMMIT Update : I have a second server with 10.0.0.3 as IP and it has the same problem that 10.0.0.2 has.

    Read the article

  • Netgear router is not resolving hostnames

    - by Thomas Clayson
    Not sure what the problem is, but I am used to being able to access other clients on my LAN via their hostname. We got a new router from plusnet (Netgear WNR1000v3) and now this has stopped working. For instance, if I were to run a web server from one computer with the hostname TomPC usually I could go into a browser and type http://TomPC and I would get the web server front page. I can access it by using the LAN ip of the machine. e.g. http://192.168.1.1 works fine. I thought it would be a simple option in the admin panel of the router - possibly I had to turn on DNS/DCHP or something. But I can't see anything, and my searches on the internet seem to turn up ridiculous solutions involving setting up a dedicated DNS server on my LAN. This is just a small home network - really I just want to be able to access my Raspberry PI on the network without having to work out the IP address every time. (I know I could just set a static IP address for it, but using its hostname would be much easier). DCHP is enabled in the LAN settings part, although RIP is disabled (I don't know what the latter is) I don't know if this has anything to do with it? Many thanks!

    Read the article

  • How can I redirect/forward all the UDP/TCP traffic on one interface to another interface in OpenWrt

    - by Sina Sou
    I am new to networking and I have a measurement device (D) that periodically sends all its readings over few UDP multicast sockets (with different multicast IP addresses and different port numbers). That device even listens to a TCP socket simultaneously to modify its configuration on port 7234. Since the device has just a Ethernet interface for communication and I want to make it work wireless, I decided to use a very small wireless open-wrt based router that attaches to the device (D) and redirect/forward all the network traffic(Both UDP/TCP) to the router wireless interface. In order to simplify the problem assume that the Device (D) establishes following sockets (at the same time) UM_SOCK1: UDP mcast socket on 239.1.2.3 port# 50620 UM_SOCK2: UDP mcast socket on 239.1.2.4 port# 50640 TC_SOCK3: TCP DHCP/STATIC ip address 192.168.1.200 port 7234 And (D) is connected to Open-Wrt router (R) via interface en01 (Ethernet) the router has it own wireless interface on (wlan0) I want all the traffic from interface pass through wlan01 and vice versa (bi-directional) en01 <---- wlan01 What would be the minimum iptables or ... commands that I need to make this possible? Even I am wondering if traffic directing can be made easier like if the direction is not going to be based on IP addresses(not desired if the device is connected via DHCP) I would rather redirection to be Interface(en0) based or on MAC address (The best solution since my device has unique MAC address)? Thanks

    Read the article

  • Virtual IPv6 Network between VirtualBox VMs

    - by Ben
    I'm trying to create a virtual IPv6 network as a test environment. I have 5 VirtualBox VMs (Ubuntu Server) with network adapters using host-only networking. You can imagine them being connected in series and every machine connects 2 subnets. I want to ping the last machine from the first one: On: 2001:db8:aaaa::100 I want to ping 2001:db8:dddd::101 (Note: there is no cccc network in between) Only static configuration and routes are used: /etc/network/interfaces auto eth0 iface eth0 inet6 static address 2001:db8:aaaa::100 netmask 64 /etc/network/interfaces auto eth0 iface eth0 inet6 static address 2001:db8:aaaa::101 netmask 64 auto eth1 iface eth1 inet6 static address 2001:db8:bbbb::100 netmask 64 up ip -6 route add 2001:db8:dddd::/64 via 2001:db8:bbbb::101 dev eth1 down ip -6 route del 2001:db8:dddd::/64 via 2001:db8:bbbb::101 dev eth1 I thought there might be some automatic route discovery going on. Anyway, ping6 2001:db8:dddd::100 will not work from aaaa::100 When I add the route: ip -6 route add 2001:db8:dddd::/64 via 2001:db8:aaaa::101 it will work. But the next interface in the same network dddd::101 is not reachable. How could that be? There is a machine with an interface bbbb::101 and another dddd::100 and I can ping the latter one, but the machine connected to it, dddd::101 not?? I also have also turned on forwarding. Any ideas?

    Read the article

  • Setup windows 2012 AD in Hyper-V for a Test environment

    - by hub
    Im trying to setup a Windos 2012 R2 test environment on my work computer (a laptop). I have a AD, DHCP and DNS server on server A, and a client connecting to the doman and that works. The client can ping the AD server and gets a valid IP adress. If I ping google.com from the client I get the IP adress but I dont get any responses (request time out). If i ping google.com from server A it works as it should. Server A have a connection to the Internet through a "external network switch" in hyper-v, which gets its internet from a router and the client is connected to a "internal network switch". May the poblem be that server A is behind a router? Can I make this solution to work regadless the network my laptop is connected to? At home i have one IP adress, at work its a totally different range. What I would like is to use my laptops internet connection, regardless wifi or wired, to act as incomming internet, is this possible?

    Read the article

  • Remote Desktop fails after VPN connection

    - by Samet Sorgut
    The local computer (comp 1) is connected to a remote computer (comp 2) with Remote Desktop. On the remote computer (comp 2), I try to establish an VPN connection to a different remote computer (comp 3). Once I try to establish the VPN connection from the remote computer (comp 2) to the second remote computer (comp 3), Remote Desktop freezes on comp 1. It is not possible to connect to comp 2 again via Remote Desktop. What can be done to connect to this remote computer (comp 2) after it establishes a VPN connection? The only thing that comes to my mind is to install a second NIC and configure Remote Desktop to accept connection from this NIC while VPN is working from the other... What do you suggest? EDIT: I want to use the internet connection of the VPN, so all traffic should go over the VPN but still RDP working. My IP: 100.0.0.1 The IP where I'm connecting via RDP: 200.0.0.20 (Mask: 255.255.255.192, Gateway: 200.0.0.193) Where the 200.0.0.1 connects to VPN the IP of the VPN is: 65.254.61.250 Will routing like this help (Command is issued in 200.0.0.20, the RDP location): route ADD 65.254.61.250 MASK 255.255.255.192 200.0.0.193 Couldn't add gives the error: The route addition failed: The parameter is incorrect. I tried before connecting to VPN.

    Read the article

  • Switch Before Firewall / Router - Multiple public IPs

    - by rii
    I currently Have a 10Mbit Full duplex circuit connected to a small unmanaged switch which then connects to a Sonicwall Firewall / Router. I have several public IP addresses (/28) that are assigned to several devices in my setup. Now the problem is the small switch I have was lent to me and needs to be returned, I have replaced this switch with several other switches but for some reason any other switch I use causes the network to become extremely slow. I believe this is a problem with the autonegotiation of theses hubs, so I am thinking of purchasing a small managed switch (cisco 300 series) and making the receiving port on the swith Explicitly 10Mbit Full Duplex and see if this works. My question is, being that this is a managed switch and needs an IP, will I still be able to run my public ips through it? Say the circuit has 70.80.4.1 - 7 will I still be able to assign 70.80.4.2 to my firewall and 70.80.4.3 to my router connected to some other port in the switch? Will I have to assign the switch a public IP address in this range as well for it to "route" to those other devices or does the switch does not care what IPs goes through it while operating as a Layer 2 Switch? Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thanks in advanced!

    Read the article

  • default domain and first domain in apache2 causing trouble

    - by acidzombie24
    I have 3 sites and a default/test site using mono's test page. I created aFirst, c, d, e, zLast. zLast has rewrite rules that should be evaluated last. Since the first VirtualHost seen is the default i set it to this --aFirst-- <VirtualHost *:80> ServerName www.domain.tld ServerAdmin webmaster@localhost DocumentRoot /var/www/test DirectoryIndex index.html index.aspx index.php MonoDocumentRootDir "/var/www/test" MonoServerPath rootsite "/usr/local/bin/mod-mono-server2" MonoApplications rootsite "/:/var/www/test" <Directory /var/www/test> MonoSetServerAlias rootsite SetHandler mono AddHandler mod_mono .aspx .ascx .asax .ashx .config .cs .asmx </Directory> </VirtualHost> The problem is my default page (the ip address of my server) and the first website (csite.ddomain.net) have problems (even though csite is defined in c and is not the first virtual host). The ip address of my server and csite.ddomain.net ALWAYS load the same site. Either monos test page or the csite. It flips every time i restart apache. Why isnt the server ip address always loading the default page (mono test page) and why isnt csite.ddomain.net always loading the site i want!?! Heres the config for --csite-- <VirtualHost *:80> ServerName csite.testdomain.net ServerAdmin webmaster@localhost ServerAlias s.csite.testdomain.net DocumentRoot /var/www/prjname DirectoryIndex index.html index.aspx MonoDocumentRootDir "/var/www/prjname" MonoServerPath rootsite "/usr/local/bin/mod-mono-server2" MonoApplications rootsite "/:/var/www/prjname" <Directory /var/www/prjname> MonoSetServerAlias rootsite SetHandler mono AddHandler mod_mono .aspx .ascx .asax .ashx .config .cs .asmx </Directory> </VirtualHost> aFirst, c, d, e, zLast are all enabled.

    Read the article

  • Puppet write hosts using api call

    - by Ben Smith
    I'm trying to write a puppet function that calls my hosting environment (rackspace cloud atm) to list servers, then update my hosts file. My get_hosts function is currently this: require 'rubygems' require 'cloudservers' module Puppet::Parser::Functions newfunction(:get_hosts, :type => :rvalue) do |args| unless args.length == 1 raise Puppet::ParseError, "Must provide the datacenter" end DC = args[0] USERNAME = DC == "us" ? "..." : "..." API_KEY = DC == "us" ? "..." : "..." AUTH_URL = DC == "us" ? CloudServers::AUTH_USA : CloudServers::AUTH_UK DOMAIN = "..." cs = CloudServers::Connection.new(:username => USERNAME, :api_key => API_KEY, :auth_url => AUTH_URL) cs.list_servers_detail.map {|server| server.map {|s| { s[:name] + "." + DC + DOMAIN => { :ip => s[:addresses][:private][0], :aliases => s[:name] }}} } end end And I have a hosts.pp that calls this and 'should' write it to /etc/hosts. class hosts::us { $hosts = get_hosts("us") hostentry { $hosts: } } define hostentry() { host{ $name: ip => $name[ip], host_aliases => $name[aliases] } } As you can imagine, this isn't currently working and I'm getting a 'Symbol as array index at /etc/puppet/manifests/hosts.pp:2' error. I imagine, once I've realised what I'm currently doing wrong there will be more errors to come. Is this a good idea? Can someone help me work out how to do this?

    Read the article

  • Strange issue with 74.125.79.118

    - by Domenic
    I'm facing with a strange issue on a Linux server. After frequent crashes the analysis found that the server is led to collapse by a huge number of connections to the ip 74.125.79.118 departing from php scripts of the hosted web sites. After a depth analysis of the files I'm found that are not present any malware infections. Ip 74.125.79.118 is Google. I realize after a Google search that the connections to this ip are generated by embedded video from youtube on web sites, among other Google features like safe search. But I don't understand how this type of behavior can lead to the collapse the server and the uniqueness of the situation leads me to think that the situation is far from being attributable only to Google and Youtube. Also I've found that blocking connections from eth0 to 74.125.79.118:80 doesn't solve the issue but if I stop DNS traffic from eth0 to internet, connections to 74.125.79.118 stops. I'm really confused about this. Any suggestions? Cheers.

    Read the article

  • Are there any viable DNS or LDAP alternatives for distributed key/value storage and retrieval?

    - by makerofthings7
    I'm working on a software app that needs distributed decentralized name resolution, and isn't bound to TCP/IP. Or more precisely, I need to store a "key" and look up it's value, and the key may be a string, a number, or any other realistic data type. Examples: With a phone number, look up a name. (or with an area code, redirect to the server that handles that exchange) With an IP Address get a DNS name, or a Whois contact (string value) With a string, get an IP, ( like a DNS TXT or SRV record). I'm thinking out of the box here and looking for any software that allows for this. (more info below) Are there any secure, scalable DNS alternatives that have gained notoriety? I could ask on StackOverflow, but think the infrastructure groups would have better insight on this. Edit More info: I'm looking at "Namecoin" the DNS version of Bitcoin, and since that project is faltering, I'm looking at alternative ways to store name-value pairs, with an optional qualifier. I think a name value pair is of global interest is useful, but on a limited scale. Namecoin tried to be too much, and ended up becoming nothing. I'm trying to solve that problem in researching alternatives and applying distributed technologies where applicable. Bitcoin/Namecoin offers a Distributed Hash Table, which has some positive aspects, but not useful for DNS, except for root servers.

    Read the article

  • VMWare use of Gratuitous ARP REPLY

    - by trs80
    I have an ESXi cluster that hosts several Windows Server VMs and around 30 Windows workstation VMs. Packet captures show a high number of ARP replies of the form: -sender_ip: VM IP -sender_mac: VM virtual MAC -target_ip: 0.0.0.0 -target_mac: Switch interface MAC The specific addresses aren't really a concern -- they're all legitimate and we're not having any problems with communications (most of the questions surrounding GARP and VMWare have to do with ping issues, a problem we don't have). I'm looking for an explanation of the traffic pattern in an environment that functions as expected. So the question is why would I see a high number of unsolicited ARP replies? Is this a mechanism VMWare uses for some purpose? What is it? Is there an alternative? EDIT: Quick diagram: [esxi]--[switch vlan]--[inline IDS]--[fw]--(rest of network) The IDS is complaining about these unsolicited ARPs. Several IDS vendors trigger on ARP replies without a prior request, or for ARP replies that have a target IP of 0.0.0.0. The target MAC in these replies is the VLAN interface on the switch. Capture points: -The IDS grabs the offending packets -The FW can see the same ones -A VM on the ESXi host does not see these, although there is an ARP request for a specific IP on the ESXi host that has source_ip=0.0.0.0 and source_mac=[switch vlan interface]. I can't share the captures, unfortunately. Really I'm interested in finding out if this is normal for an ESXi deployment.

    Read the article

  • Does SNI represent a privacy concern for my website visitors?

    - by pagliuca
    Firstly, I'm sorry for my bad English. I'm still learning it. Here it goes: When I host a single website per IP address, I can use "pure" SSL (without SNI), and the key exchange occurs before the user even tells me the hostname and path that he wants to retrieve. After the key exchange, all data can be securely exchanged. That said, if anybody happens to be sniffing the network, no confidential information is leaked* (see footnote). On the other hand, if I host multiple websites per IP address, I will probably use SNI, and therefore my website visitor needs to tell me the target hostname before I can provide him with the right certificate. In this case, someone sniffing his network can track all the website domains he is accessing. Are there any errors in my assumptions? If not, doesn't this represent a privacy concern, assuming the user is also using encrypted DNS? Footnote: I also realize that a sniffer could do a reverse lookup on the IP address and find out which websites were visited, but the hostname travelling in plaintext through the network cables seems to make keyword based domain blocking easier for censorship authorities.

    Read the article

  • Plesk FTP not working but SFTP and Shell is working

    - by shamittomar
    I am facing a strange problem. The FTP on my Plesk VPS is not working. Whenever I try to connect, FileZilla FTP client says: Status: Resolving address of xxxxxxxxxxxxx.com Status: Connecting to xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx:21... Status: Connection established, waiting for welcome message... Error: Could not connect to server So, it's not even going to the step of asking username/password. So, it's something else. The SFTP on port 22 is working fine. Also, I can successfully do shell access and run commands. But, I NEED FTP access too on port 21. I have searched everywhere but can not find any setting to enable it. This is the Plesk version info: Parallels Plesk Panel version 9.5.2 Operating system Linux 2.6.26.8-57.fc8 CPU GenuineIntel, Intel(R) Pentium(R) 4 CPU 3.00GHz Any help is appreciated. [EDIT]: The firewall is not blocking it. I have checked it on server and there are absolutely no blocking rule. Firewall states: All incoming/outgoing connections are accepted on FTP And on client-side (my PC), I can connect to other FTP servers so this is not an issue in my PC's firewall. Moreover, I can not even connect to the FTP from online FTP clients like net2ftp.

    Read the article

  • xen + debian network after upgrade squeeze to wheeze

    - by rush
    I've got a Debian + Xen server. After a system upgrade to the stable version the network doesn't come up after boot. Every time after reboot I need to bring it up manually. The network configuration was not changed during upgrade. Here is /etc/network/interfaces: auto lo iface lo inet loopback auto eth0 iface eth0 inet static address 11.22.33.44 netmask 255.255.255.0 gateway 11.22.33.1 nameserver 8.8.8.8 After boot ip r shows no route and eth0 has no ip address. Manually ip and route setup goes fine and network starts working. Messages from dmesg about network I've found (looks like nothing interesting) [ 3.894401] ACPI: Fan [FAN3] (off) [ 3.894444] ACPI: Fan [FAN4] (off) [ 4.178348] e1000e 0000:00:19.0: eth0: (PCI Express:2.5GT/s:Width x1) 00:1e:67:14:66:c9 [ 4.178351] e1000e 0000:00:19.0: eth0: Intel(R) PRO/1000 Network Connection [ 4.178392] e1000e 0000:00:19.0: eth0: MAC: 10, PHY: 11, PBA No: 0100FF-0FF [ 4.178413] e1000e 0000:02:00.0: Disabling ASPM L0s L1 [ 4.178432] xen: registering gsi 16 triggering 0 polarity 1 -- [ 4.223667] ata5: DUMMY [ 4.223668] ata6: DUMMY [ 4.289153] e1000e 0000:02:00.0: eth1: (PCI Express:2.5GT/s:Width x1) 00:1e:67:14:66:c8 [ 4.289155] e1000e 0000:02:00.0: eth1: Intel(R) PRO/1000 Network Connection [ 4.289245] e1000e 0000:02:00.0: eth1: MAC: 3, PHY: 8, PBA No: 1000FF-0FF [ 4.506908] usb 1-1: new high-speed USB device number 2 using ehci_hcd [ 4.542920] ata2: SATA link up 3.0 Gbps (SStatus 123 SControl 300) -- [ 10.362999] EXT4-fs (dm-23): mounted filesystem with ordered data mode. Opts: (null) [ 10.419103] EXT4-fs (dm-3): mounted filesystem with ordered data mode. Opts: (null) [ 10.988255] ADDRCONF(NETDEV_UP): eth1: link is not ready [ 13.175533] Event-channel device installed. [ 13.287555] XENBUS: Unable to read cpu state -- [ 13.288670] XENBUS: Unable to read cpu state [ 13.965939] Bridge firewalling registered [ 14.134048] e1000e: eth1 NIC Link is Up 1000 Mbps Full Duplex, Flow Control: Rx/Tx [ 14.283862] ADDRCONF(NETDEV_UP): peth0: link is not ready [ 14.284543] ADDRCONF(NETDEV_CHANGE): eth1: link becomes ready [ 17.800627] e1000e: peth0 NIC Link is Up 1000 Mbps Full Duplex, Flow Control: Rx/Tx [ 17.801377] ADDRCONF(NETDEV_CHANGE): peth0: link becomes ready [ 18.307278] device peth0 entered promiscuous mode [ 24.538899] eth1: no IPv6 routers present [ 28.570902] peth0: no IPv6 routers present I've upgraded two servers and I've such behaviour on two of them. How to fix this and get network starts automatically on boot?

    Read the article

  • SBS 2008 R2: Did something change with anonymous relays?

    - by gravyface
    Have noticed that prior documentation on setting up anonymous relays in SBS 2008 no longer work without some additional configuration. Used to be able to follow this documentation, which is basically: setup a new receive connector add the IP address(es) that will be permitted to relay check off "anonymous" under Permission Group and then run the Exchange shell script to grant permissions. Now what seems to be happening is that if the permitted IP address happens to fall within the same address space as another more restrictive Receive Connector (like the "Default SBS08" one) and possibly if it's ahead of the new Receive Connector alphabetically (haven't tested that yet), the relay attempt fails with "Client Was Not Authenticated" error. To get it to work, I had to modify the scope of the "Default SBS08" Receive Connector to exclude the one LAN IP that I wanted to allow relaying for. I can't recall ever having to do this for Exchange 2007 Standard and/or any other SBS 2008 servers I've setup over the last couple of years and I don't remember doing this and the wiki entry I added at the office doesn't mention it either. So my question is, has anyone else experienced this? Has there been a new change with R2 or perhaps an Exchange Service Pack?

    Read the article

  • Network structure --> Server 2k8r2 <--> Livebox <--> Router <--> Other PCs

    - by Yusuf
    I have a Livebox connection to the Internet and I have set up my network as follows: - Livebox <--> Win2k8R2 Server - Livebox <--> Netgear N150 Router - Router <--> Other PCs Therefore, in my LAN, - the Livebox has IP address 192.168.1.1, - the Router 192.168.1.12 (when accessed from the Livebox or the server), - the Router 10.0.0.1 (when accessed from the PCs connected to the Router), - the server 192.168.1.2, - the PCs 10.0.0.x I was using a previous configuration, which was as follows: - Livebox <--> Netgear N150 Router - Router <--> Win2k8R2 Server - Router <--> Other PCs Everything was simple, and I just had to forward all ports for incoming connection on the Livebox to the Router, and then forward the specific ports to the Server as needed (it must be however noted that any server I use is found on the Win2k8R2 server itself). In this previous configuration, the IP addresses were as follows: - Livebox 192.168.1.1 - Router 192.168.1.12 (when seen from Livebox) - Router 10.0.0.1 (when seen from server & PCs connected to it) - Server 10.0.0.2 - PCs 10.0.0.x So now of course, my port-forwarding does not work anymore since the server is not connected (directly) to the Router. What I would like to know is how do I configure the Livebox and Router to still have the features like before? From what I understand of networks (which is very limited, btw), I see these options: Make the router assign IPs like 192.168.1.x (but then I want the forwarding to be done from the router itself, is it possible?) The forwarding on the router to the server uses IP address 10.0.0.2. I could change it to 192.168.1.2 (Is that even possible, does it work?) Forward all ports from the Livebox itself to the server, and then manage them there (Is software-based port-forwarding as secure as hardware-based?)

    Read the article

  • Configure linux machine as bridge/switch and end device

    - by leemes
    At my home, I have two desktop PCs in two rooms. The router / DSL modem is in one of these rooms. Now I want to configure a home server (having 2 LAN ports, running 24/7) in the corridor between the two rooms, using only one LAN cable at each door. This gives me the following physical configuration: (door) (door) .----/-/----. .-----/-/----------._ FritzBox | | | .----´´ DSL Router PC1 Server | PC2 As just said, the server has 2 network interfaces and is running Ubuntu. What I need now is a network configuration which enables both the server and PC1 to connect to the router. I think the server needs to serve as a bridge or switch. Currently, all computers are configured having static IP addresses. If I'm understanding it correctly, a bridge / switch doesn't have its own IP address, but as the server needs to be configured as an own end device, it needs to have one. My first question is, do I have to configure both interfaces separately, giving both the same static IP address? My next question is, how do I bridge the two physical networks into one? I have basic understanding (but am always confused again and again) of bridges and switches, but I don't know how to configure it in software. I only know that it's possible to do so :) The third question is: Is it possible to configure this in a way that network packets from/to PC1 to/from the router only go through hardware or only consume low CPU in the server? Can you help me? Thanks in advance!

    Read the article

  • Assign individual NIC to KVM guest

    - by Bin S
    I have a server with 6 NICs installed and is running Ubuntu 12.04LTS. I want to setup 4 guest VMs using kvm. Now I want to assign 2 NICs for the host(1 Public IP and 1 private IP), and 1 NIC each to 4 guest VM(all private IP). How do I do this? /etc/network/interfaces I am having trouble with my configuration file shown below: # The loopback network interface auto lo iface lo inet loopback # The primary network interface auto eth0 iface eth0 inet static address 192.168.1.109 netmask 255.255.255.0 gateway 192.168.1.5 auto eth1 iface eth1 inet static address 192.168.1.117 netmask 255.255.255.0 auto eth2 iface eth2 inet manual auto br0 iface br0 inet static address 192.168.1.118 netmask 255.255.255.0 bridge_ports eth2 bridge_fd 9 bridge_hello 2 bridge_maxage 12 bridge_stp off auto eth3 iface eth3 inet manual auto br1 iface br1 inet static address 192.168.1.119 netmask 255.255.255.0 bridge_ports eth3 bridge_fd 9 bridge_hello 2 bridge_maxage 12 bridge_stp off auto eth4 iface eth4 inet manual auto br2 iface br2 inet static address 192.168.1.123 netmask 255.255.255.0 bridge_ports eth4 bridge_fd 9 bridge_hello 2 bridge_maxage 12 bridge_stp off auto eth5 iface eth5 inet manual auto br3 iface br3 inet static address 192.168.1.124 netmask 255.255.255.0 bridge_ports eth5 bridge_fd 9 bridge_hello 2 bridge_maxage 12 bridge_stp off

    Read the article

  • How to setup ping between XP guest from Win8 Host using Hyper-V virtual swtich

    - by rism
    Hyper-V client is installed on a Win8 Pro 64 bit box and a VM running XP has been created within that with an internal virtual swtich. The VM can be booted and accessed and there is a default virtual NIC within it with dynamic IP of 169.254.x.x which i have changed to be a static IP of 192.168.0.12/255.255.255.0 confirmed via ipconfig on the XP guest. The Host has IP of 192.168.0.7/255.255.255.0. Both host and guest have their firewalls disabled for simplicity. I cant ping guest from host nor host from guest. TTL timeout. And with regard to Hyper-V and VMs I dont know what to do next. Both are in same workgroup (as per name) but since they cant ping I guess that means nothing. .... My objective is to share a folder on VM so I can install a 32bit accountancy app that wont run on Win8/7 so if there is a more simplistic way then Im all ears but typically a peer to peer is very simple.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194  | Next Page >