Search Results

Search found 3325 results on 133 pages for 'route'.

Page 3/133 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

  • ASP.NET MVC: Route to URL

    - by JamesBrownIsDead
    What's the easiest way to get the URL (relative or absolute) to a Route in MVC? I saw this code here on SO but it seems a little verbose and doesn't enumerate the RouteTable. Example: List<string> urlList = new List<string>(); urlList.Add(GetUrl(new { controller = "Help", action = "Edit" })); urlList.Add(GetUrl(new { controller = "Help", action = "Create" })); urlList.Add(GetUrl(new { controller = "About", action = "Company" })); urlList.Add(GetUrl(new { controller = "About", action = "Management" })); With: protected string GetUrl(object routeValues) { RouteValueDictionary values = new RouteValueDictionary(routeValues); RequestContext context = new RequestContext(HttpContext, RouteData); string url = RouteTable.Routes.GetVirtualPath(context, values).VirtualPath; return new Uri(Request.Url, url).AbsoluteUri; } What's a better way to examine the RouteTable and get a URL for a given controller and action?

    Read the article

  • No route matches - after login attempt - even though the route exists?

    - by datorum
    I am working on a rails application and added a simple login system according to a book. I created the controller admin: rails generate controller admin login logout index It added the following routes to routes.db get "admin/login" get "admin/logout" get "admin/index" I can got to http://localhost:3000/admin/login there is no problem at all. But when I try to login I get: No route matches "/admin/login"! Now, the first confusing part is that the "login" method of my AdminController is not executed at all. The second confusing part is that this code works like a charm - redirects everything to /admin/login: def authorize unless User.find_by_id(session[:user_id]) flash[:notice] = "you need to login" redirect_to :controller => 'admin', :action => 'login' end end Sidenotes: I restarted the server several times. I tried a different browser - to be sure there is no caching problem.

    Read the article

  • No route in the route table matches the supplied values

    - by Sadegh
    hi i defined some routes in global handler as below routes.MapRoute("Root", "", new { controller = "Root", action = "Default" }); also i created specific controller called RootController which have Default actionResult and return some string. this works fine in vs built-in web-server but An unhandled exception occurred when i sent request rom iis. i'm running this in windows7 ultimate and iis 7.5 integrated-mode and have vs 2008 professional and mvc2 preview2. please help. thank's in advance

    Read the article

  • Cancelling Route Navigation in AngularJS Controllers

    - by dwahlin
    If you’re new to AngularJS check out my AngularJS in 60-ish Minutes video tutorial or download the free eBook. Also check out The AngularJS Magazine for up-to-date information on using AngularJS to build Single Page Applications (SPAs). Routing provides a nice way to associate views with controllers in AngularJS using a minimal amount of code. While a user is normally able to navigate directly to a specific route, there may be times when a user triggers a route change before they’ve finalized an important action such as saving data. In these types of situations you may want to cancel the route navigation and ask the user if they’d like to finish what they were doing so that their data isn’t lost. In this post I’ll talk about a technique that can be used to accomplish this type of routing task.   The $locationChangeStart Event When route navigation occurs in an AngularJS application a few events are raised. One is named $locationChangeStart and the other is named $routeChangeStart (there are other events as well). At the current time (version 1.2) the $routeChangeStart doesn’t provide a way to cancel route navigation, however, the $locationChangeStart event can be used to cancel navigation. If you dig into the AngularJS core script you’ll find the following code that shows how the $locationChangeStart event is raised as the $browser object’s onUrlChange() function is invoked:   $browser.onUrlChange(function (newUrl) { if ($location.absUrl() != newUrl) { if ($rootScope.$broadcast('$locationChangeStart', newUrl, $location.absUrl()).defaultPrevented) { $browser.url($location.absUrl()); return; } $rootScope.$evalAsync(function () { var oldUrl = $location.absUrl(); $location.$$parse(newUrl); afterLocationChange(oldUrl); }); if (!$rootScope.$$phase) $rootScope.$digest(); } }); .csharpcode, .csharpcode pre { font-size: small; color: black; font-family: consolas, "Courier New", courier, monospace; background-color: #ffffff; /*white-space: pre;*/ } .csharpcode pre { margin: 0em; } .csharpcode .rem { color: #008000; } .csharpcode .kwrd { color: #0000ff; } .csharpcode .str { color: #006080; } .csharpcode .op { color: #0000c0; } .csharpcode .preproc { color: #cc6633; } .csharpcode .asp { background-color: #ffff00; } .csharpcode .html { color: #800000; } .csharpcode .attr { color: #ff0000; } .csharpcode .alt { background-color: #f4f4f4; width: 100%; margin: 0em; } .csharpcode .lnum { color: #606060; } The key part of the code is the call to $broadcast. This call broadcasts the $locationChangeStart event to all child scopes so that they can be notified before a location change is made. To handle the $locationChangeStart event you can use the $rootScope.on() function. For this example I’ve added a call to $on() into a function that is called immediately after the controller is invoked:   function init() { //initialize data here.. //Make sure they're warned if they made a change but didn't save it //Call to $on returns a "deregistration" function that can be called to //remove the listener (see routeChange() for an example of using it) onRouteChangeOff = $rootScope.$on('$locationChangeStart', routeChange); } This code listens for the $locationChangeStart event and calls routeChange() when it occurs. The value returned from calling $on is a “deregistration” function that can be called to detach from the event. In this case the deregistration function is named onRouteChangeOff (it’s accessible throughout the controller). You’ll see how the onRouteChangeOff function is used in just a moment.   Cancelling Route Navigation The routeChange() callback triggered by the $locationChangeStart event displays a modal dialog similar to the following to prompt the user:     Here’s the code for routeChange(): function routeChange(event, newUrl) { //Navigate to newUrl if the form isn't dirty if (!$scope.editForm.$dirty) return; var modalOptions = { closeButtonText: 'Cancel', actionButtonText: 'Ignore Changes', headerText: 'Unsaved Changes', bodyText: 'You have unsaved changes. Leave the page?' }; modalService.showModal({}, modalOptions).then(function (result) { if (result === 'ok') { onRouteChangeOff(); //Stop listening for location changes $location.path(newUrl); //Go to page they're interested in } }); //prevent navigation by default since we'll handle it //once the user selects a dialog option event.preventDefault(); return; } .csharpcode, .csharpcode pre { font-size: small; color: black; font-family: consolas, "Courier New", courier, monospace; background-color: #ffffff; /*white-space: pre;*/ } .csharpcode pre { margin: 0em; } .csharpcode .rem { color: #008000; } .csharpcode .kwrd { color: #0000ff; } .csharpcode .str { color: #006080; } .csharpcode .op { color: #0000c0; } .csharpcode .preproc { color: #cc6633; } .csharpcode .asp { background-color: #ffff00; } .csharpcode .html { color: #800000; } .csharpcode .attr { color: #ff0000; } .csharpcode .alt { background-color: #f4f4f4; width: 100%; margin: 0em; } .csharpcode .lnum { color: #606060; } Looking at the parameters of routeChange() you can see that it accepts an event object and the new route that the user is trying to navigate to. The event object is used to prevent navigation since we need to prompt the user before leaving the current view. Notice the call to event.preventDefault() at the end of the function. The modal dialog is shown by calling modalService.showModal() (see my previous post for more information about the custom modalService that acts as a wrapper around Angular UI Bootstrap’s $modal service). If the user selects “Ignore Changes” then their changes will be discarded and the application will navigate to the route they intended to go to originally. This is done by first detaching from the $locationChangeStart event by calling onRouteChangeOff() (recall that this is the function returned from the call to $on()) so that we don’t get stuck in a never ending cycle where the dialog continues to display when they click the “Ignore Changes” button. A call is then made to $location.path(newUrl) to handle navigating to the target view. If the user cancels the operation they’ll stay on the current view. Conclusion The key to canceling routes is understanding how to work with the $locationChangeStart event and cancelling it so that route navigation doesn’t occur. I’m hoping that in the future the same type of task can be done using the $routeChangeStart event but for now this code gets the job done. You can see this code in action in the Customer Manager application available on Github (specifically the customerEdit view). Learn more about the application here.

    Read the article

  • Where route to 169.254.0.0 comes from?

    - by jackhab
    Running CentOS 5.4 Why do I have route to 169.254.0.0 although it does not appear in Network Ethernet Device Route configuration dialog? Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref Use Iface 192.168.1.0 * 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth2 169.254.0.0 * 255.255.0.0 U 0 0 0 eth2 default 192.168.1.1 0.0.0.0 UG 0 0 0 eth2 Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Custom ASP.NET Routing to an HttpHandler

    - by Rick Strahl
    As of version 4.0 ASP.NET natively supports routing via the now built-in System.Web.Routing namespace. Routing features are automatically integrated into the HtttpRuntime via a few custom interfaces. New Web Forms Routing Support In ASP.NET 4.0 there are a host of improvements including routing support baked into Web Forms via a RouteData property available on the Page class and RouteCollection.MapPageRoute() route handler that makes it easy to route to Web forms. To map ASP.NET Page routes is as simple as setting up the routes with MapPageRoute:protected void Application_Start(object sender, EventArgs e) { RegisterRoutes(RouteTable.Routes); } void RegisterRoutes(RouteCollection routes) { routes.MapPageRoute("StockQuote", "StockQuote/{symbol}", "StockQuote.aspx"); routes.MapPageRoute("StockQuotes", "StockQuotes/{symbolList}", "StockQuotes.aspx"); } and then accessing the route data in the page you can then use the new Page class RouteData property to retrieve the dynamic route data information:public partial class StockQuote1 : System.Web.UI.Page { protected StockQuote Quote = null; protected void Page_Load(object sender, EventArgs e) { string symbol = RouteData.Values["symbol"] as string; StockServer server = new StockServer(); Quote = server.GetStockQuote(symbol); // display stock data in Page View } } Simple, quick and doesn’t require much explanation. If you’re using WebForms most of your routing needs should be served just fine by this simple mechanism. Kudos to the ASP.NET team for putting this in the box and making it easy! How Routing Works To handle Routing in ASP.NET involves these steps: Registering Routes Creating a custom RouteHandler to retrieve an HttpHandler Attaching RouteData to your HttpHandler Picking up Route Information in your Request code Registering routes makes ASP.NET aware of the Routes you want to handle via the static RouteTable.Routes collection. You basically add routes to this collection to let ASP.NET know which URL patterns it should watch for. You typically hook up routes off a RegisterRoutes method that fires in Application_Start as I did in the example above to ensure routes are added only once when the application first starts up. When you create a route, you pass in a RouteHandler instance which ASP.NET caches and reuses as routes are matched. Once registered ASP.NET monitors the routes and if a match is found just prior to the HttpHandler instantiation, ASP.NET uses the RouteHandler registered for the route and calls GetHandler() on it to retrieve an HttpHandler instance. The RouteHandler.GetHandler() method is responsible for creating an instance of an HttpHandler that is to handle the request and – if necessary – to assign any additional custom data to the handler. At minimum you probably want to pass the RouteData to the handler so the handler can identify the request based on the route data available. To do this you typically add  a RouteData property to your handler and then assign the property from the RouteHandlers request context. This is essentially how Page.RouteData comes into being and this approach should work well for any custom handler implementation that requires RouteData. It’s a shame that ASP.NET doesn’t have a top level intrinsic object that’s accessible off the HttpContext object to provide route data more generically, but since RouteData is directly tied to HttpHandlers and not all handlers support it it might cause some confusion of when it’s actually available. Bottom line is that if you want to hold on to RouteData you have to assign it to a custom property of the handler or else pass it to the handler via Context.Items[] object that can be retrieved on an as needed basis. It’s important to understand that routing is hooked up via RouteHandlers that are responsible for loading HttpHandler instances. RouteHandlers are invoked for every request that matches a route and through this RouteHandler instance the Handler gains access to the current RouteData. Because of this logic it’s important to understand that Routing is really tied to HttpHandlers and not available prior to handler instantiation, which is pretty late in the HttpRuntime’s request pipeline. IOW, Routing works with Handlers but not with earlier in the pipeline within Modules. Specifically ASP.NET calls RouteHandler.GetHandler() from the PostResolveRequestCache HttpRuntime pipeline event. Here’s the call stack at the beginning of the GetHandler() call: which fires just before handler resolution. Non-Page Routing – You need to build custom RouteHandlers If you need to route to a custom Http Handler or other non-Page (and non-MVC) endpoint in the HttpRuntime, there is no generic mapping support available. You need to create a custom RouteHandler that can manage creating an instance of an HttpHandler that is fired in response to a routed request. Depending on what you are doing this process can be simple or fairly involved as your code is responsible based on the route data provided which handler to instantiate, and more importantly how to pass the route data on to the Handler. Luckily creating a RouteHandler is easy by implementing the IRouteHandler interface which has only a single GetHttpHandler(RequestContext context) method. In this method you can pick up the requestContext.RouteData, instantiate the HttpHandler of choice, and assign the RouteData to it. Then pass back the handler and you’re done.Here’s a simple example of GetHttpHandler() method that dynamically creates a handler based on a passed in Handler type./// <summary> /// Retrieves an Http Handler based on the type specified in the constructor /// </summary> /// <param name="requestContext"></param> /// <returns></returns> IHttpHandler IRouteHandler.GetHttpHandler(RequestContext requestContext) { IHttpHandler handler = Activator.CreateInstance(CallbackHandlerType) as IHttpHandler; // If we're dealing with a Callback Handler // pass the RouteData for this route to the Handler if (handler is CallbackHandler) ((CallbackHandler)handler).RouteData = requestContext.RouteData; return handler; } Note that this code checks for a specific type of handler and if it matches assigns the RouteData to this handler. This is optional but quite a common scenario if you want to work with RouteData. If the handler you need to instantiate isn’t under your control but you still need to pass RouteData to Handler code, an alternative is to pass the RouteData via the HttpContext.Items collection:IHttpHandler IRouteHandler.GetHttpHandler(RequestContext requestContext) { IHttpHandler handler = Activator.CreateInstance(CallbackHandlerType) as IHttpHandler; requestContext.HttpContext.Items["RouteData"] = requestContext.RouteData; return handler; } The code in the handler implementation can then pick up the RouteData from the context collection as needed:RouteData routeData = HttpContext.Current.Items["RouteData"] as RouteData This isn’t as clean as having an explicit RouteData property, but it does have the advantage that the route data is visible anywhere in the Handler’s code chain. It’s definitely preferable to create a custom property on your handler, but the Context work-around works in a pinch when you don’t’ own the handler code and have dynamic code executing as part of the handler execution. An Example of a Custom RouteHandler: Attribute Based Route Implementation In this post I’m going to discuss a custom routine implementation I built for my CallbackHandler class in the West Wind Web & Ajax Toolkit. CallbackHandler can be very easily used for creating AJAX, REST and POX requests following RPC style method mapping. You can pass parameters via URL query string, POST data or raw data structures, and you can retrieve results as JSON, XML or raw string/binary data. It’s a quick and easy way to build service interfaces with no fuss. As a quick review here’s how CallbackHandler works: You create an Http Handler that derives from CallbackHandler You implement methods that have a [CallbackMethod] Attribute and that’s it. Here’s an example of an CallbackHandler implementation in an ashx.cs based handler:// RestService.ashx.cs public class RestService : CallbackHandler { [CallbackMethod] public StockQuote GetStockQuote(string symbol) { StockServer server = new StockServer(); return server.GetStockQuote(symbol); } [CallbackMethod] public StockQuote[] GetStockQuotes(string symbolList) { StockServer server = new StockServer(); string[] symbols = symbolList.Split(new char[2] { ',',';' },StringSplitOptions.RemoveEmptyEntries); return server.GetStockQuotes(symbols); } } CallbackHandler makes it super easy to create a method on the server, pass data to it via POST, QueryString or raw JSON/XML data, and then retrieve the results easily back in various formats. This works wonderful and I’ve used these tools in many projects for myself and with clients. But one thing missing has been the ability to create clean URLs. Typical URLs looked like this: http://www.west-wind.com/WestwindWebToolkit/samples/Rest/StockService.ashx?Method=GetStockQuote&symbol=msfthttp://www.west-wind.com/WestwindWebToolkit/samples/Rest/StockService.ashx?Method=GetStockQuotes&symbolList=msft,intc,gld,slw,mwe&format=xml which works and is clear enough, but also clearly very ugly. It would be much nicer if URLs could look like this: http://www.west-wind.com//WestwindWebtoolkit/Samples/StockQuote/msfthttp://www.west-wind.com/WestwindWebtoolkit/Samples/StockQuotes/msft,intc,gld,slw?format=xml (the Virtual Root in this sample is WestWindWebToolkit/Samples and StockQuote/{symbol} is the route)(If you use FireFox try using the JSONView plug-in make it easier to view JSON content) So, taking a clue from the WCF REST tools that use RouteUrls I set out to create a way to specify RouteUrls for each of the endpoints. The change made basically allows changing the above to: [CallbackMethod(RouteUrl="RestService/StockQuote/{symbol}")] public StockQuote GetStockQuote(string symbol) { StockServer server = new StockServer(); return server.GetStockQuote(symbol); } [CallbackMethod(RouteUrl = "RestService/StockQuotes/{symbolList}")] public StockQuote[] GetStockQuotes(string symbolList) { StockServer server = new StockServer(); string[] symbols = symbolList.Split(new char[2] { ',',';' },StringSplitOptions.RemoveEmptyEntries); return server.GetStockQuotes(symbols); } where a RouteUrl is specified as part of the Callback attribute. And with the changes made with RouteUrls I can now get URLs like the second set shown earlier. So how does that work? Let’s find out… How to Create Custom Routes As mentioned earlier Routing is made up of several steps: Creating a custom RouteHandler to create HttpHandler instances Mapping the actual Routes to the RouteHandler Retrieving the RouteData and actually doing something useful with it in the HttpHandler In the CallbackHandler routing example above this works out to something like this: Create a custom RouteHandler that includes a property to track the method to call Set up the routes using Reflection against the class Looking for any RouteUrls in the CallbackMethod attribute Add a RouteData property to the CallbackHandler so we can access the RouteData in the code of the handler Creating a Custom Route Handler To make the above work I created a custom RouteHandler class that includes the actual IRouteHandler implementation as well as a generic and static method to automatically register all routes marked with the [CallbackMethod(RouteUrl="…")] attribute. Here’s the code:/// <summary> /// Route handler that can create instances of CallbackHandler derived /// callback classes. The route handler tracks the method name and /// creates an instance of the service in a predictable manner /// </summary> /// <typeparam name="TCallbackHandler">CallbackHandler type</typeparam> public class CallbackHandlerRouteHandler : IRouteHandler { /// <summary> /// Method name that is to be called on this route. /// Set by the automatically generated RegisterRoutes /// invokation. /// </summary> public string MethodName { get; set; } /// <summary> /// The type of the handler we're going to instantiate. /// Needed so we can semi-generically instantiate the /// handler and call the method on it. /// </summary> public Type CallbackHandlerType { get; set; } /// <summary> /// Constructor to pass in the two required components we /// need to create an instance of our handler. /// </summary> /// <param name="methodName"></param> /// <param name="callbackHandlerType"></param> public CallbackHandlerRouteHandler(string methodName, Type callbackHandlerType) { MethodName = methodName; CallbackHandlerType = callbackHandlerType; } /// <summary> /// Retrieves an Http Handler based on the type specified in the constructor /// </summary> /// <param name="requestContext"></param> /// <returns></returns> IHttpHandler IRouteHandler.GetHttpHandler(RequestContext requestContext) { IHttpHandler handler = Activator.CreateInstance(CallbackHandlerType) as IHttpHandler; // If we're dealing with a Callback Handler // pass the RouteData for this route to the Handler if (handler is CallbackHandler) ((CallbackHandler)handler).RouteData = requestContext.RouteData; return handler; } /// <summary> /// Generic method to register all routes from a CallbackHandler /// that have RouteUrls defined on the [CallbackMethod] attribute /// </summary> /// <typeparam name="TCallbackHandler">CallbackHandler Type</typeparam> /// <param name="routes"></param> public static void RegisterRoutes<TCallbackHandler>(RouteCollection routes) { // find all methods var methods = typeof(TCallbackHandler).GetMethods(BindingFlags.Instance | BindingFlags.Public); foreach (var method in methods) { var attrs = method.GetCustomAttributes(typeof(CallbackMethodAttribute), false); if (attrs.Length < 1) continue; CallbackMethodAttribute attr = attrs[0] as CallbackMethodAttribute; if (string.IsNullOrEmpty(attr.RouteUrl)) continue; // Add the route routes.Add(method.Name, new Route(attr.RouteUrl, new CallbackHandlerRouteHandler(method.Name, typeof(TCallbackHandler)))); } } } The RouteHandler implements IRouteHandler, and its responsibility via the GetHandler method is to create an HttpHandler based on the route data. When ASP.NET calls GetHandler it passes a requestContext parameter which includes a requestContext.RouteData property. This parameter holds the current request’s route data as well as an instance of the current RouteHandler. If you look at GetHttpHandler() you can see that the code creates an instance of the handler we are interested in and then sets the RouteData property on the handler. This is how you can pass the current request’s RouteData to the handler. The RouteData object also has a  RouteData.RouteHandler property that is also available to the Handler later, which is useful in order to get additional information about the current route. In our case here the RouteHandler includes a MethodName property that identifies the method to execute in the handler since that value no longer comes from the URL so we need to figure out the method name some other way. The method name is mapped explicitly when the RouteHandler is created and here the static method that auto-registers all CallbackMethods with RouteUrls sets the method name when it creates the routes while reflecting over the methods (more on this in a minute). The important point here is that you can attach additional properties to the RouteHandler and you can then later access the RouteHandler and its properties later in the Handler to pick up these custom values. This is a crucial feature in that the RouteHandler serves in passing additional context to the handler so it knows what actions to perform. The automatic route registration is handled by the static RegisterRoutes<TCallbackHandler> method. This method is generic and totally reusable for any CallbackHandler type handler. To register a CallbackHandler and any RouteUrls it has defined you simple use code like this in Application_Start (or other application startup code):protected void Application_Start(object sender, EventArgs e) { // Register Routes for RestService CallbackHandlerRouteHandler.RegisterRoutes<RestService>(RouteTable.Routes); } If you have multiple CallbackHandler style services you can make multiple calls to RegisterRoutes for each of the service types. RegisterRoutes internally uses reflection to run through all the methods of the Handler, looking for CallbackMethod attributes and whether a RouteUrl is specified. If it is a new instance of a CallbackHandlerRouteHandler is created and the name of the method and the type are set. routes.Add(method.Name,           new Route(attr.RouteUrl, new CallbackHandlerRouteHandler(method.Name, typeof(TCallbackHandler) )) ); While the routing with CallbackHandlerRouteHandler is set up automatically for all methods that use the RouteUrl attribute, you can also use code to hook up those routes manually and skip using the attribute. The code for this is straightforward and just requires that you manually map each individual route to each method you want a routed: protected void Application_Start(objectsender, EventArgs e){    RegisterRoutes(RouteTable.Routes);}void RegisterRoutes(RouteCollection routes) { routes.Add("StockQuote Route",new Route("StockQuote/{symbol}",                     new CallbackHandlerRouteHandler("GetStockQuote",typeof(RestService) ) ) );     routes.Add("StockQuotes Route",new Route("StockQuotes/{symbolList}",                     new CallbackHandlerRouteHandler("GetStockQuotes",typeof(RestService) ) ) );}I think it’s clearly easier to have CallbackHandlerRouteHandler.RegisterRoutes() do this automatically for you based on RouteUrl attributes, but some people have a real aversion to attaching logic via attributes. Just realize that the option to manually create your routes is available as well. Using the RouteData in the Handler A RouteHandler’s responsibility is to create an HttpHandler and as mentioned earlier, natively IHttpHandler doesn’t have any support for RouteData. In order to utilize RouteData in your handler code you have to pass the RouteData to the handler. In my CallbackHandlerRouteHandler when it creates the HttpHandler instance it creates the instance and then assigns the custom RouteData property on the handler:IHttpHandler handler = Activator.CreateInstance(CallbackHandlerType) as IHttpHandler; if (handler is CallbackHandler) ((CallbackHandler)handler).RouteData = requestContext.RouteData; return handler; Again this only works if you actually add a RouteData property to your handler explicitly as I did in my CallbackHandler implementation:/// <summary> /// Optionally store RouteData on this handler /// so we can access it internally /// </summary> public RouteData RouteData {get; set; } and the RouteHandler needs to set it when it creates the handler instance. Once you have the route data in your handler you can access Route Keys and Values and also the RouteHandler. Since my RouteHandler has a custom property for the MethodName to retrieve it from within the handler I can do something like this now to retrieve the MethodName (this example is actually not in the handler but target is an instance pass to the processor): // check for Route Data method name if (target is CallbackHandler) { var routeData = ((CallbackHandler)target).RouteData; if (routeData != null) methodToCall = ((CallbackHandlerRouteHandler)routeData.RouteHandler).MethodName; } When I need to access the dynamic values in the route ( symbol in StockQuote/{symbol}) I can retrieve it easily with the Values collection (RouteData.Values["symbol"]). In my CallbackHandler processing logic I’m basically looking for matching parameter names to Route parameters: // look for parameters in the routeif(routeData != null){    string parmString = routeData.Values[parameter.Name] as string;    adjustedParms[parmCounter] = ReflectionUtils.StringToTypedValue(parmString, parameter.ParameterType);} And with that we’ve come full circle. We’ve created a custom RouteHandler() that passes the RouteData to the handler it creates. We’ve registered our routes to use the RouteHandler, and we’ve utilized the route data in our handler. For completeness sake here’s the routine that executes a method call based on the parameters passed in and one of the options is to retrieve the inbound parameters off RouteData (as well as from POST data or QueryString parameters):internal object ExecuteMethod(string method, object target, string[] parameters, CallbackMethodParameterType paramType, ref CallbackMethodAttribute callbackMethodAttribute) { HttpRequest Request = HttpContext.Current.Request; object Result = null; // Stores parsed parameters (from string JSON or QUeryString Values) object[] adjustedParms = null; Type PageType = target.GetType(); MethodInfo MI = PageType.GetMethod(method, BindingFlags.Instance | BindingFlags.Public | BindingFlags.NonPublic); if (MI == null) throw new InvalidOperationException("Invalid Server Method."); object[] methods = MI.GetCustomAttributes(typeof(CallbackMethodAttribute), false); if (methods.Length < 1) throw new InvalidOperationException("Server method is not accessible due to missing CallbackMethod attribute"); if (callbackMethodAttribute != null) callbackMethodAttribute = methods[0] as CallbackMethodAttribute; ParameterInfo[] parms = MI.GetParameters(); JSONSerializer serializer = new JSONSerializer(); RouteData routeData = null; if (target is CallbackHandler) routeData = ((CallbackHandler)target).RouteData; int parmCounter = 0; adjustedParms = new object[parms.Length]; foreach (ParameterInfo parameter in parms) { // Retrieve parameters out of QueryString or POST buffer if (parameters == null) { // look for parameters in the route if (routeData != null) { string parmString = routeData.Values[parameter.Name] as string; adjustedParms[parmCounter] = ReflectionUtils.StringToTypedValue(parmString, parameter.ParameterType); } // GET parameter are parsed as plain string values - no JSON encoding else if (HttpContext.Current.Request.HttpMethod == "GET") { // Look up the parameter by name string parmString = Request.QueryString[parameter.Name]; adjustedParms[parmCounter] = ReflectionUtils.StringToTypedValue(parmString, parameter.ParameterType); } // POST parameters are treated as methodParameters that are JSON encoded else if (paramType == CallbackMethodParameterType.Json) //string newVariable = methodParameters.GetValue(parmCounter) as string; adjustedParms[parmCounter] = serializer.Deserialize(Request.Params["parm" + (parmCounter + 1).ToString()], parameter.ParameterType); else adjustedParms[parmCounter] = SerializationUtils.DeSerializeObject( Request.Params["parm" + (parmCounter + 1).ToString()], parameter.ParameterType); } else if (paramType == CallbackMethodParameterType.Json) adjustedParms[parmCounter] = serializer.Deserialize(parameters[parmCounter], parameter.ParameterType); else adjustedParms[parmCounter] = SerializationUtils.DeSerializeObject(parameters[parmCounter], parameter.ParameterType); parmCounter++; } Result = MI.Invoke(target, adjustedParms); return Result; } The code basically uses Reflection to loop through all the parameters available on the method and tries to assign the parameters from RouteData, QueryString or POST variables. The parameters are converted into their appropriate types and then used to eventually make a Reflection based method call. What’s sweet is that the RouteData retrieval is just another option for dealing with the inbound data in this scenario and it adds exactly two lines of code plus the code to retrieve the MethodName I showed previously – a seriously low impact addition that adds a lot of extra value to this endpoint callback processing implementation. Debugging your Routes If you create a lot of routes it’s easy to run into Route conflicts where multiple routes have the same path and overlap with each other. This can be difficult to debug especially if you are using automatically generated routes like the routes created by CallbackHandlerRouteHandler.RegisterRoutes. Luckily there’s a tool that can help you out with this nicely. Phill Haack created a RouteDebugging tool you can download and add to your project. The easiest way to do this is to grab and add this to your project is to use NuGet (Add Library Package from your Project’s Reference Nodes):   which adds a RouteDebug assembly to your project. Once installed you can easily debug your routes with this simple line of code which needs to be installed at application startup:protected void Application_Start(object sender, EventArgs e) { CallbackHandlerRouteHandler.RegisterRoutes<StockService>(RouteTable.Routes); // Debug your routes RouteDebug.RouteDebugger.RewriteRoutesForTesting(RouteTable.Routes); } Any routed URL then displays something like this: The screen shows you your current route data and all the routes that are mapped along with a flag that displays which route was actually matched. This is useful – if you have any overlap of routes you will be able to see which routes are triggered – the first one in the sequence wins. This tool has saved my ass on a few occasions – and with NuGet now it’s easy to add it to your project in a few seconds and then remove it when you’re done. Routing Around Custom routing seems slightly complicated on first blush due to its disconnected components of RouteHandler, route registration and mapping of custom handlers. But once you understand the relationship between a RouteHandler, the RouteData and how to pass it to a handler, utilizing of Routing becomes a lot easier as you can easily pass context from the registration to the RouteHandler and through to the HttpHandler. The most important thing to understand when building custom routing solutions is to figure out how to map URLs in such a way that the handler can figure out all the pieces it needs to process the request. This can be via URL routing parameters and as I did in my example by passing additional context information as part of the RouteHandler instance that provides the proper execution context. In my case this ‘context’ was the method name, but it could be an actual static value like an enum identifying an operation or category in an application. Basically user supplied data comes in through the url and static application internal data can be passed via RouteHandler property values. Routing can make your application URLs easier to read by non-techie types regardless of whether you’re building Service type or REST applications, or full on Web interfaces. Routing in ASP.NET 4.0 makes it possible to create just about any extensionless URLs you can dream up and custom RouteHanmdler References Sample ProjectIncludes the sample CallbackHandler service discussed here along with compiled versionsof the Westwind.Web and Westwind.Utilities assemblies.  (requires .NET 4.0/VS 2010) West Wind Web Toolkit includes full implementation of CallbackHandler and the Routing Handler West Wind Web Toolkit Source CodeContains the full source code to the Westwind.Web and Westwind.Utilities assemblies usedin these samples. Includes the source described in the post.(Latest build in the Subversion Repository) CallbackHandler Source(Relevant code to this article tree in Westwind.Web assembly) JSONView FireFoxPluginA simple FireFox Plugin to easily view JSON data natively in FireFox.For IE you can use a registry hack to display JSON as raw text.© Rick Strahl, West Wind Technologies, 2005-2011Posted in ASP.NET  AJAX  HTTP  

    Read the article

  • Zend Router Route Regex with Search params

    - by balan-mahadevan
    Hi , Trying to grab the params after ?. I need them to add to the Zend_Paginator. ex: http://www.example.com/test/show?name=xxx&age=20&sex=m Building a paginator for search results. Is there any solution for that ? $router = new Zend_Controller_Router_Route_Regex( 'test/show\?(.*)', array( 'controller' = 'test', 'action' = 'show', 'module' = 'user' ), array( 1 = 'q' ), 'test/show%s' ); $router_prev->addRoute('view',$router);

    Read the article

  • Loosing Route data in RedirectToAction

    - by user1512359
    hi i have a weird problem and here we go: i am redirecting using this command : return RedirectToAction("ViewMessage", "Account", new {id = model.MessageId}); but in ViewMessage action when i try to get id, its null ?!?!?!?!?? string strMessageId = RouteData.Values["id"] as string; i have done this code in lots of places and it works fine but i dont know what is going on here.... :( i know i can use TempData but i dont want to :)

    Read the article

  • Persistent static route stops working after VPN drops and reconnects

    - by user76157
    I've got a VPN between two networks, one home and one office (A and B). Their subnets are: (A) 192.168.1.0 and (B) 192.168.0.0 The two networks have identical ADSL routers. Unfortunately these can only do dial-out VPN. So I've got a Windows 2008 server on Network B acting as a VPN server (ServerB). Network A's router (RouterA) passes through Network B's router and connects via PPTP to ServerB. RouterA is assigned the static IP 192.168.0.40 on Network B. There's a persistent static route on ServerB telling it to use 0.40 for all requests to Network A's subnet, 192.168.1.0. (route -p add 192.168.1.0 mask 255.255.255.0 192.168.0.40). This enables ServerB to ping all machines on A (and those machines to ping ServerB). The VPN connection occasionally drops (I'm not sure why - it's set to remain always on and seems to drop randomly). This wouldn't be too much of a problem, as it reconnects automatically and quickly, except that when it does reconnect, the static route on ServerB no longer works. Route print (on ServerB) shows that the persistent static route still exists. However a tracert to a machine on Network A doesn't use the static route; it tries instead to use ServerB's default gateway (which is RouterB), and fails to find the machine. Deleting and re-adding the static route fixes the problem - a tracert uses the static route. At the moment, a batch file to delete and re-add the static route is scheduled to run every day. But this is clearly far from an ideal solution! I hope that's not too confusing. Any help would be very much appreciated.

    Read the article

  • VPN: Disable class based route addition for Windows XP/Vista

    - by brgsousa
    Paraphrasing this SuperUser link: When you set up a VPN, the Windows default is to enable "Use default gateway on remote network." A new default route is added to the routing table pointing to the remote network's gateway, and the existing default route has its metric increased to force all Internet traffic to traverse the tunnel and use the remote network's gateway. All traffic uses the VPN, and traffic destined for the outside world is directed to the remote gateway. When the VPN drops, the route to the remote gateway is removed and the original default route is set back to the original metric. Unchecking "use default gateway on remote network" means that new default route isn't added, so Internet traffic goes out the local gateway, but a new classful route is added to the routing table, using the local adapter's IP, pointing down the VPN. Only traffic destined for the classful network of the local adapter goes down the VPN. This may not be what you want. Checking "Disable class based route addition" means that classful route isn't added to your machine when the VPN starts up, and you'll need to add the appropriate routes for networks that should be routed through the tunnel. But, the option "Disable class based route addition" is available ONLY for Windows 7. How can I do something like that for Windows XP or Vista since they don't have that option? I have searched about for that but, no solution yet.

    Read the article

  • Why is Windows 7 not following all routes?

    - by GigabyteProductions
    My computer is connected to my secondary router that's running the 192.168.42.0/24 network and my computer also has a route that directs anything on that network to the router, but for anything on that network other than the router itself, it get's the ICMP response of Reply from 192.168.42.194: Destination host unreachable. (with 192.168.42.194 being my computer). Every other network works, like all of the internet, or addresses on my primary router like 192.168.1.*, just not on the 192.168.42.0/24 network... route print returns: IPv4 Route Table =========================================================================== Active Routes: Network Destination Netmask Gateway Interface Metric 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 192.168.42.1 192.168.42.194 276 127.0.0.0 255.0.0.0 On-link 127.0.0.1 306 127.0.0.1 255.255.255.255 On-link 127.0.0.1 306 127.255.255.255 255.255.255.255 On-link 127.0.0.1 306 192.168.42.0 255.255.255.0 On-link 192.168.42.194 276 192.168.42.194 255.255.255.255 On-link 192.168.42.194 276 192.168.42.255 255.255.255.255 On-link 192.168.42.194 276 224.0.0.0 240.0.0.0 On-link 127.0.0.1 306 224.0.0.0 240.0.0.0 On-link 192.168.42.194 276 255.255.255.255 255.255.255.255 On-link 127.0.0.1 306 255.255.255.255 255.255.255.255 On-link 192.168.42.194 276 =========================================================================== Persistent Routes: Network Address Netmask Gateway Address Metric 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 192.168.42.1 Default =========================================================================== The only time anything is supposed to send an ICMP Host Unreachable response is when there's no route to it, right? So, why is my own computer sending that to ping or tracert when I have the route of 192.168.42.0 with the mask of 255.255.255.0? An IP address of 192.168.42.2 surely fits into that route. If I explicitly add a route for the IP address i am trying to access, it works, like: route add 192.168.42.2 mask 255.255.255.255 192.168.42.1 (the 192.168.42.1 right after mask is gateway, or the device to send the packet to so it can route it further), but why wont it work for the implicit route that's automatically on the table? I disabled my firewall, too (I use Comodo if anyone thinks this still serves as a problem). I'v even tried explicitly adding the gateway of 192.168.42.1 to the 192.168.42.0/24 route instead of it routing through 0.0.0.0's gateway, which is what On-link does. but that didn't work either, so it's not a gateway specification problem. If the host was really unreachable, it would be the router's IP address (192.168.42.1) sending that to me... This network is all of my creation, so there's no problem such as an administrator locking me out, because i am the administrator.

    Read the article

  • Having two IP Routes/Gateways of last Resort on an HP Switch

    - by SteadH
    We have an HP Layer 3 Switch that is doing IP routing between vlans. The general set up is that the switch has an IP address on each VLAN and IP routing is enabled. On our servers VLAN, we have a firewall that has a connection to the outside world. To set a IP route on the HP router, we use IOS command ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 192.168.2.1 where 192.168.2.1 is the address of our firewall, and the zeros essentially mean to route all traffic that the switch doesn't know what to do with out the firewall as a gateway. We're in the middle of an ISP and firewall change. I set up the new firewall and ran the IOS command ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 192.168.2.254 (the address of the new firewall). Things started working nicely. When I reviewed the configuration of the switch though, I noticed that it did not replace the previous ip route command, but just added another route. Now, I know how to remove the old firewall route (no ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 192.168.2.1), but what is the effect of having these two 0.0.0.0 routes? Is it switch implosion? Will a server just respond back over the route it receives the request from? I've read elsewhere that having two default gateways is an impossibility by definition, but I'm curious about this situation that our switch allowed. Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Windows 7: how can I add an IP range in the "route" command?

    - by KeyStroke
    Hi, I'm using two network connections, and I tried using the "route" command so that when I access a specific internal IP on my LAN, it would use connection 1, anything else would go normally through connection 2 (which doesn't have access to my LAN). The problem is I have a bunch of internal IP's that I need to access, and the "route" command doesn't seem to allow me to add an IP range instead of specific IP. And connection 1 doesn't have internet access, so I can't use it as my default connection. Any idea how this can be solved? Your help is appreciated

    Read the article

  • BGP path prepended route not listed anywhere

    - by Julien Vehent
    We have a simple multi-homed setup with two routers that advertise our AS to two ISP. The second ISP (ISP B) is only used for backup when ISP A goes down, so we prepended our AS 3 times on this route. I spend a couple of hours this morning poking at looking glass routers all over the internet, and none of them list our backup route with the prepended path. I checked the south african internet exchange, the london internet exchange, oregon internet exchange and a couple dozen ISPs. All of them have multiples routes through ISP A, often with 3 or 4 hops. The route through ISP B should, at least, appear somewhere and have 5 or 6 hops. But I couldn't find it anywhere. (I checked the full bgp tables on the looking glass routers, using show ip bgp 65000) My questions are: Is there a limit to the size of a route after which most routers will simply discard the route ? Is our backup route even going to work when ISP A goes down, if no router knows about it ? Our two routers are connected on iBGP. Would it be possible that the route through ISPB is not announced because the iBGP session prefers the route through ISPA ? This is what non-exist-map and advertise-map are supposed to do, but none of those are used in either routers.

    Read the article

  • How to route traffic from VM (Parallels) over an Open VPN connection on the host (OS X)

    - by withakay
    Scenario: I have a Mac running Lion that is connected to an OpenVPN server I have a Windows XP VM (running on parallels, but I don't think this is important) I want to be able to route traffic from the XP VM via the host Mac's OpenVPN connection so that I can log on to a domain. The remote network is 172.16.0.0/23 (255.255.254.0) Open VPN is configured to supply address in the 10.100.101.0/24 range and sets up the routing to 172.16.0.0 using the gateway 10.100.101.1/32 My local network is 192.16.1.0/24 NOTE: I do not want to install OpenVPN into the XP virtual machine as I would have to use a passwordless key in order for OpenVPN to connect before logon. Anyone got any ideas?

    Read the article

  • ERROR: Linux route add command failed: external program exited with error status: 4

    - by JohnMerlino
    A remote machine running fedora uses openvpn, and multiple developers were successfully able to connect to it via their client openvpn. However, I am running Ubuntu 12.04 and I am having trouble connecting to the server via vpn. I copied ca.crt, home.key, and home.crt from the server to my local machine to /etc/openvpn folder. My client.conf file looks like this: ############################################## # Sample client-side OpenVPN 2.0 config file # # for connecting to multi-client server. # # # # This configuration can be used by multiple # # clients, however each client should have # # its own cert and key files. # # # # On Windows, you might want to rename this # # file so it has a .ovpn extension # ############################################## # Specify that we are a client and that we # will be pulling certain config file directives # from the server. client # Use the same setting as you are using on # the server. # On most systems, the VPN will not function # unless you partially or fully disable # the firewall for the TUN/TAP interface. ;dev tap dev tun # Windows needs the TAP-Win32 adapter name # from the Network Connections panel # if you have more than one. On XP SP2, # you may need to disable the firewall # for the TAP adapter. ;dev-node MyTap # Are we connecting to a TCP or # UDP server? Use the same setting as # on the server. ;proto tcp proto udp # The hostname/IP and port of the server. # You can have multiple remote entries # to load balance between the servers. remote xx.xxx.xx.130 1194 ;remote my-server-2 1194 # Choose a random host from the remote # list for load-balancing. Otherwise # try hosts in the order specified. ;remote-random # Keep trying indefinitely to resolve the # host name of the OpenVPN server. Very useful # on machines which are not permanently connected # to the internet such as laptops. resolv-retry infinite # Most clients don't need to bind to # a specific local port number. nobind # Downgrade privileges after initialization (non-Windows only) ;user nobody ;group nogroup # Try to preserve some state across restarts. persist-key persist-tun # If you are connecting through an # HTTP proxy to reach the actual OpenVPN # server, put the proxy server/IP and # port number here. See the man page # if your proxy server requires # authentication. ;http-proxy-retry # retry on connection failures ;http-proxy [proxy server] [proxy port #] # Wireless networks often produce a lot # of duplicate packets. Set this flag # to silence duplicate packet warnings. ;mute-replay-warnings # SSL/TLS parms. # See the server config file for more # description. It's best to use # a separate .crt/.key file pair # for each client. A single ca # file can be used for all clients. ca ca.crt cert home.crt key home.key # Verify server certificate by checking # that the certicate has the nsCertType # field set to "server". This is an # important precaution to protect against # a potential attack discussed here: # http://openvpn.net/howto.html#mitm # # To use this feature, you will need to generate # your server certificates with the nsCertType # field set to "server". The build-key-server # script in the easy-rsa folder will do this. ns-cert-type server # If a tls-auth key is used on the server # then every client must also have the key. ;tls-auth ta.key 1 # Select a cryptographic cipher. # If the cipher option is used on the server # then you must also specify it here. ;cipher x # Enable compression on the VPN link. # Don't enable this unless it is also # enabled in the server config file. comp-lzo # Set log file verbosity. verb 3 # Silence repeating messages ;mute 20 But when I start server and look in /var/log/syslog, I notice the following error: May 27 22:13:51 myuser ovpn-client[5626]: /sbin/route add -net 10.27.12.1 netmask 255.255.255.252 gw 10.27.12.37 May 27 22:13:51 myuser ovpn-client[5626]: ERROR: Linux route add command failed: external program exited with error status: 4 May 27 22:13:51 myuser ovpn-client[5626]: /sbin/route add -net 172.27.12.0 netmask 255.255.255.0 gw 10.27.12.37 May 27 22:13:51 myuser ovpn-client[5626]: /sbin/route add -net 10.27.12.1 netmask 255.255.255.255 gw 10.27.12.37 And I am unable to connect to the server via openvpn: $ ssh [email protected] ssh: connect to host xxx.xx.xx.130 port 22: No route to host What may I be doing wrong?

    Read the article

  • Default IPv6 route on debian squeeze does not come up after boot

    - by Georg Bretschneider
    I have a problem with my default IPv6 route not coming up after boot on a Debian Squeeze system. This is my config (/etc/network/interfaces): # Loopback device: auto lo iface lo inet loopback iface lo inet6 loopback # device: br0 auto br0 iface br0 inet static bridge_ports eth0 bridge_fd 0 address 88.198.62.xx broadcast 88.198.62.63 netmask 255.255.255.224 gateway 88.198.62.33 up route add -net 88.198.62.32 netmask 255.255.255.224 gw 88.198.62.33 br0 iface br0 inet6 static address 2a01:4f8:131:10x::2 netmask 64 gateway 2a01:4f8:131:100::1 up route -A inet6 add 2a01:4f8:131:100::1/59 dev br0 My inet comes up alright, but I have to exec the route command manually after boot to make IPv6 work. Otherwise I can't even reach my gateway. This is the output of ip -6 route show after boot: 2a01:4f8:131:10x::/64 dev br0 proto kernel metric 256 mtu 1500 advmss 1440 hoplimit 4294967295 unreachable fe80::/64 dev lo proto kernel metric 256 error -101 mtu 16436 advmss 16376 hoplimit 4294967295 fe80::/64 dev br0 proto kernel metric 256 mtu 1500 advmss 1440 hoplimit 4294967295 fe80::/64 dev eth0 proto kernel metric 256 mtu 1500 advmss 1440 hoplimit 4294967295 I already tried it with: up ip -6 route add 2a01:4f8:131:100::1 dev br0 up ip -6 route add default via 2a01:4f8:131:100::1 dev br0 in /etc/network/interfaces, but with the same results. If I execute those commands manually on my shell, everything starts working nicely. And yes, I tried with post-up instead of up, too. Only other changes I made was to activate ip forwarding for IPv6, because I want to run some LXC containers on that system.

    Read the article

  • Advertise a subnet route with radvd

    - by Thomas Berger
    we have set up a small IPv6 Testing network. The setup looks like this: ::/0 +----------+ | Firewall | Router to the public net +----------+ | 2001:...::/106 | +----------+ +-------| SIT GW | sit Tunnel gatway to the some test users | +----------+ | +----------+ | Test Sys | Testsystem +----------+ The idea is to advertise the default route from the firewall and the route for the SIT subnets from the sit gateway. The configurations for radvd are: # Firewall interface eth0 { AdvSendAdvert on; route ::/0 { }; }; # SIT Gatway interface eth0 { AdvSendAdvert on; route 2001:...::/106 { }; }; We have captured the adv. packages with tcpdump and the packages looks good. We see a default route from the fw, and the subnet route from the SIT gatway. But if we look on the testsystem there are two default routes over both gateways. There is no subnet route. The routing does not work of course. Here the routes we get: 2001:.....::/64 dev eth0 proto kernel metric 256 mtu 1500 advmss 1440 hoplimit 4294967295 fe80::/64 dev eth0 proto kernel metric 256 mtu 1500 advmss 1440 hoplimit 4294967295 default via fe80::baac:6fff:fe8e:XXXX dev eth0 proto kernel metric 1024 expires 0sec mtu 1500 advmss 1440 hoplimit 64 default via fe80::e415:aeff:fe12:XXXX dev eth0 proto kernel metric 1024 expires 0sec mtu 1500 advmss 1440 hoplimit 64 Any Idea?

    Read the article

  • How to route outbound traffic to specific domain "XYZ.org" via a specific NIC or public/static IP?

    - by user139943
    Within the next week or so, I'll be setting up an AT&T U-verse modem with 5 usable static public IP addresses. I plan to register a domain name to 1 of the 5 static IPs (remaining 4 unregistered), and run a website from a single server setup in my home LAN. I'll skip the long winded reason why, but I need to somehow route outbound traffic (originating from my server) destined for one public domain (i.e. http://www.sample.org) through one of the UNREGISTERED static IP addresses ONLY. Basically, I want this public domain to see connections coming from an IP address and not my domain name. If it makes it easier, this can apply to all outbound traffic from my server as long as it doesn't impact users browsing my website! Inbound connections should go through the domain name / registered public IP. Can I accomplish this with my single server with one or multiple NICs? Do I need multiple servers and set one up as a proxy? Please help as my background is in software and not networking, and I don't think I can accomplish this at a software level (e.g. Java). Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Routing subnet over GRE tunnel

    - by eMgz
    Hi, Im trying to configure a GRE over IPSec connection between two subnets. The IPSec tunnel is opened and now I want to add a GRE tunnel over it: ip tunnel add GRE01 mode gre remote 10.244.0.1 local 10.244.245.32 ttl 255 ip link set GRE01 up ip addr add 10.244.248.126 dev GRE01 ip route add 10.244.248.125 dev GRE01 Now I have an interface GRE01 (ifconfig): GRE10 Link encap:UNSPEC HWaddr <h_addr> inet addr:10.244.248.126 P-t-P:10.244.248.126 Mask: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: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) And the following routes (ip route list): 10.244.248.125 dev GRE10 scope link <pub_subnet> dev eth0 proto kernel scope link src <pub_ip> default via <pub_gw> dev eth0 metric 100 As a last step, I need now to route my subnet over the tunnel: ip route add 10.245.1.224/28 10.244.248.125 However, I am getting the error Error: either "to" is duplicate, or "10.244.248.125" is a garbage. So, what I didn't understand is why I can't route my subnet over the tunnel, once the only route I have there says that it should route the tunnel IP over the GRE01 interface. Any hint? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • pix 501, static route to d-link router (different subnet)

    - by ra170
    I have pix 501 cisco firewall with internal ip 192.168.10.1. I have connected d-link router (dir-655) to pix 501. The d-link router has internal ip 192.168.0.1 The picture would like something like that: |pix 501| has 192.168.10.1 ip |DIR-655| has 192.168.0.1 ip 1. |cable modem|----|pix 501|-------|DIR-655|-----PC 2. PC--------|pix 501|---------|DIR-655| | | |cable modem| When I'm on the wireless network (dir-655) with assigned ip of 192.168.0.x I can cross the subnet and connect to my firewall 192.168.10.1. (pic. 1) The problem is that if I'm on the 192.168.10.x network I can't connect to anything over at 192.168.0.x network. (pic.2) I've tried entering a static route like this: `route inside 192.168.0.0 255.255.255.0 192.168.10.1 1` I also tried assigning static ip to wan interface on DIR-655 to 192.168.10.30 and then tried this: route inside 192.168.0.0 255.255.255.0 192.168.10.30 1 But still, can't connect to 192.168.0.1 or anything on that subnet. Is there a way to setup a static route? Would adding a separate router between PIX 501 and DIR-655 help? I would think that static route like this should take care of it, but it doesn't. This is my route config and nat: (config)# sh route outside 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 (outside_IP) 1 DHCP static outside (outside_IP) 255.255.248.0 (outside_IP) 1 CONNECT static inside 192.168.0.0 255.255.255.0 192.168.10.1 1 OTHER static inside 192.168.10.0 255.255.255.0 192.168.10.1 1 CONNECT static or (route inside 192.168.0.0 255.255.255.0 192.168.10.30 1) (config)# sh nat nat (inside) 1 192.168.1.0 255.255.255.0 0 0 nat (inside) 1 192.168.10.0 255.255.255.0 0 0 nat (inside) 1 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 0 0 I ended up turning DIR-655 into an Access Point (turning off DHCP and pluging cable from PIX lan interface into one of the LAN interfaces on DIR-655, and leaving WAN port empty), that works as far as DIR-655 being on the same subnet now, and I can access every machine. However the question is, why can't I simply route between those two? would router between these two help? One of the reasons is, that the PIX 501 has only 10 licences, so now I'm using almost all of them. (I have few computers, iphones, ps3, print server, etc.) I would really appreciate some help! Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Need assistance with Kohana 3 and catch all route turning into a 404 error

    - by alex
    Based on this documentation, I've implemented a catch all route which routes to an error page. Here is the last route in my bootstrap.php Route::set('default', '<path>', array('path' => '.+')) ->defaults(array( 'controller' => 'errors', 'action' => '404', )); However I keep getting this exception thrown when I try and go to a non existent page Kohana_Exception [ 0 ]: Required route parameter not passed: path If I make the <path> segment optional (i.e. wrap it in parenthesis) then it just seems to load the home route, which is... Route::set('home', '') ->defaults(array( 'controller' => 'home', 'action' => 'index', )); The home route is defined first. I execute my main request like so $request = Request::instance(); try { // Attempt to execute the response $request->execute(); } catch (Exception $e) { if (Kohana::$environment === Kohana::DEVELOPMENT) throw $e; // Log the error Kohana::$log->add(Kohana::ERROR, Kohana::exception_text($e)); // Create a 404 response $request->status = 404; $request->response = Request::factory(Route::get('default')->uri())->execute(); } $request->send_headers(); echo $request->response; This means that the 404 header is sent to the browser, but I assumed by sending the request to the capture all route then it should show the 404 error set up in my errors controller. <?php defined('SYSPATH') or die('No direct script access.'); class Controller_Errors extends Controller_Base { public function before() { parent::before(); } public function action_404() { $this->bodyClass[] = '404'; $this->internalView = View::factory('internal/not_found'); $longTitle = 'Page Not Found'; $this->titlePrefix = $longTitle; } } Why won't it show my 404 error page?

    Read the article

  • Optional route parameters in ASP.NET 4 RTM no longer work as before

    - by Simon_Weaver
    I upgraded my project to ASP.NET 4 RTM with ASP.NET MVC 2.0 RTM today. I was previously using ASP.NET 3.5 with ASP.NET MVC 2.0 RTM. Some of my routes don't work suddenly and I don't know why. I'm not sure if something changed between 3.5 and 4.0 - or if this was a regression type issue in the 4.0 RTM. (I never previously tested my app with 4.0). I like to use Url.RouteUrl("route-name", routeParams) to avoid ambiguity when generating URLs. Here's my route definition for a gallery page. I want imageID to be optional (you get a thumbnail page if you don't specify it). // gallery id routes.MapRoute( "gallery-route", "gallery/{galleryID}/{imageID}/{title}", new { controller = "Gallery", action = "Index", galleryID = (string) null, imageID = (string) null, title = (string) null} ); In .NET 3.5 / ASP.NET 2.0 RTM / IIS7 Url.RouteUrl("gallery-route", "cats") => /gallery/cats Url.RouteUrl("gallery-route", "cats", 4) => /gallery/cats/4 Url.RouteUrl("gallery-route", "cats", 4, "tiddles") => /gallery/cats/4/tiddles In .NET 4.0 RTM / ASP.NET 2.0 RTM / IIS7 Url.RouteUrl("gallery-route", "cats") => null Url.RouteUrl("gallery-route", "cats", 4) => /gallery/cats/4 Url.RouteUrl("gallery-route", "cats", 4, "tiddles") => /gallery/cats/4/tiddles Previously I could supply only the galleryID and everything else would be ignored in the generated URL. But now it's looking like I need to specify all the parameters up until title - or it gives up in determining the URL. Incoming URLs work fine for /gallery/cats and that is correctly mapped through this rule with imageID and title both being assigned null in my controller. I also tested the INCOMING routes with http://haacked.com/archive/2008/03/13/url-routing-debugger.aspx and they all work fine.

    Read the article

  • Microsoft dévoile la feuille de route de ses produits d'administration, et présente sa solution clou

    Microsoft dévoile la feuille de route de ses produits d'administration, et présente sa solution cloud Windows Intune Le Microsoft Management Summit a actuellement lieu à Las Vegas. Il s'y déroule du 19 au 23 Avril et permet de faire le point sur les produits d'administration de la firme de Redmond. Mardi, Microsoft y a dévoilé la feuille de route de ses produits d'administration avant de présenter Windows Intune : une solution « in the Cloud » pour administrer les postes de travail. Retrouvez tous les détails sur ces deux nouvelles dans le communiqué de presse que nous a fait parvenir le service de presse de Microsoft France : ...

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >