Search Results

Search found 5734 results on 230 pages for 'forward declarations'.

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 24/230 | < Previous Page | 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31  | Next Page >

  • OpenVPN IPv6 over IPv4 tunnel

    - by user66779
    Today I installed OpenVPN 2.3rc2 on both my windows 7 client machine and centos 6 server. This new version of OpenVPN provides full compatibility for IPv6. The Problem: I am currently able to connect to the server (through the IPv4 tunnel) and ping the IPv6 address which is assigned to my client and I can also ping the tun0 interface on the server. However, I cannot browse to any IPv6 websites. My vps provider has given me this: 2607:f840:0044:0022:0000:0000:0000:0000/64 is routed to this server (2607:f840:0:3f:0:0:0:eda). This is ifconfig after setup with OpenVPN running: eth0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:16:3E:12:77:54 inet addr:208.111.39.160 Bcast:208.111.39.255 Mask:255.255.255.0 inet6 addr: 2607:f740:0:3f::eda/64 Scope:Global inet6 addr: fe80::216:3eff:fe12:7754/64 Scope:Link UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 RX packets:2317253 errors:0 dropped:7263 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:1977414 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:1000 RX bytes:1696120096 (1.5 GiB) TX bytes:1735352992 (1.6 GiB) Interrupt:29 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:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:0 RX bytes:0 (0.0 b) TX bytes:0 (0.0 b) tun0 Link encap:UNSPEC HWaddr 00-00-00-00-00-00-00-00-00-00-00-00-00-00-00-00 inet addr:10.8.0.1 P-t-P:10.8.0.2 Mask:255.255.255.255 inet6 addr: 2607:f740:44:22::1/64 Scope:Global UP POINTOPOINT RUNNING NOARP MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 RX packets:739567 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:1218240 errors:0 dropped:1542 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:100 RX bytes:46512557 (44.3 MiB) TX bytes:1559930874 (1.4 GiB) So OpenVPN is sucessfully creating a tun0 interface and assigning clients IPv6 addresses using 2607:f840:44:22::/64. The first client to connect is getting 2607:f840:44:22::1000 and the second 2607:f840:44:22::1001, and so on... plus 1 each time. After connecting as the first client, I can ping from my windows client machine 2607:f740:44:22::1 and 2607:f740:44:22::1000. However, I have no access to IPv6 websites. I believe the problem is that the tun0 IPv6 addressees are not being forwarded to the eth0 interface. This is the firewall running on the server: #!/bin/sh # # iptables configuration script # # Flush all current rules from iptables # iptables -F iptables -t nat -F # # Allow SSH connections on tcp port 22 # iptables -A INPUT -i eth0 -p tcp --dport 22 -j ACCEPT iptables -A OUTPUT -o eth0 -p tcp --sport 22 -j ACCEPT # # Set access for localhost # iptables -A INPUT -i lo -j ACCEPT # # Accept connections on 1195 for vpn access from client # iptables -A INPUT -i eth0 -p udp --dport 1195 -m state --state NEW,ESTABLISHED -j ACCEPT iptables -A OUTPUT -o eth0 -p udp --sport 1195 -m state --state ESTABLISHED -j ACCEPT # # Apply forwarding for OpenVPN Tunneling # iptables -A FORWARD -m state --state RELATED,ESTABLISHED -j ACCEPT iptables -A FORWARD -s 10.8.0.0/24 -j ACCEPT iptables -t nat -A POSTROUTING -o eth0 -j SNAT --to 209.111.39.160 iptables -A FORWARD -j REJECT # # Enable forwarding # echo 1 > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_forward # # Set default policies for INPUT, FORWARD and OUTPUT chains # iptables -P INPUT ACCEPT iptables -P FORWARD ACCEPT iptables -P OUTPUT ACCEPT # # IPv6 # IP6TABLES=/sbin/ip6tables $IP6TABLES -F INPUT $IP6TABLES -F FORWARD $IP6TABLES -F OUTPUT echo -n "1" >/proc/sys/net/ipv6/conf/all/forwarding echo -n "1" >/proc/sys/net/ipv6/conf/all/proxy_ndp echo -n "0" >/proc/sys/net/ipv6/conf/all/autoconf echo -n "0" >/proc/sys/net/ipv6/conf/all/accept_ra $IP6TABLES -A INPUT -i eth0 -m state --state ESTABLISHED,RELATED -j ACCEPT $IP6TABLES -A INPUT -i eth0 -p tcp --dport 22 -j ACCEPT $IP6TABLES -A INPUT -i eth0 -p icmpv6 -j ACCEPT $IP6TABLES -P INPUT ACCEPT $IP6TABLES -P FORWARD ACCEPT $IP6TABLES -P OUTPUT ACCEPT Server.conf: server-ipv6 2607:f840:44:22::/64 server 10.8.0.0 255.255.255.0 port 1195 proto udp dev tun ca ca.crt cert server.crt key server.key dh dh2048.pem ifconfig-pool-persist ipp.txt push "redirect-gateway def1 bypass-dhcp" push "dhcp-option DNS 208.67.222.222" push "dhcp-option DNS 208.67.220.220" keepalive 10 60 tls-auth ta.key 0 cipher AES-256-CBC comp-lzo user nobody group nobody persist-key persist-tun status openvpn-status.log log-append openvpn.log verb 5 Client.conf: client dev tun nobind keepalive 10 60 hand-window 15 remote 209.111.39.160 1195 udp persist-key persist-tun ca ca.crt key client1.key cert client1.crt remote-cert-tls server tls-auth ta.key 1 comp-lzo verb 3 cipher AES-256-CBC I'm not sure where I am going wrong, it could be the firewall, or something missing from server or client.conf. This version of OpenVPN was only released yesterday, and there's little info on the internet about how to setup an IPv6 over IPv4 vpn tunnel. I've read the manual for this new version of OpenVPN (parts pertaining to IPv6) and it provides very little info too. Thanks for any help.

    Read the article

  • hostapd running on Ubuntu Server 13.04 only allows single station to connect when using wpa

    - by user450688
    Problem Only a single station can connect to hostapd at a time. Any single station can connect (W8, OSX, iOS, Nexus) but when two or more hosts are connected at the same time the first client loses its connectivity. However there are no connectivity issues when WPA is not used. Setup Linux (Ubuntu server 13.04) wireless router (with separate networks for wired WAN, wired LAN, and Wireless LAN. iptables-save output: *nat :PREROUTING ACCEPT [0:0] :INPUT ACCEPT [0:0] :OUTPUT ACCEPT [0:0] :POSTROUTING ACCEPT [0:0] -A POSTROUTING -s 10.0.0.0/24 -o p4p1 -j MASQUERADE -A POSTROUTING -s 10.0.1.0/24 -o p4p1 -j MASQUERADE COMMIT *mangle :PREROUTING ACCEPT [13:916] :INPUT ACCEPT [9:708] :FORWARD ACCEPT [4:208] :OUTPUT ACCEPT [9:3492] :POSTROUTING ACCEPT [13:3700] COMMIT *filter :INPUT DROP [0:0] :FORWARD DROP [0:0] :OUTPUT ACCEPT [9:3492] -A INPUT -i p4p1 -m state --state RELATED,ESTABLISHED -j ACCEPT -A INPUT -i p4p1 -p tcp -m tcp --dport 22 -m state --state NEW -j ACCEPT -A INPUT -i eth0 -j ACCEPT -A INPUT -i wlan0 -j ACCEPT -A INPUT -i lo -j ACCEPT -A FORWARD -i p4p1 -m state --state RELATED,ESTABLISHED -j ACCEPT -A FORWARD -i eth0 -j ACCEPT -A FORWARD -i wlan0 -j ACCEPT -A FORWARD -i lo -j ACCEPT COMMIT /etc/hostapd/hostapd.conf #Wireless Interface interface=wlan0 driver=nl80211 ssid=<removed> hw_mode=g channel=6 max_num_sta=15 auth_algs=3 ieee80211n=1 wmm_enabled=1 wme_enabled=1 #Configure Hardware Capabilities of Interface ht_capab=[HT40+][SMPS-STATIC][GF][SHORT-GI-20][SHORT-GI-40][RX-STBC12] #Accept all MAC address macaddr_acl=0 #Shared Key Authentication wpa=1 wpa_passphrase=<removed> wpa_key_mgmt=WPA-PSK wpa_pairwise=CCMP rsn_pairwise=CCMP ###IPad Connectivevity Repair ieee8021x=0 eap_server=0 Wireless Card #lshw output product: RT2790 Wireless 802.11n 1T/2R PCIe vendor: Ralink corp. physical id: 0 bus info: pci@0000:03:00.0 logical name: mon.wlan0 version: 00 serial: <removed> width: 32 bits clock: 33MHz capabilities: pm msi pciexpress bus_master cap_list logical wireless ethernet physical configuration: broadcast=yes driver=rt2800pci driverversion=3.8.0-25-generic firmware=0.34 ip=10.0.1.254 latency=0 link=yes multicast=yes wireless=IEEE 802.11bgn #iw list output Band 1: Capabilities: 0x272 HT20/HT40 Static SM Power Save RX Greenfield RX HT20 SGI RX HT40 SGI RX STBC 2-streams Max AMSDU length: 3839 bytes No DSSS/CCK HT40 Maximum RX AMPDU length 65535 bytes (exponent: 0x003) Minimum RX AMPDU time spacing: 2 usec (0x04) HT RX MCS rate indexes supported: 0-15, 32 TX unequal modulation not supported HT TX Max spatial streams: 1 HT TX MCS rate indexes supported may differ Frequencies: * 2412 MHz [1] (27.0 dBm) * 2417 MHz [2] (27.0 dBm) * 2422 MHz [3] (27.0 dBm) * 2427 MHz [4] (27.0 dBm) * 2432 MHz [5] (27.0 dBm) * 2437 MHz [6] (27.0 dBm) * 2442 MHz [7] (27.0 dBm) * 2447 MHz [8] (27.0 dBm) * 2452 MHz [9] (27.0 dBm) * 2457 MHz [10] (27.0 dBm) * 2462 MHz [11] (27.0 dBm) * 2467 MHz [12] (disabled) * 2472 MHz [13] (disabled) * 2484 MHz [14] (disabled) Bitrates (non-HT): * 1.0 Mbps * 2.0 Mbps (short preamble supported) * 5.5 Mbps (short preamble supported) * 11.0 Mbps (short preamble supported) * 6.0 Mbps * 9.0 Mbps * 12.0 Mbps * 18.0 Mbps * 24.0 Mbps * 36.0 Mbps * 48.0 Mbps * 54.0 Mbps max # scan SSIDs: 4 max scan IEs length: 2257 bytes Coverage class: 0 (up to 0m) Supported Ciphers: * WEP40 (00-0f-ac:1) * WEP104 (00-0f-ac:5) * TKIP (00-0f-ac:2) * CCMP (00-0f-ac:4) Available Antennas: TX 0 RX 0 Supported interface modes: * IBSS * managed * AP * AP/VLAN * WDS * monitor * mesh point software interface modes (can always be added): * AP/VLAN * monitor valid interface combinations: * #{ AP } <= 8, total <= 8, #channels <= 1 Supported commands: * new_interface * set_interface * new_key * new_beacon * new_station * new_mpath * set_mesh_params * set_bss * authenticate * associate * deauthenticate * disassociate * join_ibss * join_mesh * set_tx_bitrate_mask * set_tx_bitrate_mask * action * frame_wait_cancel * set_wiphy_netns * set_channel * set_wds_peer * Unknown command (84) * Unknown command (87) * Unknown command (85) * Unknown command (89) * Unknown command (92) * testmode * connect * disconnect Supported TX frame types: * IBSS: 0x00 0x10 0x20 0x30 0x40 0x50 0x60 0x70 0x80 0x90 0xa0 0xb0 0xc0 0xd0 0xe0 0xf0 * managed: 0x00 0x10 0x20 0x30 0x40 0x50 0x60 0x70 0x80 0x90 0xa0 0xb0 0xc0 0xd0 0xe0 0xf0 * AP: 0x00 0x10 0x20 0x30 0x40 0x50 0x60 0x70 0x80 0x90 0xa0 0xb0 0xc0 0xd0 0xe0 0xf0 * AP/VLAN: 0x00 0x10 0x20 0x30 0x40 0x50 0x60 0x70 0x80 0x90 0xa0 0xb0 0xc0 0xd0 0xe0 0xf0 * mesh point: 0x00 0x10 0x20 0x30 0x40 0x50 0x60 0x70 0x80 0x90 0xa0 0xb0 0xc0 0xd0 0xe0 0xf0 * P2P-client: 0x00 0x10 0x20 0x30 0x40 0x50 0x60 0x70 0x80 0x90 0xa0 0xb0 0xc0 0xd0 0xe0 0xf0 * P2P-GO: 0x00 0x10 0x20 0x30 0x40 0x50 0x60 0x70 0x80 0x90 0xa0 0xb0 0xc0 0xd0 0xe0 0xf0 * Unknown mode (10): 0x00 0x10 0x20 0x30 0x40 0x50 0x60 0x70 0x80 0x90 0xa0 0xb0 0xc0 0xd0 0xe0 0xf0 Supported RX frame types: * IBSS: 0x40 0xb0 0xc0 0xd0 * managed: 0x40 0xd0 * AP: 0x00 0x20 0x40 0xa0 0xb0 0xc0 0xd0 * AP/VLAN: 0x00 0x20 0x40 0xa0 0xb0 0xc0 0xd0 * mesh point: 0xb0 0xc0 0xd0 * P2P-client: 0x40 0xd0 * P2P-GO: 0x00 0x20 0x40 0xa0 0xb0 0xc0 0xd0 * Unknown mode (10): 0x40 0xd0 Device supports RSN-IBSS. HT Capability overrides: * MCS: ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff * maximum A-MSDU length * supported channel width * short GI for 40 MHz * max A-MPDU length exponent * min MPDU start spacing Device supports TX status socket option. Device supports HT-IBSS.

    Read the article

  • Hanging of host network connections when starting KVM guest on bridge

    - by Chris Phillips
    Hi, I've a KVM system upon which I'm running a network bridge directly between all VM's and a bond0 (eth0, eth1) on the host OS. As such, all machines are presented on the same subnet, available outside of the box. The bond is doing mode 1 active / passive, with an arp_ip_target set to the default gateway, which has caused some issues in itself, but I can't see the bond configs mattering here myself. I'm seeing odd things most times when I stop and start a guest on the platform, in that on the host I lose network connectivity (icmp, ssh) for about 30 seconds. I don't lose connectivity on the other already running VM's though... they can always ping the default GW, but the host can't. I say "about 30 seconds" but from some tests it actually seems to be 28 seconds usually (or at least, I lose 28 pings...) and I'm wondering if this somehow relates to the bridge config. I'm not running STP on the bridge at all, and the forwarding delay is set to 1 second, path cost on the bond0 lowered to 10 and port priority of bond0 also lowered to 1. As such I don't think that the bridge should ever be able to think that bond0 is not connected just fine (as continued guest connectivity implies) yet the IP of the host, which is on the bridge device (... could that matter?? ) becomes unreachable. I'm fairly sure it's about the bridged networking, but at the same time as this happens when a VM is started there are clearly loads of other things also happening so maybe I'm way off the mark. Lack of connectivity: # ping 10.20.11.254 PING 10.20.11.254 (10.20.11.254) 56(84) bytes of data. 64 bytes from 10.20.11.254: icmp_seq=1 ttl=255 time=0.921 ms 64 bytes from 10.20.11.254: icmp_seq=2 ttl=255 time=0.541 ms type=1700 audit(1293462808.589:325): dev=vnet6 prom=256 old_prom=0 auid=42949672 95 ses=4294967295 type=1700 audit(1293462808.604:326): dev=vnet7 prom=256 old_prom=0 auid=42949672 95 ses=4294967295 type=1700 audit(1293462808.618:327): dev=vnet8 prom=256 old_prom=0 auid=42949672 95 ses=4294967295 kvm: 14116: cpu0 unimplemented perfctr wrmsr: 0x186 data 0x130079 kvm: 14116: cpu0 unimplemented perfctr wrmsr: 0xc1 data 0xffdd694a kvm: 14116: cpu0 unimplemented perfctr wrmsr: 0x186 data 0x530079 64 bytes from 10.20.11.254: icmp_seq=30 ttl=255 time=0.514 ms 64 bytes from 10.20.11.254: icmp_seq=31 ttl=255 time=0.551 ms 64 bytes from 10.20.11.254: icmp_seq=32 ttl=255 time=0.437 ms 64 bytes from 10.20.11.254: icmp_seq=33 ttl=255 time=0.392 ms brctl output of relevant bridge: # brctl showstp brdev brdev bridge id 8000.b2e1378d1396 designated root 8000.b2e1378d1396 root port 0 path cost 0 max age 19.99 bridge max age 19.99 hello time 1.99 bridge hello time 1.99 forward delay 0.99 bridge forward delay 0.99 ageing time 299.95 hello timer 0.50 tcn timer 0.00 topology change timer 0.00 gc timer 0.04 flags vnet5 (3) port id 8003 state forwarding designated root 8000.b2e1378d1396 path cost 100 designated bridge 8000.b2e1378d1396 message age timer 0.00 designated port 8003 forward delay timer 0.00 designated cost 0 hold timer 0.00 flags vnet0 (2) port id 8002 state forwarding designated root 8000.b2e1378d1396 path cost 100 designated bridge 8000.b2e1378d1396 message age timer 0.00 designated port 8002 forward delay timer 0.00 designated cost 0 hold timer 0.00 flags bond0 (1) port id 0001 state forwarding designated root 8000.b2e1378d1396 path cost 10 designated bridge 8000.b2e1378d1396 message age timer 0.00 designated port 0001 forward delay timer 0.00 designated cost 0 hold timer 0.00 flags I do see the new port listed as learning, but in line with the forward delay, only for 1 or 2 seconds when polling the brctl output on a loop. All pointers, tips or stabs in the dark appreciated.

    Read the article

  • Forwarding udp ports iptables packets "lost"?

    - by Dindihi
    I have a Linux router (Debian 6.x) where i forward some ports to internal services. Some tcp ports (like 80, 22...) are OK. I have one Application listening on port 54277udp. No return is coming from this app, i only get Data on this port. Router: cat /proc/sys/net/ipv4/conf/all/rp_filter = 1 cat /proc/sys/net/ipv4/conf/eth0/forwarding = 1 cat /proc/sys/net/ipv4/conf/ppp0/forwarding = 1 $IPTABLES -t nat -I PREROUTING -p udp -i ppp0 --dport 54277 -j DNAT --to-destination $SRV_IP:54277 $IPTABLES -I FORWARD -p udp -d $SRV_IP --dport 54277 -j ACCEPT Also MASQUERADING internal traffic to ppp0(internet) is active & working. Default Policy INPUT&OUTPUT&FORWARD is DROP What is strange, when i do: tcpdump -p -vvvv -i ppp0 port 54277 I get a lot of traffic: 18:35:43.646133 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 57, id 0, offset 0, flags [DF], proto UDP (17), length 57) source.ip > own.external.ip..54277: [udp sum ok] UDP, length 29 18:35:43.652301 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 57, id 0, offset 0, flags [DF], proto UDP (17), length 57) source.ip > own.external.ip..54277: [udp sum ok] UDP, length 29 18:35:43.653324 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 57, id 0, offset 0, flags [DF], proto UDP (17), length 57) source.ip > own.external.ip..54277: [udp sum ok] UDP, length 29 18:35:43.655795 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 57, id 0, offset 0, flags [DF], proto UDP (17), length 57) source.ip > own.external.ip..54277: [udp sum ok] UDP, length 29 18:35:43.656727 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 57, id 0, offset 0, flags [DF], proto UDP (17), length 57) source.ip > own.external.ip..54277: [udp sum ok] UDP, length 29 18:35:43.659719 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 57, id 0, offset 0, flags [DF], proto UDP (17), length 57) source.ip > own.external.ip..54277: [udp sum ok] UDP, length 29 tcpdump -p -i eth0 port 54277 (on the same machine, the router) i get much less traffic. also on the destination $SRV_IP there are only a few packets coming in, but not all. INTERNAL SERVER: 19:15:30.039663 IP source.ip.52394 > 192.168.215.4.54277: UDP, length 16 19:15:30.276112 IP source.ip.52394 > 192.168.215.4.54277: UDP, length 16 19:15:30.726048 IP source.ip.52394 > 192.168.215.4.54277: UDP, length 16 So some udp ports are "ignored/dropped" ? Any idea what could be wrong? Edit: This is strange: The Forward rule has data packets, but the PREROUTING rule has 0 packets... iptables -nvL -t filter |grep 54277 Chain FORWARD (policy DROP 0 packets, 0 bytes) 168 8401 ACCEPT udp -- * * 0.0.0.0/0 192.168.215.4 state NEW,RELATED,ESTABLISHED udp dpt:54277 iptables -nvL -t nat |grep 54277 Chain PREROUTING (policy ACCEPT 405 packets, 24360 bytes) 0 0 DNAT udp -- ppp0 * 0.0.0.0/0 my.external.ip udp dpt:54277 state NEW,RELATED,ESTABLISHED to:192.168.215.4

    Read the article

  • Secure openVPN using IPTABLES

    - by bob franklin smith harriet
    Hey, I setup an openVPN server and it works ok. The next step is to secure it, I opted to use IPTABLES to only allow certain connections through but so far it is not working. I want to enable access to the network behind my openVPN server, and allow other services (web access), when iptables is disabaled or set to allow all this works fine, when using my following rules it does not. also note, I already configured openVPN itself to do what i want and it works fine, its only failing when iptables is started. Any help to tell me why this isnt working will appreciated here. These are the lines that I added in accordance with openVPN's recommendations, unfortunately testing these commands shows that they are requiered, they seem incredibly insecure though, any way to get around using them? # Allow TUN interface connections to OpenVPN server -A INPUT -i tun+ -j ACCEPT #allow TUN interface connections to be forwarded through other interfaces -A FORWARD -i tun+ -j ACCEPT # Allow TAP interface connections to OpenVPN server -A INPUT -i tap+ -j ACCEPT # Allow TAP interface connections to be forwarded through other interfaces -A FORWARD -i tap+ -j ACCEPT These are the new chains and commands i added to restrict access as much as possible unfortunately with these enabled, all that happens is the openVPN connection establishes fine, and then there is no access to the rest of the network behind the openVPN server note I am configuring the main iptables file and I am paranoid so all ports and ip addresses are altered, and -N etc appears before this so ignore that they dont appear. and i added some explanations of what i 'intended' these rules to do, so you dont waste time figuring out where i went wrong : 4 #accepts the vpn over port 1192 -A INPUT -p udp -m udp --dport 1192 -j ACCEPT -A INPUT -j INPUT-FIREWALL -A OUTPUT -j ACCEPT #packets that are to be forwarded from 10.10.1.0 network (all open vpn clients) to the internal network (192.168.5.0) jump to [sic]foward-firewall chain -A FORWARD -s 10.10.1.0/24 -d 192.168.5.0/24 -j FOWARD-FIREWALL #same as above, except for a different internal network -A FORWARD -s 10.10.1.0/24 -d 10.100.5.0/24 -j FOWARD-FIREWALL # reject any not from either of those two ranges -A FORWARD -j REJECT -A INPUT-FIREWALL -m state --state RELATED,ESTABLISHED -j ACCEPT -A INPUT-FIREWALL -p tcp -m tcp --dport 22 -j ACCEPT -A INPUT-FIREWALL -j REJECT -A FOWARD-FIREWALL -m state --state RELATED,ESTABLISHED -j ACCEPT #80 443 and 53 are accepted -A FOWARD-FIREWALL -m tcp -p tcp --dport 80 -j ACCEPT -A FOWARD-FIREWALL -m tcp -p tcp --dport 443 -j ACCEPT #192.168.5.150 = openVPN sever -A FOWARD-FIREWALL -m tcp -p tcp -d 192.168.5.150 --dport 53 -j ACCEPT -A FOWARD-FIREWALL -m udp -p udp -d 192.168.5.150 --dport 53 -j ACCEPT -A FOWARD-FIREWALL -j REJECT COMMIT now I wait :D

    Read the article

  • How to configure a tun interface on Linux for SSH port forwarding?

    - by sarshad
    I am trying to forward port 139 from a Windows machine to my Ubuntu SSH server on a tun interface with the ip address 10.0.0.1. This is so that I can access the windows shares on the machine on my Ubuntu server, through the reverse tunnel. I can forward ports to 127.0.0.1, but not to 10.0.0.1. On windows I am using the Tunnelier ssh client. On my Ubuntu server, the following message is printed in auth.log: Received disconnect from 124.109.51.154: 11: Server denied request for client-side server-2-client forwarding on 10.0.0.1:139. So far i have tried the following settings: GatewayPorts yes PermitTunnel yes AllowTcpForwarding yes in the /etc/ssh/sshd_config file, but it did not work. I set up the tun like this: sudo tunctl -t loc_0 -u myusername sudo ifconfig loc_0 inet 10.0.0.1 netmask 255.255.255.0 up The settings in the Tunneler ssh client should not matter because I can forward port 139 successfully to the Microsoft Loopback Adapter on a Windows machine running the WinSSHD server. Versions: Windows is XP SP3, Ubuntu is 10.10. Update: I tried to forward the port to a number greater than 1024 mentioning the IP address of the tun, and it successfully connected but the forwarding was done on 127.0.0.1 instead of the tun's IP address 10.0.0.1. So there are two separate problems now, when connecting from the Windows machine: 1) Forwarding on ports less than 1024 is probably being denied. How can we allow that on the server? 2) Forwarding is done only on 127.0.0.1 even if I mention 10.0.0.1 which is the tun's IP address. Another attempt: I also tried to forward port 22 of a Linux machine to the tun's port 55567. It showed success. But when I tried to ssh into that port using both local addresses, on the Linux machine in its debug display I got the error Connection failed: no route to host when using 127.0.0.1 to connect and simply Connection refused when using the tun's IP address. So the tun is not getting the forwarded port no matter we connect from a Windows client or a Linux client.

    Read the article

  • FTP not listing files behind firewall (setsockopt (ignored): Permission denied)

    - by KennyDs
    We are developing a Magento application that has a module that works with FTP. Today we deployed this on the testing environment which is setup in the following way: Gateway server which has the following iptables rules: # iptables -L -n -v Chain INPUT (policy ACCEPT 2 packets, 130 bytes) pkts bytes target prot opt in out source destination 0 0 ACCEPT all -- lo * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 165 13720 ACCEPT all -- * * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 state RELATED,ESTABLISHED Chain FORWARD (policy ACCEPT 7 packets, 606 bytes) pkts bytes target prot opt in out source destination 0 0 ACCEPT all -- eth1 eth0 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 state RELATED,ESTABLISHED 15 965 ACCEPT all -- eth0 eth1 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 0 0 REJECT all -- eth1 eth1 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 reject-with icmp-port-unreachable Chain OUTPUT (policy ACCEPT 126 packets, 31690 bytes) pkts bytes target prot opt in out source destination These are set at runtime via the following bash script: #!/bin/sh PATH=/usr/sbin:/sbin:/bin:/usr/bin # # delete all existing rules. # iptables -F iptables -t nat -F iptables -t mangle -F iptables -X # Always accept loopback traffic iptables -A INPUT -i lo -j ACCEPT # Allow established connections, and those not coming from the outside iptables -A INPUT -m state --state ESTABLISHED,RELATED -j ACCEPT iptables -A FORWARD -i eth1 -o eth0 -m state --state ESTABLISHED,RELATED -j ACCEPT # Allow outgoing connections from the LAN side. iptables -A FORWARD -i eth0 -o eth1 -j ACCEPT # Masquerade. iptables -t nat -A POSTROUTING -o eth1 -j MASQUERADE # Don't forward from the outside to the inside. iptables -A FORWARD -i eth1 -o eth1 -j REJECT # Enable routing. echo 1 > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_forward The gateway server is connected to the WAN via eth1 and is connected to the internal network via eth0. One of the servers from eth1 has the following problem when trying to list files over ftp: $ ftp -vd myftpserver.com Connected to myftpserver.com 220 Welcome to MY FTP Server ftp: setsockopt: Bad file descriptor Name (myftpserver.com:magento): XXXXXXXX ---> USER XXXXXXXX 331 User XXXXXXXX, password please Password: ---> PASS XXXX 230 Password Ok, User logged in ---> SYST 215 UNIX Type: L8 Remote system type is UNIX. Using binary mode to transfer files. ftp> ls ftp: setsockopt (ignored): Permission denied ---> PORT 192,168,19,15,135,75 421 Service not available, remote server has closed connection When I try listing the files in passive mode, same result. When I run the same command on the gateway server, everything works fine so I believe that the issue is happening because of the iptables rules not forwarding properly. Does anyone have an idea which rule I need to add to make this work?

    Read the article

  • Android XML. What is the purpose of the star in the ID string?

    - by alex2k8
    In some sources I see such declarations <item android:id="@+id/menu_display_groups" android:icon="@*android:drawable/ic_menu_allfriends" android:title="@string/menu_displayGroup" /> Notice the * @*android: It seems to give access to internal resources. But would like to know for sure. Also curious, if it is safe to build application with such declarations using Android 2.2 SDK, and run it on 1.5.

    Read the article

  • Different types for declaring pointer variables

    - by viswanathan
    Consider the below 2 declarations. appears next to the datatype and not next to variable char* ptr1, * ptr2, * ptr3; //all 3 are pointers appears next to the variable and not next to datatype char *ptr1,*ptr2,*ptr3; //again al 3 are pointers Is there any difference in intepretation between the 2 declarations. I know there is no difference in the variables. What is the rationale behind introducing void pointers?

    Read the article

  • Forwarding non-www domain to other domain with dns

    - by Zen Savona
    Is it possible to forward firstdomain.com to www.seconddomain.com or seconddomain.com using surely dns records? I know how to forward www.firstdomain.com to seconddomain.com (with CNAME). What I am trying to do is move my site from one domain to another (new) one, and not break all the links which use the old domain name. I can't do a 301 redirect as it's hosted on Github Pages and I don't have access to the webserver. Thanks

    Read the article

  • Hangs up on install "Who are you" -- Dell Inspiron 1150 [closed]

    - by Writer595
    Possible Duplicate: Installer gets stuck with a grayed out forward button. I'm installing to a Dell Inspiron 1150 from a CD. I get to the window labeled "Who are you?," and enter info into all the fields. The prompt at the bottom says "Ready when you are..." The BACK button is available, but the FORWARD button is grayed out. I tried going BACK, and I tried reentering the info, and I tried restarting the install, but I can't get it past this screen.

    Read the article

  • KVM Guest with NAT + Bridged networking

    - by Daniel
    I currently have a few KVM Guests on a dedicated server with bridged networking (this works) and i can successfully ping the outside ips i assign via ifconfig (in the guest). However, due to the fact i only have 5 public ipv4 ip addresses, i would like to port forward services like so: hostip:port - kvm_guest:port UPDATE I found out KVM comes with a "default" NAT interface, so added the virtual NIC to the Guest virsh configuration then configured it in the Guest, it has the ip address: 192.168.122.112 I can successfully ping 192.168.122.112 and access all ports on 192.168.122.112 from the KVM Host, so i tried to port forward like so: iptables -t nat -I PREROUTING -p tcp --dport 5222 -j DNAT --to-destination 192.168.122.112:2521 iptables -I FORWARD -m state -d 192.168.122.0/24 --state NEW,RELATED,ESTABLISHED -j ACCEPT telnet KVM_HOST_IP 5222 just hangs on "trying" telnet 192.168.122.112 2521 works [root@node1 ~]# tcpdump port 5222 tcpdump: WARNING: eth0: no IPv4 address assigned tcpdump: verbose output suppressed, use -v or -vv for full protocol decode listening on eth0, link-type EN10MB (Ethernet), capture size 65535 bytes 23:43:47.216181 IP 1.152.245.247.51183 > null.xmpp-client: Flags [S], seq 1183303931, win 65535, options [mss 1400,nop,wscale 3,nop,nop,TS val 445777813 ecr 0,sackOK,eol], length 0 23:43:48.315747 IP 1.152.245.247.51183 > null.xmpp-client: Flags [S], seq 1183303931, win 65535, options [mss 1400,nop,wscale 3,nop,nop,TS val 445778912 ecr 0,sackOK,eol], length 0 23:43:49.415606 IP 1.152.245.247.51183 > null.xmpp-client: Flags [S], seq 1183303931, win 65535, options [mss 1400,nop,wscale 3,nop,nop,TS val 445780010 ecr 0,sackOK,eol], length 0 7 packets received by filter 0 packets dropped by kernel [root@node1 ~]# iptables -L Chain INPUT (policy ACCEPT) target prot opt source destination Chain FORWARD (policy ACCEPT) target prot opt source destination ACCEPT all -- anywhere 192.168.122.0/24 state NEW,RELATED,ESTABLISHED Chain OUTPUT (policy ACCEPT) target prot opt source destination All help is appreciated. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • I have added a port to the public zone in firewalld but still can't access the port

    - by mikemaccana
    I've been using iptables for a long time, but have never used firewalld until recently. I have enabled port 3000 TCP via firewalld with the following command: # firewall-cmd --zone=public --add-port=3000/tcp --permanent However I can't access the server on port 3000. From an external box: telnet 178.62.16.244 3000 Trying 178.62.16.244... telnet: connect to address 178.62.16.244: Connection refused There are no routing issues: I have a separate rule for a port forward from port 80 to port 8000 which works fine externally. My app is definitely listening on the port too: Proto Recv-Q Send-Q Local Address Foreign Address State User Inode PID/Program name tcp 0 0 0.0.0.0:3000 0.0.0.0:* LISTEN 99 36797 18662/node firewall-cmd doesn't seem to show the port either - see how ports is empty. You can see the forward rule I mentioned earlier. # firewall-cmd --list-all public (default, active) interfaces: eth0 sources: services: dhcpv6-client ssh ports: masquerade: no forward-ports: port=80:proto=tcp:toport=8000:toaddr= icmp-blocks: rich rules: However I can see the rule in the XML config file: # cat /etc/firewalld/zones/public.xml <?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?> <zone> <short>Public</short> <description>For use in public areas. You do not trust the other computers on networks to not harm your computer. Only selected incoming connections are accepted.</description> <service name="dhcpv6-client"/> <service name="ssh"/> <port protocol="tcp" port="3000"/> <forward-port to-port="8000" protocol="tcp" port="80"/> </zone> What else do I need to do to allow access to my app on port 3000? Also: is adding access via a port the correct thing to do? Or should I make a firewalld 'service' for my app instead?

    Read the article

  • Natting trafic from a tunnel to internet

    - by mezgani
    I'm trying to set up a GRE tunnel between a linux box and a router (LAN), and I'm having a few problems which seem to depend to my iptables configuration. Watching with tcpdump on linux box, I can see packets coming with flags GREv0, all i need right know is forwarding this data to internet, found here some trace : iptables -F iptables -X iptables -P INPUT ACCEPT iptables -P FORWARD ACCEPT iptables -P OUTPUT ACCEPT iptables -t nat -F iptables -t nat -X iptables -t nat -P PREROUTING ACCEPT iptables -t nat -P POSTROUTING ACCEPT iptables -t nat -P OUTPUT ACCEPT iptables -t mangle -F iptables -t mangle -X iptables -t mangle -P PREROUTING ACCEPT iptables -t mangle -P OUTPUT ACCEPT iptables -A INPUT -p 47 -j ACCEPT iptables -A FORWARD -i ppp0 -o cloud -j ACCEPT iptables -A FORWARD -i cloud -o ppp0 -j ACCEPT iptables -A FORWARD -m state --state ESTABLISHED,RELATED -j ACCEPT iptables -t nat -A POSTROUTING -o ppp0 -j MASQUERADE echo "1" /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_forward cloud Link encap:UNSPEC HWaddr C4-CE-7A-2E-F2-BF-DD-C0-00-00-00-00-00-00-00-00 inet adr:10.3.3.3 P-t-P:10.3.3.3 Masque:255.255.255.255 UP POINTOPOINT RUNNING NOARP MTU:1476 Metric:1 RX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:124 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 lg file transmission:0 RX bytes:0 (0.0 B) TX bytes:10416 (10.1 KiB) Table de routage IP du noyau Destination Passerelle Genmask Indic MSS Fenêtre irtt Iface 196.206.120.1 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.255 UH 0 0 0 ppp0 192.168.0.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth0 10.3.3.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 cloud 0.0.0.0 196.206.120.1 0.0.0.0 UG 0 0 0 ppp0 root@aldebaran:~# ip route 196.206.120.1 dev ppp0 proto kernel scope link src 196.206.122.46 192.168.0.0/24 dev eth0 proto kernel scope link src 192.168.0.18 10.3.3.0/24 dev cloud scope link default via 196.206.120.1 dev ppp0

    Read the article

  • How do I setup routing for 2 companies with different Internet connections on the same LAN?

    - by Clint Miller
    Here's the setup: 2 companies (A & B) share office space and a LAN. A 2nd ISP is brought in and company A wants it's own Internet connection (ISP A) and company B wants it's own Internet connection (ISP B). VLANs are deployed internally to separate the 2 company's networks (company A: VLAN 1, company B: VLAN 2, shared VOIP: VLAN 3). With separate VLANs it's simple enough to use separate DHCP servers (or separate scopes on the same server) to assign the default gateway to each company's gateway for their Internet connection. Static routes can be created on each gateway to point traffic destined for the other company's VLAN or the voice VLAN so that all nodes are reachable as expected. However, I think this is a form of asymmetrical routing, right? (The path from node A1 to node B1 is not the same as the path back from node B1 to node A1). Can I setup policy-based routing to correct this? In that case, can I assign the same default gateway to every device on all VLANs and create a routing policy on a L3 switch to look at the source address and forward traffic to the appropriate next hop? In that case, I want the routing logic to go like this: If the destination address is known, forward the traffic (traffic destined for a different VLAN). If the destination address is unknown, forward the traffic to ISP A's gateway if the source address is on VLAN A; or forward the traffic to ISP B's gateway if the source address is VLAN B. Am I thinking about this problem in the correct way? Is there another way to solve this problem that I am overlooking?

    Read the article

  • When connecting to PPTP Centos via Windows 7 VPN, I get error 2147943625

    - by Charlie Dyason
    The remote computer refused the network connection. phrase has been my arch enemy for the past week now I recently "bought" a VPS server, I gave up trying to configure it with OpenVPN, all the issues were making me lose my mind, so I tried the easier way with pptp, but i figure, both are leading to a dead end... I followed this post (many others too but this is the unlucky one), http://blog.secaserver.com/2011/10/install-vpn-pptp-server-centos-6/ and it all goes well with the setup, however, I run into this error when connecting to the VPN in Windows 7 here is a pic of the error: Image So I do not know what I have done wrong... When connecting, Code: Select all netstat -apn | grep -w 1723 before connecting: netstat -apn |grep -w 1723 tcp 0 0 0.0.0.0:1723 0.0.0.0:* LISTEN 1137/pptpd after the error came I tried again: netstat -apn |grep -w 1723 tcp 0 0 0.0.0.0:1723 0.0.0.0:* LISTEN 1137/pptpd tcp 0 0 41.185.26.238:1723 41.13.212.47:49607 TIME_WAIT - iptables: # Generated by iptables-save v1.4.7 on Fri Nov 1 18:14:53 2013 *filter :INPUT ACCEPT [0:0] :FORWARD ACCEPT [0:0] :OUTPUT ACCEPT [63:8868] -A INPUT -m state --state RELATED,ESTABLISHED -j ACCEPT -A INPUT -p icmp -j ACCEPT -A INPUT -i eth0 -j ACCEPT -A INPUT -i lo -j ACCEPT -A INPUT -p tcp -m state --state NEW -m tcp --dport 22 -j ACCEPT -A INPUT -i eth0 -p tcp -m tcp --dport 1723 -j ACCEPT -A INPUT -i eth0 -p gre -j ACCEPT -A FORWARD -i ppp+ -o eth0 -j ACCEPT -A FORWARD -i eth0 -o ppp+ -j ACCEPT -A INPUT -j REJECT --reject-with icmp-host-prohibited -A FORWARD -j REJECT --reject-with icmp-host-prohibited COMMIT # Completed on Fri Nov 1 18:14:53 2013 # Generated by iptables-save v1.4.7 on Fri Nov 1 18:14:53 2013 *nat : PREROUTING ACCEPT [96:12732] : POSTROUTING ACCEPT [0:0] : OUTPUT ACCEPT [31:2179] -A POSTROUTING -o eth0 -j MASQUERADE COMMIT # Completed on Fri Nov 1 18:14:53 2013 options.pptpd the only changes was the require-mppe # BSD licensed ppp-2.4.2 upstream with MPPE only, kernel module ppp_mppe.o # {{{ refuse-pap refuse-chap refuse-mschap # Require the peer to authenticate itself using MS-CHAPv2 [Microsoft # Challenge Handshake Authentication Protocol, Version 2] authentication. require-mschap-v2 require-mppe # Require MPPE 128-bit encryption # (note that MPPE requires the use of MSCHAP-V2 during authentication) require-mppe-128 # }}} I check the iptables, everything is normal, all INPUTs, etc are before rejects, username and password I also checked in chap-secrets file, I am really puzzled...

    Read the article

  • How do I replicate Gmail filtering (forwarding mostly)?

    - by projectdp
    I have reached the limits of Gmail forwarding. Before there was no need to verify forwarding addresses. It's a problem for me now because the addresses I want to forward to are not natural inboxes but automated systems with no way to track the verification email contents. I want to set this up for example: mobile - email - facebook-email - flickr-email - tumblr-email - posterous-email How do I do this without Gmail filters? I think I need to use fetchmail to watch my inbox and then autoforward to the above addresses. Is fetchmail the best solution to this issue? Any other MRA's? I'd like to do some more complicated things with the emails in an automated fashion too, how would I go about monitoring the inbox, doing some actions to the email before forwarding, and forward everywhere? prerequisites: a server: fetchmail daemon to poll the account local mailbox script to clean & forward appropriately (python probably) sendmail + ~/.forward file backup email account (Gmail probably) Any help would be greatly appreciated. I'm trying to automate my social content distribution.

    Read the article

  • Outlook Web Access and Rules

    - by Chris_K
    One of my clients would prefer that I have an email address in their domain. They run SBS 2k8 so I just monitor my email from them (and their clients) via Outlook Web Access. No POP or IMAP access, only OWA. No VPN access either, so no "real" Outlook. Just OWA. I figured I'd build an outlook rule to forward mail from that account to an account that I monitor -- that way I won't need to keep IE open all the time to monitor email. However, I just can't seem to get the dang rule to work and am hoping someone here can give me a nudge or pointer. From OWA, I click on Options - Rules and edit my current rule that kinda works. The rule is supposed to forward the email sent to me and then move it to a folder. It does move it to a folder... just never seems to forward it. The rule looks like this: Apply this rule after the message arrives where my name is in the To box redirect it to [email protected] and move it to the Forwarded to MyEmail folder except with "ALERT" in the subject As I mentioned, mail does get moved, just never redirected. I've tried "Forward" and "redirect" actions with the same results. Any suggestions?

    Read the article

  • Virtualbox port forwarding with iptables

    - by jverdeyen
    I'm using a virtualmachine (virtualbox) as mailserver. The host is an Ubuntu 12.04 and the guest is an Ubuntu 10.04 system. At first I forwarded port 25 to 2550 on the host and added a port forward rule in VirtualBox from 2550 to 25 on the guest. This works for all ports needed for the mailserver. The guest has a host only connection and a NAT (with the port-forwarding). My mailserver was receiving and sending mail properly. But all connections are comming from the virtualbox internal ip, so every host connection is allowed, and that's not what I want. So.. I'm trying to skip the VirtualBox forwarding part and just forward port 25 to my host only ip of the guest system. I used these rules: iptables -F iptables -P INPUT ACCEPT iptables -P OUTPUT ACCEPT iptables -P FORWARD ACCEPT iptables -t nat -P PREROUTING ACCEPT iptables -t nat -P POSTROUTING ACCEPT iptables -A INPUT --protocol tcp --dport 25 -j ACCEPT iptables -A INPUT -i lo -j ACCEPT iptables -A INPUT -s 192.168.99.0/24 -i vboxnet0 -j ACCEPT echo 1 > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_forward iptables -t nat -A PREROUTING -p tcp -i eth0 -d xxx.host.ip.xxx --dport 25 -j DNAT --to 192.168.99.105:25 iptables -A FORWARD -s 192.168.99.0/24 -i vboxnet0 -p tcp --dport 25 -j ACCEPT iptables -t nat -A POSTROUTING -s 192.168.99.0 -o eth0 -j MASQUERADE iptables -L -n But after these changes I still can't connect with a simple telnet. (Which was possible with my first solution). The guest machine doesn't have any firewall. I only have one network interface on the host (eth0) and a host interface (vboxnet0). Any suggestions? Or should I go back to my old solution (which I don't really like). Edit: bridge mode isn't an option, I have only on IP available for the moment. Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Set up Linux box as WAP for MyBookLive?

    - by AcidFlask
    I inherited an old Linux box as well as a MyBookLive and would like to make the MyBookLive available over my wireless, essentially using the Linux box as a wireless access point. I just wiped the Linux box (home) and installed Ubuntu 12.04 on it. My network setup currently looks like this: (192.168.0.1 netmask 255.255.255.0) ISP --- wireless router --- wlan0 on home (192.168.0.12) | eth0 on home --- MyBookLive MacBook (192.168.0.11) so that the MyBookLive is basically a glorified external hard drive. The router does have an Ethernet port, but it is being used by my roommate's computer so I can't plug the MyBookLive directly into it. Right now I can ping MyBookLive.local and MacBook.local from home, but I am having trouble understanding and figuring out what the correct iptables commands are to make my MacBook see my MyBookLive through the Bonjour network. Also, I'm not sure if I need to set up DNS to forward xxx.local Bonjour/Zeroconf addresses. I tried the following to forward my entire wired network (which has only my MyBookLive) to a single IP address: sysctl net.ipv4.ip_forward=1 iptables -A FORWARD -i wlan0 -o eth0 -j ACCEPT iptables -A FORWARD -i eth0 -o wlan0 -j ACCEPT iptables -t nat -A PREROUTING -i eth0 -p tcp -j DNAT --to 192.168.0.66 iptables -t nat -A PREROUTING -i eth0 -p udp -j DNAT --to 192.168.0.66 but I can't ping this address from my MacBook. This is probably horribly wrong, but I am a complete noob at setting up this kind of network and could use some expert help with setting this up properly.

    Read the article

  • OpenVPN server will not redirect traffic

    - by skerit
    I set up an OpenVPN server on my VPS, using this guide: http://vpsnoc.com/blog/how-to-install-openvpn-on-a-debianubuntu-vps-instantly/ And I can connect to it without problems. Connect, that is, because no traffic is being redirected. When I try to load a webpage when connected to the vpn I just get an error. This is the config file it generated: dev tun server 10.8.0.0 255.255.255.0 ifconfig-pool-persist ipp.txt ca ca.crt cert server.crt key server.key dh dh1024.pem push "route 10.8.0.0 255.255.255.0" push "redirect-gateway" comp-lzo keepalive 10 60 ping-timer-rem persist-tun persist-key group daemon daemon This is my iptables.conf # Generated by iptables-save v1.4.4 on Sat May 7 13:09:44 2011 *raw :PREROUTING ACCEPT [37938267:10998335127] :OUTPUT ACCEPT [35616847:14165347907] COMMIT # Completed on Sat May 7 13:09:44 2011 # Generated by iptables-save v1.4.4 on Sat May 7 13:09:44 2011 *nat :PREROUTING ACCEPT [794948:91051460] :POSTROUTING ACCEPT [1603974:108147033] :OUTPUT ACCEPT [1603974:108147033] -A POSTROUTING -s 10.8.0.0/24 -o eth0 -j MASQUERADE -A POSTROUTING -s 10.8.0.0/24 -o eth1 -j MASQUERADE -A POSTROUTING -s 10.8.0.0/24 -o venet0 -j MASQUERADE COMMIT # Completed on Sat May 7 13:09:44 2011 # Generated by iptables-save v1.4.4 on Sat May 7 13:09:44 2011 *mangle :PREROUTING ACCEPT [37938267:10998335127] :INPUT ACCEPT [37677226:10960834925] :FORWARD ACCEPT [0:0] :OUTPUT ACCEPT [35616847:14165347907] :POSTROUTING ACCEPT [35680187:14169930490] COMMIT # Completed on Sat May 7 13:09:44 2011 # Generated by iptables-save v1.4.4 on Sat May 7 13:09:44 2011 *filter :INPUT ACCEPT [37677226:10960834925] :FORWARD ACCEPT [0:0] :OUTPUT ACCEPT [35616848:14165347947] -A INPUT -i eth0 -j LOG --log-prefix "BANDWIDTH_IN:" --log-level 7 -A FORWARD -o eth0 -j LOG --log-prefix "BANDWIDTH_OUT:" --log-level 7 -A FORWARD -i eth0 -j LOG --log-prefix "BANDWIDTH_IN:" --log-level 7 -A OUTPUT -o eth0 -j LOG --log-prefix "BANDWIDTH_OUT:" --log-level 7 COMMIT # Completed on Sat May 7 13:09:44 2011

    Read the article

  • iptables : how to allow incoming ftp traffic?

    - by logansama
    Hi, Still fighting my way through the jungle that is called iptables. I have managed to allow FTP access outside of our LAN: both these would work. NOTE: eth0 is the LAN interface and eth1 is the WAN interface. iptables -t filter -A FORWARD -i eth0 -p tcp --dport 20:21 -j ACCEPT or iptables -A FORWARD -i eth0 -o eth1 -p tcp --sport 20:21 --dport 1024:65535 -j ACCEPT But when i connect to a external FTP server i manage to log in and all is fine until it wishes to List the directory content. Then nothing happens as the data is blocked, due to the fact that i do not have a rule set up to allow it! (my last rule on the FORWARD chain is to block all traffic) I have tried a gazillion rules (many of which i did not understand) to try and allow the FTP traffic back through my server. One such rule for example was: iptables -A FORWARD -i eth1 -o eth0 -p tcp --sport 20:21 --dport 1024:65535 -j ACCEPT But i cannot get the List to work. It just times out after a while. Would anyone perhaps know how to build a rule which would allow FTP to List / allow such traffic back? Or have a link to sources i could work through? Thank you,

    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 | 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31  | Next Page >