Search Results

Search found 4786 results on 192 pages for 'traffic shaping'.

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

Page 21/192 | < Previous Page | 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28  | Next Page >

  • SEO and Increasing Website Traffic

    In today's modern world, a website is the equivalent of a huge billboard outside your office. It is your advertising window to all your customers and you want people to see it. There is not much point in having an all singing, all dancing website that nobody visits!

    Read the article

  • How to Increase Website Traffic and Visibility

    The Internet has over the recent past turned around the way businesses operate and market their products and services. There is however one problem that many companies are facing even after designing some of the most elaborate websites to market themselves and this is web visibility.

    Read the article

  • Flow of packet in network

    - by user58859
    I can't visualize in my mind the network traffic flow. eg. If there are 15 pc's in a LAN. When packet goes from router to local LAN, do it passes all the computers? Means did it goes to ehernet card of every computer and those computers accept the packet based on their physical address. To which pc the packet will go first? To the nearest to the router? What happen if that first pc captures that packet(though it is not for it)? What happens when a pc broadcast a message? Do it have to generate 14 packets for all the pc's or only one packet reach to all pc's? If it is one packet and captured by first pc, how other pc's can get that? I can't imagine how this traffic is exactly flows? May be my analogy is completely wrong. Can anybody explain me this? Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • powershell v2 remoting - How do you enable unecrypted traffic

    - by Peter Walke
    I'm writing a powershell v2 script that I'd like to run against a remote server. When I run it, I get the error : Connecting to remote server failed with the following error message : The WinRM client cannot process the request. Unencrypted traffic is currently disabled in the client configuration. Change the client configurati on and try the request again. For more information, see the about_ Remote_Troubleshooting Help topic. I looked at the online help for about _ Remote_Troubleshooting, but it didn't point me towards how to enable unecrypted traffic. Below is the script that I'm using that is causing me problems. Note: I have already run Enable-PSRemoting on the remote machine to allow it to accept incoming requests. I have tried to use a session option variable, but it doesn't seem to make any difference. $key = "HKLM:\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\PowerShell\1\ShellIds" Set-ItemProperty $key ConsolePrompting True $tvar = "password" $password = ConvertTo-SecureString -string $tvar -asPlainText –force $username="domain\username" $mySessionOption = New-PSSessionOption -NoEncryption $credential = New-Object System.Management.Automation.PSCredential($username,$password) invoke-command -filepath C:\scripts\RemoteScript.ps1 -sessionoption $mySessionOption -authentication digest -credential $credential -computername RemoteServer How do I enable unencrypted traffic?

    Read the article

  • Routing WIFI and LAN for specific traffic

    - by jakebird451
    I have two network devices aboard my macbook pro: WIFI (en1): Used for general traffic. Connects to an ip of 192.168.19.* via DHCP LAN (en0): Used for specific traffic. Connects to an ip of 192.168.2.10 as a static IP. Does not connect to a router, only a switch for direct routing connection. I have 4 IP addresses I need to access on the LAN: 192.168.2.1 192.168.2.21 192.168.2.20 192.168.2.30 The rest of the traffic needs to go to WIFI. I have tried setting up a routing table for the specific ip addresses, but I only managed to mess up my network. I do not venture out into the world of networking too often, but this was the latest command I have been trying: sudo route add -host 192.168.2.30 -interface en0 This command killed my ability to use ping. It told me that ping could not allocate memory (is that even possible)? It also killed my wifi access. Logging out and back in fixed the issue. I really do not mind to make this solution permanent, so I am fine with a temporary routing. EDIT: If I currently have been trying: sudo route flush sudo route add default 192.168.19.1 This gets everything to work for about a minute. But after such minute it "forgets" the routing to WiFi while retaining LAN's (en0) routing. If I unplug and replug my LAN (en0) cable, the process works for another minute.

    Read the article

  • Blocking HTTPS and P2P Traffic

    - by Genboy
    I have a Debian server running at the gateway level on a LAN. This runs squid for creating block lists of websites - for eg. blocking social networking on the LAN. Also uses iptables. I am able to do a lot of things with squid & iptables, but a few things seem difficult to achieve. 1) If I block facebook through their http url, people can still access https://www.facebook.com because squid doesn't go through https traffic by default. However, if the users set the gateway IP address as proxy on their web browser, then https is also blocked. So I can do one thing - using iptables drop all outgoing 443 traffic, so that people are forced to set proxy on their browser in order to browse any HTTPS traffic. However, is there a better solution for this. 2) As the number of blocked urls increase in squid, I am planning to integrate squidguard. However, the good squidguard lists are not free for commercial use. Anyone knows of a good squidguard list which is free. 3) Block yahoo messenger, gtalk etc. There are so many ports on which these Instant Messenger softwares work. You need to drop lots of outgoing ports in iptables. However, new ports get added, so you have to keep adding them. And even if your list of ports is current, people can still use the web version of gtalk etc. 4) Blocking P2P. Haven't been able to figure out how to do this till now.

    Read the article

  • iptables to block non-VPN-traffic if not through tun0

    - by dacrow
    I have a dedicated Webserver running Debian 6 and some Apache, Tomcat, Asterisk and Mail-stuff. Now we needed to add VPN support for a special program. We installed OpenVPN and registered with a VPN provider. The connection works well and we have a virtual tun0 interface for tunneling. To archive the goal for only tunneling a single program through VPN, we start the program with sudo -u username -g groupname command and added a iptables rule to mark all traffic coming from groupname iptables -t mangle -A OUTPUT -m owner --gid-owner groupname -j MARK --set-mark 42 Afterwards we tell iptables to to some SNAT and tell ip route to use special routing table for marked traffic packets. Problem: if the VPN failes, there is a chance that the special to-be-tunneled program communicates over the normal eth0 interface. Desired solution: All marked traffic should not be allowed to go directly through eth0, it has to go through tun0 first. I tried the following commands which didn't work: iptables -A OUTPUT -m owner --gid-owner groupname ! -o tun0 -j REJECT iptables -A OUTPUT -m owner --gid-owner groupname -o eth0 -j REJECT It might be the problem, that the above iptable-rules didn't work due to the fact, that the packets are first marked, then put into tun0 and then transmitted by eth0 while they are still marked.. I don't know how to de-mark them after in tun0 or to tell iptables, that all marked packet may pass eth0, if they where in tun0 before or if they going to the gateway of my VPN provider. Does someone has any idea to a solution? Some config infos: iptables -nL -v --line-numbers -t mangle Chain OUTPUT (policy ACCEPT 11M packets, 9798M bytes) num pkts bytes target prot opt in out source destination 1 591K 50M MARK all -- * * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 owner GID match 1005 MARK set 0x2a 2 82812 6938K CONNMARK all -- * * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 owner GID match 1005 CONNMARK save iptables -nL -v --line-numbers -t nat Chain POSTROUTING (policy ACCEPT 393 packets, 23908 bytes) num pkts bytes target prot opt in out source destination 1 15 1052 SNAT all -- * tun0 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 mark match 0x2a to:VPN_IP ip rule add from all fwmark 42 lookup 42 ip route show table 42 default via VPN_IP dev tun0

    Read the article

  • VLAN Tagging Traffic on Cisco Switch

    - by David W
    I have a situation where I'm setting up multiple VLANS on a pfSense firewall on the same physical interface for a client. So in pfSense, I now have VLAN 100 (employees) and VLAN 200 (students - student computer lab). Downstream from pfSense, I have a Cisco SG200 switch, and coming off of the SG200 is the student lab (running on a Catalyst 2950. Yes, that's old, but it works, and this is a poor nonprofit we're talking about). What I'd like to do is tag everything on the network as VLAN 100, except for the student computer lab. Earlier today when I was on-site with the client, I went into to the old Catalyst 2950, and assigned all of its ports to access VLAN 200 (switchport mode access vlan 200) without setting up a trunk on the Catalyst or on the SG200. Looking back on it, I now understand why internet in the lab broke. I reverted the lab back to the default VLAN1 (we're still running on a different firewall - we haven't deployed pfSense -, and the traffic is still separated physically). So my question is, what do I need to do in order to properly deploy this scenario? I believe the correct answer is: Ensure VLANs 100 and 200 are setup in pfSense, and that DHCP is operating correctly (on separate subnets) Setup a trunkport VLAN that allows both 100 & 200 traffic, and plug that port directly into pfSense. Setup a VLAN 200 trunkport on the SG200 (It's not running iOS, but if it were, the command would be switchport trunk native vlan 200), which will then plug into the Catalyst 2950. Setup a VLAN 200 trunkport on the Catalyst 2950 (that is plugged into the SG200 VLAN200 port with the same command - switchport trunk native vlan 200) Setup the rest of the ports on the old Catalyst 2950 in the lab to be access ports on VLAN200. Is there anything that I'm missing, or do I need to tweak any of these steps, in order to properly segment the network traffic?

    Read the article

  • Route specific network traffic through vpn in virtualbox guest

    - by Sander
    I am running OSX with a windows server 2008 guest in Virtualbox. My goal is to route some of the network traffic in the host through the server guest. This is because the win2008 server has a VPN connection to my workplace using a Smartcard solution which can not operate on OSX. My current set-up is like this: OSX (Host): connected to the internet via en01 Win2008 (Guest): connected to the internet using NAT (lan1 in guest) has a SSTP VPN connection to my workplace is connected to the guest using an Host Only Adapter vboxnet0 (LAN2 in guest) The important part is about the host (OSX). Primarily I want all network traffic to just go through en01. However, all traffic which can only be accessed through the VPN must go through the guest and through the VPN. I have one specific FQDN which can only be accessed through the VPN (say corp.mycompany.com). I do not know much about networking. I thought I would be able to get it to work by bridging together LAN2 and LAN1 but this didn't seem to work this: http://archives.aidanfindlater.com/blog/2010/02/03/use-vpn-for-specific-sites-on-mac-os-x/ using a loopback adapter on WinXP (when I did not have win2008 yet, but this doesn't work because I can't create a PPTP connection) And I've also read about Routing and Remote Access but I have no idea on how to use this. Can someone help me in the right direction?

    Read the article

  • iptables to block VPN-traffic if not through tun0

    - by dacrow
    I have a dedicated Webserver running Debian 6 and some Apache, Tomcat, Asterisk and Mail-stuff. Now we needed to add VPN support for a special program. We installed OpenVPN and registered with a VPN provider. The connection works well and we have a virtual tun0 interface for tunneling. To archive the goal for only tunneling a single program through VPN, we start the program with sudo -u username -g groupname command and added a iptables rule to mark all traffic coming from groupname iptables -t mangle -A OUTPUT -m owner --gid-owner groupname -j MARK --set-mark 42 Afterwards we tell iptables to to some SNAT and tell ip route to use special routing table for marked traffic packets. Problem: if the VPN failes, there is a chance that the special to-be-tunneled program communicates over the normal eth0 interface. Desired solution: All marked traffic should not be allowed to go directly through eth0, it has to go through tun0 first. I tried the following commands which didn't work: iptables -A OUTPUT -m owner --gid-owner groupname ! -o tun0 -j REJECT iptables -A OUTPUT -m owner --gid-owner groupname -o eth0 -j REJECT It might be the problem, that the above iptable-rules didn't work due to the fact, that the packets are first marked, then put into tun0 and then transmitted by eth0 while they are still marked.. I don't know how to de-mark them after in tun0 or to tell iptables, that all marked packet may pass eth0, if they where in tun0 before or if they going to the gateway of my VPN provider. Does someone has any idea to a solution? Some config infos: iptables -nL -v --line-numbers -t mangle Chain OUTPUT (policy ACCEPT 11M packets, 9798M bytes) num pkts bytes target prot opt in out source destination 1 591K 50M MARK all -- * * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 owner GID match 1005 MARK set 0x2a 2 82812 6938K CONNMARK all -- * * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 owner GID match 1005 CONNMARK save iptables -nL -v --line-numbers -t nat Chain POSTROUTING (policy ACCEPT 393 packets, 23908 bytes) num pkts bytes target prot opt in out source destination 1 15 1052 SNAT all -- * tun0 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 mark match 0x2a to:VPN_IP ip rule add from all fwmark 42 lookup 42 ip route show table 42 default via VPN_IP dev tun0

    Read the article

  • What does "incoming" and "outgoing" traffic mean?

    - by mgibsonbr
    I've seen many resources explaining how to set up a server's firewall to allow incoming and outgoing traffic on HTTP standard ports (80 and 443), but I can't figure out why I would need either of them. Do I need to unblock both for a "regular" web site to work? For file uploads to work? Are there situations where it would be advisable to unblock one and leave the other blocked? Sorry if that's a basic question, but I couldn't find it explained anywhere (also I'm not a native english speaker). I know in a "regular" web site the client is always the one who initiates a request, so I'm assuming a web server must accept incoming traffic on those ports, and my common sense tells me the server is allowed to send a response without unblocking anything else (otherwise it wouldn't make sense to have two types of rules). Is that correct? But what is an outgoing web (service) traffic, and what would be its use? AFAIK if the server wanted to initiate a connection with another machine, the specific port that matters is the one in the other end (i.e. the destination port would be 80), on its end any free port could be used (the source port would be random). I can open HTTP requests from my server (using wget for instance) without unblocking anything. So I'm assuming my concepts of "incoming" and "outgoing" are wrong somehow.

    Read the article

  • Passwortgeschützter Traffic-meter

    - by UncleBob
    Hallo erstmal, ich habe hier ein kleines Problem für das ich bis jetzt noch keine Lösung habe. Ich lebe in Bosnien und teile hier die Internetverbindung mit der Vermieterin, und wie es in Bosnien so ist haben wir keine Flatrate, sondern eine 15 Giga traffic limite. Das wäre eigentlich mehr als genug, wenn der Sohn der Vermieterin nicht immer überziehen würde, sodass die Rechnungen immer ziemlich teuer ausfallen. Ich habe ihm bereits ein Messprogramm installiert, aber das schaltet er offensichtlich aus sobald er in die Nähe seiner Limite kommt und behauptet dann die Limite nicht überzogen zu haben. Ich brauche also mindestens ein Messprogramm das Passwortgeschützt ist und/oder im Log Zeiten vermerkt wärend denen es nicht eingeschaltet war. Noch besser wäre ein Programm das ihm den Netzzugriff einfach abklemmt wenn er seinen Anteil überschreitet, also eine Mischung aus Trafic-meter und Parental Guard. Kann mir da jemand weiterhelfen? Gtranslated version Hi first, I have a small problem for which I yet have no solution. I live in Bosnia and share the Internet connection here with the owner, and how it is in Bosnia, we do not have a flat rate, but a 15 Giga traffic limite. That would actually would be more than enough, if the son of the landlady does not always cover so that the bills always turn out quite expensive. I have it already installed a monitoring program, but he apparently turns out as soon as he comes close to its limit and then claims not to have the limit excessive. I therefore need at least a measurement program that is password protected and / or in the log notes During low periods where it has not turned on. Even better would be a program that disconnects him from accessing the network if it simply exceeds its share, ie a mixture of Traffic parameters and Parental Guard. Can someone help me there?

    Read the article

  • Network topology for both direct and routed traffic between two nodes

    - by IndigoFire
    Despite it's small size, this is the most difficult network design problem I've faced. There are three nodes in this network: PC running Windows XP with an internal WiFi adapter.Base station with both WiFi and a Wireless Modem (WiModem)Mobile device with both WiFi and WiModem The modem is a low-bandwidth but high-reliability connection. We'd like to use WiFi for high-bandwidth stuff like file transfers when the mobile is nearby, and the modem for control information. Here's the tricky part: we'd like the wifi traffic to go directly from the mobile to the PC, as rebroadcasting packets on the same WiFi channel takes up double the bandwidth. We can do that with a manual configuration by giving the both the PC and the base station two IP addresses for their WiFi interfaces: one on a subnet shared with the mobile, and one on their own subnet. The routes on the PC are set up so that any traffic going to the mobile via WiModem goes through the secondary IP address so that return traffic from the mobile also goes through the WiModem. Here's what that looks like: PC WiFi 1: 192.168.2.10/24 WiFi 2: 192.168.3.10/24 Default route: 192.168.2.1 Base Station WiFi 1: 192.168.2.1/24 WiFi 2: 192.168.3.1/24 WiModem: 192.168.4.1/24 Mobile WiFi: 192.168.3.20/24 WiModem: 192.168.4.20/24 We'd like to move to having the base station automatically configure the mobile and PC, as the manual setup is problematic when you start having multiple mobiles and PCs. This means that the PC can only have 1 IP address and needs to be treated as being pretty simple. Is it possible to have a setup driven by DHCP on the base station that is efficient with bandwidth?

    Read the article

  • Possible for linux bridge to intercept traffic?

    - by A G
    I have a linux machine setup as a bridge between a client and a server; brctl addbr0 brctl addif br0 eth1 brctl addif br0 eth2 ifconfig eth1 0.0.0.0 ifconfig eth2 0.0.0.0 ip link set br0 up I also have an application listening on port 8080 of this machine. Is it possible to have traffic destined for port 80 to be passed to my application? I have done some research and it looks like it could be done using ebtables and iptables. Here is the rest of my setup: //set the ebtables to pass this traffic up to ip for processing; DROP on the broute table should do this ebtables -t broute -A BROUTING -p ipv4 --ip-proto tcp --ip-dport 80 -j redirect --redirect-target DROP //set iptables to forward this traffic to my app listening on port 8080 iptables -t mangle -A PREROUTING -p tcp --dport 80 -j TPROXY --on-port 8080 --tproxy-mark 1/1 iptables -t mangle -A PREROUTING -p tcp -j MARK --set-mark 1/1 //once the flows are marked, have them delivered locally via loopback interface ip rule add fwmark 1/1 table 1 ip route add local 0.0.0.0/0 dev lo table 1 //enable ip packet forwarding echo 1 > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_forward However nothing is coming into my application. Am I missing anything? My understanding is that the target DROP on the broute BROUTING chain will push it up to be processed by iptables. Secondly, are there any other alternatives I should investigate? Edit: IPtables gets it at nat PREROUTING, but it looks like it drops after that; the INPUT chain (in either mangle or filter) doesn't see the packet.

    Read the article

  • Routing WIFI and LAN for specific traffic

    - by jakebird451
    I have two network devices aboard my macbook pro: WIFI (en1): Used for general traffic. Connects to an ip of 192.168.19.* via DHCP LAN (en0): Used for specific traffic. Connects to an ip of 192.168.2.10 as a static IP. Does not connect to a router, only a switch for direct routing connection. I have 4 IP addresses I need to access on the LAN: 192.168.2.1 192.168.2.21 192.168.2.20 192.168.2.30 The rest of the traffic needs to go to WIFI. I have tried setting up a routing table for the specific ip addresses, but I only managed to mess up my network. I do not venture out into the world of networking too often, but this was the latest command I have been trying: sudo route add -host 192.168.2.30 -interface en0 This command killed my ability to use ping. It told me that ping could not allocate memory (is that even possible)? It also killed my wifi access. Logging out and back in fixed the issue. I really do not mind to make this solution permanent, so I am fine with a temporary routing.

    Read the article

  • Troubleshooting unwanted NTP Traffic

    - by Jaxaeon
    A domain controller running Windows Server 2012 is sending NTP and NETBIOS traffic to an address that has never been configured as a time provider. The server logs give no indication that any NTP traffic is failing. The only place I see any evidence of this traffic is in pfSense system logs: (Blocked) Jun 9 08:48:50 DOMAIN 10.0.1.100:123 192.128.127.254:123 UDP (Blocked) Jun 9 08:48:53 DOMAIN 10.0.1.100:137 192.128.127.254:137 UDP As far as I can tell the NTP service is working normally otherwise: DC2.domain.com[10.0.1.101:123]: ICMP: 0ms delay NTP: -0.0131705s offset from DC1.domain.com RefID: DC1.domain.com [10.0.1.100] Stratum: 3 DC1.domain.com *** PDC ***[10.0.1.100:123]: ICMP: 0ms delay NTP: +0.0000000s offset from DC1.domain.com RefID: clock1.albyny.inoc.net [64.246.132.14] Stratum: 2 The time provider NtpClient is currently receiving valid time data from 1.pool.ntp.org,0×1 (ntp.m|0x0|0.0.0.0:123->204.2.134.163:123). The time provider NtpClient is currently receiving valid time data from 0.pool.ntp.org,0×1 (ntp.m|0x0|0.0.0.0:123->64.246.132.14:123). The time service is now synchronizing the system time with the time source 0.pool.ntp.org,0×1 (ntp.m|0x0|0.0.0.0:123->64.246.132.14:123). I've been inside and out of the NTP configuration and cannot find any reason for this traffic. Reverse DNS points the destination address to nothing.attdns.com. pinging nothing.attdns.com from the domain controller in question leads to a response from loopback (127.0.0.2) which makes my head hurt. Any ideas? EDIT1: It should probably be noted that after a dns flush, nslookup 192.128.127.254 returns nothing.attdns.com. 192.128.127.254 is not present in domain.com DNS records. The attdns.com domain is not present in cached lookups. 127.in-addr.arpa is clean of any funkyness. EDIT2: The loopback ping response from nothing.attdns.com is possibly unrelated. Machines on other networks are also displaying this behavior. EDIT3: As mentioned in the comments, I tracked the problem network adapter back to my pfSense VM hosted in esxi 5.5 (I know shame on me for virtualizing a firewall). pfSense was configured to use DC1.domain.com as its primary time provider, but upon changing it back to pool.ntp.org the problem persists. pfSense logs give no indication of NTP misconfiguration. Everywhere I can think to look this VM is identified as 10.0.1.253, so I still have no idea why it’s sending NTP requests as 192.128… Since this firewall was a temporary solution to a problem that no longer exists so I am going to decommission it. EDIT4: The queries were coming from another machine sharing the same virtual adapter as the firewall. The machine has two local adapters: one for LAN, and the other for attached hardware that uses an Ethernet connection. That hardware sits in the the mystery subnet, and the machine is broadcasting NTP requests over both adapters.

    Read the article

  • Nginx traffic is going to wrong upsteam when mixing named servers and default servers

    - by Morgan
    I have the below config file for nginx. The problem is all traffic is going to upstream clustera. How do I configure nginx to only send traffic for example.com to clustera and all the rest to clusterb? user www-data; worker_processes 1; error_log /var/log/nginx/error.log; pid /var/run/nginx.pid; events { worker_connections 1024; } http { include /etc/nginx/mime.types; log_format cache '\n*** $remote_addr [$time_local] ' '[$upstream_cache_status] $upstream_response_time ' '$host "$request" ($status) $body_bytes_sent ' '"$http_referer" "$http_user_agent" ' 'Cache-Control: $upstream_http_cache_control ' 'Expires: $upstream_http_expires ' ; access_log /var/log/nginx/access.log cache; sendfile on; keepalive_timeout 65; gzip on; gzip_vary on; gzip_comp_level 6; gzip_proxied any; gzip_disable "MSIE [1-6]\.(?!.*SV1)"; gzip_buffers 16 8k; include /etc/nginx/conf.d/*.conf; proxy_cache_key "$scheme$host$request_uri"; proxy_cache_path /var/cache/nginx levels=1:2 keys_zone=main:10m max_size=1g inactive=30m; upstream clustera { ip_hash; server a.example.com:80; } upstream clusterb { ip_hash; server b.example.com:80; } client_max_body_size 20m; client_body_buffer_size 128k; proxy_connect_timeout 300; proxy_send_timeout 300; proxy_read_timeout 300; # host for example.com should send traffic to clustera server { listen 80; server_name example.com; location ~*(png|jpeg|jpg|gif|ico|css|js)$ { proxy_pass http://clustera; proxy_set_header Host $host; proxy_set_header X-Real-IP $remote_addr; proxy_set_header X-Forwarded-For $proxy_add_x_forwarded_for; proxy_cache main; proxy_cache_valid 200 5m; proxy_cache_valid 302 1m; } location / { proxy_pass http://clustera; proxy_set_header Host $host; proxy_set_header X-Real-IP $remote_addr; proxy_set_header X-Forwarded-For $proxy_add_x_forwarded_for; } } # host for everyone else. traffic goes to clusterb server { listen 80; server_name _; if ( $http_user_agent ~* (spider|crawler|slurp) ) { return 503; } set $slow 0; if ( $http_user_agent ~* (bot) ) { set $slow 1; } if ( $slow ) { set $limit_rate 1k; } location ~*(png|jpeg|jpg|gif|ico|css|js)$ { proxy_pass http://clusterb; proxy_set_header Host $host; proxy_set_header X-Real-IP $remote_addr; proxy_set_header X-Forwarded-For $proxy_add_x_forwarded_for; proxy_cache main; proxy_cache_valid 200 5m; proxy_cache_valid 302 1m; } location /images { proxy_pass http://clisterb; proxy_set_header Host $host; proxy_set_header X-Real-IP $remote_addr; proxy_set_header X-Forwarded-For $proxy_add_x_forwarded_for; proxy_cache main; proxy_cache_valid 200 5m; proxy_cache_valid 302 1m; } location / { proxy_pass http://clusterb; proxy_set_header Host $host; proxy_set_header X-Real-IP $remote_addr; proxy_set_header X-Forwarded-For $proxy_add_x_forwarded_for; } } }

    Read the article

  • Toggle Android emulator network traffic from emulator invocation

    - by highphi
    I'm working on scripts to manage large amounts of Android emulators and I need to disable all network traffic on some of them. Because I'm doing all of this on a headless server, I cannot use the F8 hotkey described on the emulater documentation. I'm currently routing the TCP traffic through a null proxy with by using emulator-arm ... -http-proxy 0.0.0.0:0 and this blocks the traffic that I want it to. I thought this was working well until I noticed some strange error messages while running my scripts. The console started outputting accept too many open files and checking the open files with lsof reveals numerous messages stating "can't identify protocol" ... emulator- 19463 username 19u sock 0,6 0t0 1976595845 can't identify protocol emulator- 19463 username 20u sock 0,6 0t0 1976595847 can't identify protocol ... The only "solution" I found to this is to kill all of the emulators and then wait until this limit is reached again, which is hardly a solution at all. Is there another way to do this while invoking the emulator? Am I incorrectly using the -htt-proxy switch to block the traffic? Other people found solutions to block traffic by manually doing this by using airplane mode, but this isn't feasible for me as I'm controlling emulators via scripts. I could send keyevents to the emulator with my script and turn the phone on in airplane mode, but I would prefer something more reliable than this.

    Read the article

  • Howto monitor traffic between IIS and MSSQL

    - by kockiren
    Hello @all, i try to check how much traffic flows between MSSQL Server and IIS Server in different Locations. There are 1 ipcop in every Location and i download the tcpdump file from one Firewall and search for DST=ipmssql and SRC=ipIIS but i did not find the ip from the Database Server. But there are traffic between both. Any suggestions why i did not find the IP Adress from the MSSQL Server? Is this an configuration failure in IPCop or is the Traffic between ISS and MSSQL so strange :-) Regards Rene

    Read the article

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

< Previous Page | 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28  | Next Page >