Search Results

Search found 11524 results on 461 pages for 'insurance networking news'.

Page 241/461 | < Previous Page | 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248  | Next Page >

• WDS (Wireless Distribution System) not work

  - by xdevel2000

  I've a dlink di-524 as main router (192.168.0.1) connected to Internet and a second router (192.168.0.2), a tplink wr841n, with WDS enabled and correctly configured to "join" with dlink. After I connect via wireless a laptop (192.168.0.100) to tplink and both work good but with the laptop I can't go to Internet. It seems as WDS not work. With the laptop I can only ping the tplink but other ping (the dlink or other LAN computer not responding). What's the problem? Perhaps also the dlink must have the WDS option? Thanks.

  Read the article

• Virtual box host-only adapter configuration

  - by Xoundboy

  I have VirtualBox 4 running on Win 7 with a Centos 6 guest VM set up for hosting my dev server. When I'm connected to my home network the guest can be accessed via a static IP address that I configured (192.168.56.2), but not when I'm in the office. I'm guessing that the DHCP server in the office doesn't have a gateway configured for the 192.168.56.x IP range. I read something about the VB host-only adapter that should allow me to set this guest VM up in such a way that I don't need to be on any network to be able to access the guest from the host using a static IP. I've not been able to find out exactly how to configure this though. Can anyone give me an example configuration, thanks. UPDATE: Thanks for your responses. I've now set up a single virtual network adapter in VirtualBox and set it to host-only: C:\Users\Ben>vboxmanage list hostonlyifs Name: VirtualBox Host-Only Ethernet Adapter GUID: d419ef62-3c46-4525-ad2d-be506c90459a Dhcp: Disabled IPAddress: 192.168.56.2 NetworkMask: 255.255.255.0 IPV6Address: fe80:0000:0000:0000:78e3:b200:5af3:2a57 IPV6NetworkMaskPrefixLength: 64 HardwareAddress: 08:00:27:00:94:e8 MediumType: Ethernet Status: Up VBoxNetworkName: HostInterfaceNetworking-VirtualBox Host-Only Ethernet Adapter On the guest I've set up eth0 to use the same IP address as the host-only adapter (192.168.56.2) but when I try to log in using Putty I still get "Network Error : connection refused". VirtualBox DHCP servier is enabled but I can't ping the gateway (192.168.56.1) from either host nor guest. There's no firewall running on either OS. What next?

  Read the article

• How to direct outgoing traffic through specific interface?

  - by user1434058

  I added eth1 and eth2 to my Ubuntu Server, all 3 use DHCP and are on the same lan eth0 10.0.0.41 eth1 10.0.0.42 eth3 10.0.0.43 Kernel IP routing table Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref Use Iface default router.net 0.0.0.0 UG 100 0 0 eth0 10.0.0.0 * 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth0 10.0.0.0 * 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth1 10.0.0.0 * 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth2 curl --interface eth1 www.google.com doesn't work what else do i need to do for the above to work?

  Read the article

• How to detect which process is doing a port scan

  - by Rick

  I have Linux server running a unauthorized process (which I do not know the name of) which is doing a port scan from the server out to the internet. How do I find out which process this is and kill it! Thanks!

  Read the article

• How to route local traffic over switch?

  - by Franz Kafka

  I'm just cabled up at home but haven't got any way of verifying that gigabit speed can be reached. As I've only got one laptop with one network card, one cable, and one switch, I'm kind of stuck. I'm using a tool that you can start as a server or as a client to send data from one box to another. I would like to send and receive on the same Windows box. I guess if I use my network local IP address, my Windows 8.1 PC will just route traffic internally. Is there some way of forcing the traffic to go to the switch and back again?

  Read the article

• Linux Mint on VirtualBox has no internet connection

  - by Martin

  Physical machine: Mac Mini running OSX 10.7.5 Virtual machine: Linux Mint 15 Cinnamon 64-bit Using VirtualBox. I am trying to make the linux connect to the internet. For some reason I can access the host computer with 192.168.2.100. Its set up to show me a web-page that says "It works". This I can see from the linux. But I cannot reach anything on the internet. Either FireFox says "Unable to connect" or when I run nslookup google.com I get connection timed out; no servers could be reached. My setting on VirtualBox under the Network tab are: Bridge Adapter vnic0 promiscouos Mode:Allow All`. If it makes a difference, the host has a WiFi connection to the home router. What have I missed?

  Read the article

• How frequent are network partitions on cloud services?

  - by roja

  Much is made of the CAP trade-off for data storage where conflicts can be introduced if there is a network partition. My question is there any evidence that this is a problem that arises with any significant frequency in modern cloud IAAS services e.g.; EC2, Azure, Rackspace. Is it a problem which, despite being a theoretical roadblock in constructing idealised distributed systems is, in fact, a non-issue for all practical concerns? Has anyone experienced a network partition within one of these systems (within a single data-centre?) If so would you be willing to share any details?

  Read the article

• XenServer 5.6.1-fp1. Can't get network working

  - by casey_miller

  I have a PC where XenServer 5.6.1 fp-1 has been successfully installed. I've manually set the network settings: 192.168.1.50 255.255.255.0 192.168.1.1 but it's set to xenbr0 iface. While eth0 is empty. When I click on "Configure Management Inteface" it shows that eth0 is connected. But when I ping a default gateway (which is 100% should be accessible) it fails. I used to another shell (Alt+F3) and logged as root. I also failed to ping. with both: ping -I eth0 192.168.1.1 and ping -I xenbr0 192.168.1.1 Be assured that: Cable works Ethernet adapter is 100% functional (prev OS was Ubuntu it was working) There is no firewall rule to deny anything. (everything is allowed) So the question is: What is a problem???

  Read the article

• Connecting to Aerohive AP's from Laptops running Win. 7 using authentication from a Windows 2008 domain server

  - by user264116

  I have deployed a wireless network using Aerohive access points. 2 of them are set up as radius servers. I want my users to be able to use the same user name and password they use when they log onto our domain. They are able to do this from android devices or computers running Windows 8. It will not work on Windows 7 machines. How do I remedy this situation, keeping in mind that the machines are personal machines not company owned and I will have no way to change their hardware or software.

  Read the article

• How can I port forward over a VPN NAT?

  - by Charlie

  I have a multi-site VPN currently running with pfSense boxes and currently using OpenVPN. However I can change the OS and VPN type if need be. The main router has a 10.13.0.0/16 subnet and a series of public IPs For example, a branch has a 10.12.1.0/24 subnet How can I port forward NAT traffic on a public IP of the main router to a server behind the NAT of the second? So for instance port 95 on a public IP assigned to the main router forwards to 10.12.1.102 on the other router. Is this even possible? Currently my setup works great but only for intertnal traffic

  Read the article

• How to use CLEAR USB WiMax in Ubuntu (host) and Windows XP (guest) using VirtualBox

  - by bithacker

  I'm trying to use CLEAR Motorola WiMax USB in Ubuntu as there is no support for Linux as yet. I've installed Windows XP as guest in Ubuntu and the version I'm using is 3.2.2. USB is connecting fine in Windows XP but I can't use internet in Ubuntu. Can you please tell me how to do it. Here is the configuration that could help you guys. Thanks in advance. I'm using Two Network Adapters. Network Adapter 1: PCnet-FAST III (NAT) Adapter 2: PCnet-FAST III (Host-only adapter, 'vboxnet0') ipconfig [on Guest windowsXP] Windows IP Configuration Ethernet adapter Local Area Connection: PCnet-FAST III (NAT) Connection-specific DNS Suffix . : IP Address. . . . . . . . . . . . : 10.0.2.15 Subnet Mask . . . . . . . . . . . : 255.255.255.0 Default Gateway . . . . . . . . . : 10.0.2.2 Ethernet adapter Local Area Connection 3: PCnet-FAST III (Host-only adapter, 'vboxnet0') Connection-specific DNS Suffix . : IP Address. . . . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.56.101 Subnet Mask . . . . . . . . . . . : 255.255.255.0 Default Gateway . . . . . . . . . : Ethernet adapter Local Area Connection 2: Connection-specific DNS Suffix . : CLEAR Motorola USB IP Address. . . . . . . . . . . . : 10.168.242.33 Subnet Mask . . . . . . . . . . . : 255.255.192.0 Default Gateway . . . . . . . . . : 10.168.192.2 IFCONFIG [on Host Ubuntu] (Ethernet) eth0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:14:22:b9:9d:76 UP BROADCAST MULTICAST MTU:1500 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:1000 RX bytes:0 (0.0 B) TX bytes:0 (0.0 B) Interrupt:16 eth1 (Wireless) Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:13:ce:f0:9b:0d inet6 addr: fe80::213:ceff:fef0:9b0d/64 Scope:Link UP BROADCAST MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 RX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:1 errors:0 dropped:5 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:1000 RX bytes:0 (0.0 B) TX bytes:84 (84.0 B) Interrupt:17 Base address:0xe000 Memory:dfcff000-dfcfffff 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:2292 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:2292 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:0 RX bytes:171952 (171.9 KB) TX bytes:171952 (171.9 KB) vboxnet0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 0a:00:27:00:00:00 inet addr:192.168.56.1 Bcast:192.168.56.255 Mask:255.255.255.0 inet6 addr: fe80::800:27ff:fe00:0/64 Scope:Link UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 RX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:137 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:1000 RX bytes:0 (0.0 B) TX bytes:21174 (21.1 KB)

  Read the article

• Windows 7 Won't connect to Wireless Router too far away (but still have 3 bars)

  - by Kerry

  I have found this problem a couple of times. Windows 7 with Intel AGN 5100 won't connect to a WPA2-PSK router when it's too far away. Both times I've had this happen I was in a foreign country (London and Stockholm), and both times I was upstairs while the router was downstairs. Now, it still has 2-3 bars when looking at local WiFi, but I get the "will not connect" error, and debugging doesn't help at all (it doesn't know what's wrong). I went downstairs and it connected immediately (but I need to be able to have it upstairs). My Android Cell Phone and iPad were able to connect upstairs just fine. Any suggestions?

  Read the article

• Bypass network stack. Which options do we have? Pros and cons of each option [on hold]

  - by javapowered

  I'm writing trading application. I want to bypass network stack in Linux but I don't know how this can be done. I'm looking for complete list of options with pros and cons of each of them. The only option I know - is to buy solarflare network card which supports OpenOnLoad. What other options should I consider and what is pros and cons of each of them? Well the question is pretty simple - what is the best way to bypass network stack? upd: OpenOnload It achieves performance improvements in part by performing network processing at user-level, bypassing the OS kernel entirely on the data path. Intel DDIO to allow Intel® Ethernet Controllers and adapters to talk directly with the processor cache of the Intel® Xeon® processor E5. What's key difference between these techologies? Do they do roughly the same things? I much better like Intel DDIO because it's much easy to use, but OpenOnload required a lot of installation and tuning. If good OpenOnload application is much faster than good Intel DDIO application?

  Read the article

• Ubuntu, connecting to WLAN

  - by Holly

  Hello, I successfully installed Ubuntu onto my usb hard drive. However, I'm not sure what the issue is with my internet. I'm not familiar enough with ubuntu to know whether this is a problem with recognizing my wireless card or with my internet, etc. So I suppose my question is, how do I tell whether it's recognizing my wireless card? (Network manager isn't showing any wireless signals, though I wasn't sure if it was supposed to. ) And, if it's not working, how do I go about troubleshooting that issue? Thanks!

  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

• What are the different ways of remotely connecting to your computer?

  - by Rogue

  I'll be leaving for uni soon and would like to know the different methods of connecting remotely to my home pc. I know about VPN but are there any other ways? Also how secure is each of this method as I wouldn't want snoopers on my home-pc especially when I'm away. Also can i set up a remote connection to start and shut down my computer My operating system is windows, but if linux is more secure i would be willing to switch.

  Read the article

• Preventing endless forwarding with two routers

  - by jarmund

  The network in quesiton looks basically like this: /----Inet1 / H1---[111.0/24]---GW1---[99.0/24] \----GW2-----Inet2 Device explaination H1: Host with IP 192.168.111.47 GW1: Linux box with IPs 192.168.111.1 and 192.168.99.2, as well as its own route to the internet. GW2: Generic wireless router with IP 192.168.99.1 and its own route to the internet. Inet1 & Inet2: Two possible routes to the internet In short: H has more than one possible route to the internet. H is supposed to only access the internet via GW2 when that link is up, so GW1 has some policy based routing special just for H1: ip rule add from 192.168.111.47 table 991 ip route add default via 192.168.99.1 table 991 While this works as long as GW2 has a direct link to the internet, the problem occurs when that link is down. What then happens is that GW2 forwards the packet back to GW1, which again forwards back to GW2, creating an endless loop of TCP-pingpong. The preferred result would be that the packet was just dropped. Is there something that can be done with iptables on GW1 to prevent this? Basically, an iptables-friendly version of "If packet comes from GW2, but originated from H1, drop it" Note1: It is preferable not to change anything on GW2. Note2: H1 needs to be able to talk to both GW1 and GW2, and vice versa, but only GW2 should lead to the internet TLDR; H1 should only be allowed internet access via GW2, but still needs to be able to talk to both GW1 and GW2. EDIT: The interfaces for GW1 are br0.105 for the '99' network, and br0.111 for the '111' network. The sollution may or may not be obnoxiously simple, but i have not been able to produce the proper iptables syntax myself, so help would be most appreciated. PS: This is a follow-up question from this question

  Read the article

• Using Hamachi VPN to connect to Linux VM at home

  - by Cameron Verotti

  I have a CentOS 5.10 Linux box at home running on VMWare, with Windows 2008 as the host. I have set up a Hamachi VPN so that I can connect to the Host server from work, I attempted to add a second VNIC to the VM and bridged it to the hamachi Network Interface. I spun up the VM and checked eth1 with ifconfig and its throwing me a ipv6 address not a ipv4. I want to hook this VM up so that I can run a ssh command from work to the VM. MY network at home is all on Local 198.168.. hence the need to make a VPN network like Hamachi. I cannot seem to find anything that tells me or helps me with tunneling my Linux VM via Hamachi. Any help would be fantastic!

  Read the article

• Set source address to use tun device does not work (Debian Squeeze)

  - by A. Donda

  there have been similar questions on StackExchange but none of the answers helped me, so I'll try a question of my own. I have a VPN connection via OpenVPN. By default, all traffic is redirected through the tunnel using OpenVPN's "two more specific routes" trick, but I disabled that. My routing table is like this: 198.144.156.141 192.168.2.1 255.255.255.255 UGH 0 0 0 eth0 10.30.92.5 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.255 UH 0 0 0 tun1 10.30.92.1 10.30.92.5 255.255.255.255 UGH 0 0 0 tun1 192.168.2.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth0 0.0.0.0 10.30.92.5 0.0.0.0 UG 0 0 0 tun1 0.0.0.0 192.168.2.1 0.0.0.0 UG 0 0 0 eth0 And the interface configuration is like this: # ifconfig eth0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr XX-XX- inet addr:192.168.2.100 Bcast:192.168.2.255 Mask:255.255.255.0 inet6 addr: fe80::211:9ff:fe8d:acbd/64 Scope:Link UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 RX packets:394869 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:293489 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:1000 RX bytes:388519578 (370.5 MiB) TX bytes:148817487 (141.9 MiB) Interrupt:20 Base address:0x6f00 tun1 Link encap:UNSPEC HWaddr 00-00-00-00-00-00-00-00-00-00-00-00-00-00-00-00 inet addr:10.30.92.6 P-t-P:10.30.92.5 Mask:255.255.255.255 UP POINTOPOINT RUNNING NOARP MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 RX packets:64 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:67 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:100 RX bytes:9885 (9.6 KiB) TX bytes:4380 (4.2 KiB) plus the lo device. The routing table has two default routes, one via eth0 through my local network router (DSL modem) at 192.168.2.1, and another via tun1 through the VPN's gateway. With this configuration, if I connect to a site, the route chosen is the direct one (because it has less hops?): # traceroute 8.8.8.8 -n traceroute to 8.8.8.8 (8.8.8.8), 30 hops max, 60 byte packets 1 192.168.2.1 0.427 ms 0.491 ms 0.610 ms 2 213.191.89.13 17.981 ms 20.137 ms 22.141 ms 3 62.109.108.48 23.681 ms 25.009 ms 26.401 ms ... This is fine, because my goal is to send only traffic from specific applications through the tunnel (esp. transmission, using its -i / bind-address-ipv4 option). To test whether this can work at all, I check it first with traceroute's -s option: # traceroute 8.8.8.8 -n -s 10.30.92.6 traceroute to 8.8.8.8 (8.8.8.8), 30 hops max, 60 byte packets 1 * * * 2 * * * 3 * * * ... This I take to mean that connection using the tunnel's local address as source is not possible. What is possible (though only as root) is to specify the source interface: # traceroute 8.8.8.8 -n -i tun1 traceroute to 8.8.8.8 (8.8.8.8), 30 hops max, 60 byte packets 1 10.30.92.1 129.337 ms 297.758 ms 297.725 ms 2 * * * 3 198.144.152.17 297.653 ms 297.652 ms 297.650 ms ... So apparently the tun1 interface is working and it is possible to send packets through it. But selecting the source interface is not implemented in my actual target application (transmission), so I would like to get source address selection to work. What am I doing wrong?

  Read the article

• VPN service into 192 network

  - by tophersmith116

  I'm thinking about setting up a security testing lab. I work on a switched network, and that just makes for unnecessary headaches when doing testing. I'd like to create a 192 network with a few machines inside for DBs and AppServers etc. I will need a pivot machine that connects to both the outer network and the 192 (for automation purposes). But I'd like to be able to connect into the 192 network with my own machine from the outer network as the "attacking" machine (rather than have dedicated attack machines inside the 192 network). Therefore, I'd like to have the pivot server be a VPN server as well, so that my machine can VPN into the 192 network from the outer network. First off, is this even possible? Can I have a single computer with two NICs where a VPN service allows remote connections into the 192? Secondly, I'd like to have multiple outer clients connect to the VPN. Does anyone have any suggestions? I've used Hamachi well before, but I've also seen some good stuff from OpenVPN.

  Read the article

• Is this iptables NAT exploitable from the external side?

  - by Karma Fusebox

  Could you please have a short look on this simple iptables/NAT-Setup, I believe it has a fairly serious security issue (due to being too simple). On this network there is one internet-connected machine (running Debian Squeeze/2.6.32-5 with iptables 1.4.8) acting as NAT/Gateway for the handful of clients in 192.168/24. The machine has two NICs: eth0: internet-faced eth1: LAN-faced, 192.168.0.1, the default GW for 192.168/24 Routing table is two-NICs-default without manual changes: Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref Use Iface 192.168.0.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth1 (externalNet) 0.0.0.0 255.255.252.0 U 0 0 0 eth0 0.0.0.0 (externalGW) 0.0.0.0 UG 0 0 0 eth0 The NAT is then enabled only and merely by these actions, there are no more iptables rules: echo 1 > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_forward /sbin/iptables -t nat -A POSTROUTING -o eth0 -j MASQUERADE # (all iptables policies are ACCEPT) This does the job, but I miss several things here which I believe could be a security issue: there is no restriction about allowed source interfaces or source networks at all there is no firewalling part such as: (set policies to DROP) /sbin/iptables -A FORWARD -i eth0 -o eth1 -m state --state RELATED,ESTABLISHED -j ACCEPT /sbin/iptables -A FORWARD -i eth1 -o eth0 -j ACCEPT And thus, the questions of my sleepless nights are: Is this NAT-service available to anyone in the world who sets this machine as his default gateway? I'd say yes it is, because there is nothing indicating that an incoming external connection (via eth0) should be handled any different than an incoming internal connection (via eth1) as long as the output-interface is eth0 - and routing-wise that holds true for both external und internal clients that want to access the internet. So if I am right, anyone could use this machine as open proxy by having his packets NATted here. So please tell me if that's right or why it is not. As a "hotfix" I have added a "-s 192.168.0.0/24" option to the NAT-starting command. I would like to know if not using this option was indeed a security issue or just irrelevant thanks to some mechanism I am not aware of. As the policies are all ACCEPT, there is currently no restriction on forwarding eth1 to eth0 (internal to external). But what are the effective implications of currently NOT having the restriction that only RELATED and ESTABLISHED states are forwarded from eth0 to eth1 (external to internal)? In other words, should I rather change the policies to DROP and apply the two "firewalling" rules I mentioned above or is the lack of them not affecting security? Thanks for clarification!

  Read the article

• Xen DomU does not have network connectivity

  - by Prakashkumar Thiagarajan

  I am trying to install Xen on my Fedora box. Dom0 image has network connectivity. But when I try to create a DomU, it does not have network connectivity. I want to be able to run in bridged mode. I have the /etc/xend/xend-config.sxp file accordingly. My config file looks like kernel = "/boot/vmlinuz-2.6.18-xenU" memory = 64 name = "clientA" vif = ['bridge=xenbr0,mac=12.34.56.78.9A.BC'] root = "/dev/sda1 ro" ramdisk = "/boot/initrd-linux.img" extra = "ro selinux=0.3 initcall_debug" features = 'auto_translated_physmap' Am I missing something ?

  Read the article

• 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

• Command or tool to display list of connections to a Windows file share

  - by BizTalkMama

  Is there a Windows command or tool that can tell me what users or computers are connected to a Windows fileshare? Here's why I'm looking for this: I've run into issues in the past where our deployment team has deployed BizTalk applications to one of our environments using the wrong bindings, leaving us with two receive locations pointing to the same file share (i.e. both dev and test servers point to dev receive location uri). When this occurs, the two environments in question tend to take turns processing the files received (meaning if I am attempting to debug something in one environment and the other environment has picked the file up, it looks as if my test file has disappeared into thin air). We have several different environments, plus individual developer machines, and I'd rather not have to check each individually to find the culprit. I'm looking for a quick way to detect what locations are connected to the share once I notice my test files vanishing. If I can determine the connections that are invalid, I can go directly to the person responsible for that environment and avoid the time it takes to randomly ask around. Or if the connections appear to be correct, I can go directly to troubleshooting where in the process the message gets lost. Any suggestions?

  Read the article

• Linking two networks that have a common device

  - by Serban Razvan

  I recently bought a Samsung Smart TV having in mind to connect it to the Internet. Because my router is very far from it and not wanting to buy an expensive wireless for the TV, I created a homemade solution. I have the laptop (an smartphone and the PC) connected to the router which is connected to the internet. I shared the laptop's wireless connection to the ethernet port which I connected to the TV. So far, the TV is connected to the internet, but is there any way to make him part of the router's network instead of the 2 devices network (the laptop and the TV)?

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248  | Next Page >