Search Results

Search found 30 results on 2 pages for 'readynas'.

Page 2/2 | < Previous Page | 1 2 

  • What are my options for booting OSX 10.6 when my DVD drive is broken?

    - by Kev
    I'm about to completely re-pave my Mac Mini but the DVD drive has died on me which means I can't boot from the installation media. I know I can boot from a USB stick but I don't have one available, what are my options given the following hardware at hand? Netgear ReadyNAS Duo NAS (NIC or USB only, no Firewire) USB HDD (no Firewire) I've ripped an ISO of the installation disk, can I somehow get the Mini to boot from this image using one of the above? If I decide not to re-pave but just upgrade, can the Mac be upgraded just using an OSX 10.6 ISO image on its disk?

    Read the article

  • Getting rid of your server in a small business environment

    - by andygeers
    In a small business environment, is it still necessary to have a central server? Speaking for my own company (a small charity with about 12 employees) we use our server (Windows Server 2003) for the following: Email via Microsoft Exchange Central storage Acting as a print server User authentication / Active Directory There are significant costs associated with running a server like this: Electricity, first for the server itself then for the air conditioning required (this thing pumps out a lot of heat) Noise (of which there is a lot) IT support bills (both Windows Server and Exchange are pretty complicated, and there are many ways they can go wrong) I've found ways to replace many of these functions with cheaper (better?) alternatives: Google Apps / GMail is a clear win for us: we have so many spam related problems it's not even funny, and Outlook is dog slow on our aging computers You can buy networked storage devices with built in print servers, such as the Netgear ReadyNAS™ RND4210 that would allow us to store/share all of our documents, and allow us to access printers over the network The only thing that I can't figure out how to do away with is the authentication side of things - it seems to me that if we got rid of our server, you'd essentially have a bunch of independent PCs that had no shared pool of user accounts / no central administrator. Is that right? Does that matter? Am I missing any other good reasons to keep a central server? Does anybody know of any good, cost-effective ways of achieving the same end but without the expensive central server?

    Read the article

  • Random "not accessible" "you might not have permission to use this network resource"

    - by Jim Fred
    A couple of computers, both Win7-64 can connect to shares on a NAS server, at least most of the time. At random intervals, these Win7-64 computers cannot access some shares but can access others on the same NAS. When access is denied, a dialog box appears saying "\\myServer\MyShare02 not accessible...you might not have permission to use this network resource..." Other shares, say \\myServer\MyShare01, ARE accessible from the affected computers and yet other computers CAN access the affected shares. Reboots of the affected computers seem to allow the affected computer to connect to the affected shares - but then, getting a cup of coffee seems to help too. When the problem appears, the network seems to be ok e.g. the affected computers can access other shares on the affected server and can ping etc. Also Other computers can access the affected shares. The NAS server is a NetGear ReadyNas Pro. The problem might be on the NAS side such as a resource limitation but since only 2 Win7-64 PCs seem to be affected the most, the problem could be on the PC side - I'm not sure yet. I of course searched for solutions and found several tips addressing initial connection problems (use correct workgroup name, use IP address instead of server name, remove security restrictions etc) but none of those remedies address the random nature of this problem.

    Read the article

  • Critique My Backup and Storage Plan

    - by MetaHyperBolic
    My current storage (RAID-1 off of a hardware RAID card) and backup (a spare drive) solutions for my home network are inadequate. I have too much data scattered on various one-off drives. It is time to evolve. Backups seem simple enough, at least: lots of big drives. However, I am bewildered by the number of choices for small home storage. The Drobo S looks appealing. So does the ReadyNAS. I am not looking for bunches of shiny features, I'm mostly interested in reliability. I am not interested in building Yet Another PC to create a file server or doing something in the cloud, or whatever. I'm stupid, so I am keeping it simple. Requirements for Main Volume: Starting working space roughly 2TB, with options for growth up to 5TB RAID or something RAID-like with at least one parity drive eSATA II for speed during backups Ability to shut down gracefully when alerted of low power by a UPS Optional but Desirable: Will take 2TB drives now with options for the larger 3TB drives coming in 2010-2011 Optional but Desirable: : RAID-6 or something similar, with two parity drives Optional but Desirable: : Hot spare Ethernet connection not required, as the volume will be shared via the same machines which runs my home print server Backups: Backup performed via ROBOCOPY in mirror mode to an external hard drive via a eSATA II connection. Start with rotating between two external 2TB hard drives, will go up to six external 2TB drives. Start with a weekly backup, move to a bi-weekly backup as more drives are added. Move to 3TB drives as the size of my main volume increases. Backup drives will be stored on an off-site location. Hard drives: I plan on buying all of the same model, but different batches from different vendors. I found a "burn-in" utility with which I can pound away on the drives for a couple of weeks before adding them to the backup pool or the main volume. I estimate that I am looking at roughly $1,500 to start, once I start throwing in two TB drives for backup and four for storage. So, are there any obvious flaws in my plan? What have I overlooked? Any suggestions for the storage device for my main volume that fits my requirements? Or do I just keep it simple, 2 drives in RAID-1, then perform due diligence with my backups, accepting that I will have to buy a whole new unit when my data grows past 2TB?

    Read the article

  • Can't get the L2TP IPSEC up and running

    - by Maciej Swic
    i have an Ubuntu 11.10 (oneiric) server running on a ReadyNAS. Im planning to use this to accept ipsec+l2tp connections through a router. However, the connection is failing somewhere half through. Using Openswan IPsec U2.6.28/K3.0.0-12-generic and trying to connect with an iOS 5 iPhone 4S. This is how far i can get: auth.log: Jan 19 13:54:11 ubuntu pluto[1990]: added connection description "PSK" Jan 19 13:54:11 ubuntu pluto[1990]: added connection description "L2TP-PSK-NAT" Jan 19 13:54:11 ubuntu pluto[1990]: added connection description "L2TP-PSK-noNAT" Jan 19 13:54:11 ubuntu pluto[1990]: added connection description "passthrough-for-non-l2tp" Jan 19 13:54:11 ubuntu pluto[1990]: listening for IKE messages Jan 19 13:54:11 ubuntu pluto[1990]: NAT-Traversal: Trying new style NAT-T Jan 19 13:54:11 ubuntu pluto[1990]: NAT-Traversal: ESPINUDP(1) setup failed for new style NAT-T family IPv4 (errno=19) Jan 19 13:54:11 ubuntu pluto[1990]: NAT-Traversal: Trying old style NAT-T Jan 19 13:54:11 ubuntu pluto[1990]: adding interface eth0/eth0 192.168.19.99:500 Jan 19 13:54:11 ubuntu pluto[1990]: adding interface eth0/eth0 192.168.19.99:4500 Jan 19 13:54:11 ubuntu pluto[1990]: adding interface lo/lo 127.0.0.1:500 Jan 19 13:54:11 ubuntu pluto[1990]: adding interface lo/lo 127.0.0.1:4500 Jan 19 13:54:11 ubuntu pluto[1990]: adding interface lo/lo ::1:500 Jan 19 13:54:11 ubuntu pluto[1990]: adding interface eth0/eth0 2001:470:28:81:a00:27ff:* Jan 19 13:54:11 ubuntu pluto[1990]: loading secrets from "/etc/ipsec.secrets" Jan 19 13:54:11 ubuntu pluto[1990]: loading secrets from "/var/lib/openswan/ipsec.secrets.inc" Jan 19 14:04:31 ubuntu pluto[1990]: packet from 95.*.*.233:500: received Vendor ID payload [RFC 3947] method set to=109 Jan 19 14:04:31 ubuntu pluto[1990]: packet from 95.*.*.233:500: received Vendor ID payload [draft-ietf-ipsec-nat-t-ike] method set to=110 Jan 19 14:04:31 ubuntu pluto[1990]: packet from 95.*.*.233:500: ignoring unknown Vendor ID payload [8f8d83826d246b6fc7a8a6a428c11de8] Jan 19 14:04:31 ubuntu pluto[1990]: packet from 95.*.*.233:500: ignoring unknown Vendor ID payload [439b59f8ba676c4c7737ae22eab8f582] Jan 19 14:04:31 ubuntu pluto[1990]: packet from 95.*.*.233:500: ignoring unknown Vendor ID payload [4d1e0e136deafa34c4f3ea9f02ec7285] Jan 19 14:04:31 ubuntu pluto[1990]: packet from 95.*.*.233:500: ignoring unknown Vendor ID payload [80d0bb3def54565ee84645d4c85ce3ee] Jan 19 14:04:31 ubuntu pluto[1990]: packet from 95.*.*.233:500: ignoring unknown Vendor ID payload [9909b64eed937c6573de52ace952fa6b] Jan 19 14:04:31 ubuntu pluto[1990]: packet from 95.*.*.233:500: received Vendor ID payload [draft-ietf-ipsec-nat-t-ike-03] meth=108, but already using method 110 Jan 19 14:04:31 ubuntu pluto[1990]: packet from 95.*.*.233:500: received Vendor ID payload [draft-ietf-ipsec-nat-t-ike-02] meth=107, but already using method 110 Jan 19 14:04:31 ubuntu pluto[1990]: packet from 95.*.*.233:500: received Vendor ID payload [draft-ietf-ipsec-nat-t-ike-02_n] meth=106, but already using method 110 Jan 19 14:04:31 ubuntu pluto[1990]: packet from 95.*.*.233:500: received Vendor ID payload [Dead Peer Detection] Jan 19 14:04:31 ubuntu pluto[1990]: "PSK"[1] 95.*.*.233 #1: responding to Main Mode from unknown peer 95.*.*.233 Jan 19 14:04:31 ubuntu pluto[1990]: "PSK"[1] 95.*.*.233 #1: transition from state STATE_MAIN_R0 to state STATE_MAIN_R1 Jan 19 14:04:31 ubuntu pluto[1990]: "PSK"[1] 95.*.*.233 #1: STATE_MAIN_R1: sent MR1, expecting MI2 Jan 19 14:04:33 ubuntu pluto[1990]: "PSK"[1] 95.*.*.233 #1: NAT-Traversal: Result using draft-ietf-ipsec-nat-t-ike (MacOS X): both are NATed Jan 19 14:04:33 ubuntu pluto[1990]: "PSK"[1] 95.*.*.233 #1: transition from state STATE_MAIN_R1 to state STATE_MAIN_R2 Jan 19 14:04:33 ubuntu pluto[1990]: "PSK"[1] 95.*.*.233 #1: STATE_MAIN_R2: sent MR2, expecting MI3 Jan 19 14:05:03 ubuntu pluto[1990]: ERROR: asynchronous network error report on eth0 (sport=500) for message to 95.*.*.233 port 500, complainant 95.*.*.233: Connection refused [errno 111, origin ICMP type 3 code 3 (not authenticated)] Router config UDP 500, 1701 and 4500 forwarded to 192.168.19.99 (Ubuntu server for ipsec). Ipsec passthrough enabled. /etc/ipsec.conf # /etc/ipsec.conf - Openswan IPsec configuration file # This file: /usr/share/doc/openswan/ipsec.conf-sample # # Manual: ipsec.conf.5 version 2.0 # conforms to second version of ipsec.conf specification config setup nat_traversal=yes #charonstart=yes #plutostart=yes protostack=netkey conn PSK authby=secret forceencaps=yes pfs=no auto=add keyingtries=3 dpdtimeout=60 dpdaction=clear rekey=no left=192.168.19.99 leftnexthop=192.168.19.1 leftprotoport=17/1701 right=%any rightprotoport=17/%any rightsubnet=vhost:%priv,%no dpddelay=10 #dpdtimeout=10 #dpdaction=clear include /etc/ipsec.d/l2tp-psk.conf /etc/ipsec.d/l2tp-psk.conf conn L2TP-PSK-NAT rightsubnet=vhost:%priv also=L2TP-PSK-noNAT conn L2TP-PSK-noNAT # # PreSharedSecret needs to be specified in /etc/ipsec.secrets as # YourIPAddress %any: "sharedsecret" authby=secret pfs=no auto=add keyingtries=3 # we cannot rekey for %any, let client rekey rekey=no # Set ikelifetime and keylife to same defaults windows has ikelifetime=8h keylife=1h # l2tp-over-ipsec is transport mode type=transport # left=192.168.19.99 # # For updated Windows 2000/XP clients, # to support old clients as well, use leftprotoport=17/%any leftprotoport=17/1701 # # The remote user. # right=%any # Using the magic port of "0" means "any one single port". This is # a work around required for Apple OSX clients that use a randomly # high port, but propose "0" instead of their port. rightprotoport=17/%any dpddelay=10 dpdtimeout=10 dpdaction=clear conn passthrough-for-non-l2tp type=passthrough left=192.168.19.99 leftnexthop=192.168.19.1 right=0.0.0.0 rightsubnet=0.0.0.0/0 auto=route /etc/ipsec.secrets include /var/lib/openswan/ipsec.secrets.inc %any %any: PSK "my-key" 192.168.19.99 %any: PSK "my-key" /etc/xl2tpd/xl2tpd.conf [global] debug network = yes debug tunnel = yes ipsec saref = no listen-addr = 192.168.19.99 [lns default] ip range = 192.168.19.201-192.168.19.220 local ip = 192.168.19.99 require chap = yes refuse chap = no refuse pap = no require authentication = no ppp debug = yes pppoptfile = /etc/ppp/options.xl2tpd length bit = yes /etc/ppp/options.xl2tpd pcp-accept-local ipcp-accept-remote noccp auth crtscts idle 1800 mtu 1410 mru 1410 defaultroute debug lock proxyarp connect-delay 5000 ipcp-accept-local /etc/ppp/chap-secrets # Secrets for authentication using CHAP # client server secret IP addresses maciekish * my-secret * * maciekish my-secret * I can't seem to find the problem. Other ipsec connections to other hosts work from the network im currently at.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 1 2