Search Results

Search found 5589 results on 224 pages for 'rules and constraints'.

Page 30/224 | < Previous Page | 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37  | Next Page >

  • Windows updates behind a physical firewall with only IP based rules and generic outbound connections are turned off

    - by user125245
    I have some boxes that I do not want to allow any in or outbound traffic to the internet Except for windows updates. However the fire wall in place (Cisco ASA) apparently only supports ip based rules. As best I can tell access to Microsoft updates via anything other then the half dozen URL masks the Microsoft lists as needed does not appear possible. I have kicked around building a full WSUS that I would then manually copy the update files to so that no direct Microsoft access is needed but this sounds very top heavy for the very few boxes involved. I have also kicked around manual updates all around but am not certain how to be conveniently and confidently sure that the correct updates are being applied in the correct order. Any ideas from any direction would be appreciated. I want this as simple / cost effective as possible but have very little flexibility on the only absolutely required internet access policy.

    Read the article

  • Can mod_rewrite Conditions/Rules be executed in random order?

    - by Tom
    I have some mod rewrite rules that test for the presence of a file on various NFS mounts and I would like that the tests occur randomly, as a very rudimentary way to distribute load. For example: RewriteEngine on RewriteCond %{REQUEST_URI} ^/(.+)$ RewriteCond /mnt/mount1/%1 -f RewriteRule ^/(.+)$ /mnt/mount1/$1 [L] RewriteCond %{REQUEST_URI} ^/(.+)$ RewriteCond /mnt/mount2/%1 -f RewriteRule ^/(.+)$ /mount2/$1 [L] RewriteCond %{REQUEST_URI} ^/(.+)$ RewriteCond /mnt/mount3/%1 -f RewriteRule ^/(.+)$ /mnt/mount3/$1 [L] RewriteCond %{REQUEST_URI} ^/(.+)$ RewriteCond /mnt/mount4/%1 -f RewriteRule ^/(.+)$ /mnt/mount4/$1 [L] As far as I understand mod_rewrite Apache will look for the file on /mnt/mount1, then mount2, mount3 and so on. Can I randomize this on each request? I understand this is an odd request but I need a creative solution to some unforeseen downtime. On a side note, do I need to redeclare RewriteCond %{REQUEST_URI} ^/(.+)$ each time like I have done? Thanks

    Read the article

  • How to inspect/modify Windows Firewall rules while the Windows Firewall/ICS service is stopped and disabled?

    - by Kal
    I'm trying to fix up my friend's remote Windows Server 2003 R2 machine. I have Remote Desktop access at the moment. However, I notice that Windows Firewall/Internet Connection Sharing service of the remote machine is disabled, which seems to be a bad idea. If I enable and start the service now, I may lose my Remote Desktop access in case the exception rule for Remode Desktop has not been defined in Windows Firewall. So I need a way to inspect and modify exception rules even as the Windows Firewall/ICS service is stopped and disabled. Does anybody know how?

    Read the article

  • Keeping track of File System Utilization in Ops Center 12c

    - by S Stelting
    Enterprise Manager Ops Center 12c provides significant monitoring capabilities, combined with very flexible incident management. These capabilities even extend to monitoring the file systems associated with Solaris or Linux assets. Depending on your needs you can monitor and manage incidents, or you can fine tune alert monitoring rules to specific file systems. This article will show you how to use Ops Center 12c to Track file system utilization Adjust file system monitoring rules Disable file system rules Create custom monitoring rules If you're interested in this topic, please join us for a WebEx presentation! Date: Thursday, November 8, 2012 Time: 11:00 am, Eastern Standard Time (New York, GMT-05:00) Meeting Number: 598 796 842 Meeting Password: oracle123 To join the online meeting ------------------------------------------------------- 1. Go to https://oracleconferencing.webex.com/oracleconferencing/j.php?ED=209833597&UID=1512095432&PW=NOWQ3YjJlMmYy&RT=MiMxMQ%3D%3D 2. If requested, enter your name and email address. 3. If a password is required, enter the meeting password: oracle123 4. Click "Join". To view in other time zones or languages, please click the link: https://oracleconferencing.webex.com/oracleconferencing/j.php?ED=209833597&UID=1512095432&PW=NOWQ3YjJlMmYy&ORT=MiMxMQ%3D%3D   Monitoring File Systems for OS Assets The Libraries tab provides basic, device-level information about the storage associated with an OS instance. This tab shows you the local file system associated with the instance and any shared storage libraries mounted by Ops Center. More detailed information about file system storage is available under the Analytics tab under the sub-tab named Charts. Here, you can select and display the individual mount points of an OS, and export the utilization data if desired: In this example, the OS instance has a basic root file partition and several NFS directories. Each file system mount point can be independently chosen for display in the Ops Center chart. File Systems and Incident  Reporting Every asset managed by Ops Center has a "monitoring policy", which determines what represents a reportable issue with the asset. The policy is made up of a bunch of monitoring rules, where each rule describes An attribute to monitor The conditions which represent an issue The level or levels of severity for the issue When the conditions are met, Ops Center sends a notification and creates an incident. By default, OS instances have three monitoring rules associated with file systems: File System Reachability: Triggers an incident if a file system is not reachable NAS Library Status: Triggers an incident for a value of "WARNING" or "DEGRADED" for a NAS-based file system File System Used Space Percentage: Triggers an incident when file system utilization grows beyond defined thresholds You can view these rules in the Monitoring tab for an OS: Of course, the default monitoring rules is that they apply to every file system associated with an OS instance. As a result, any issue with NAS accessibility or disk utilization will trigger an incident. This can cause incidents for file systems to be reported multiple times if the same shared storage is used by many assets, as shown in this screen shot: Depending on the level of control you'd like, there are a number of ways to fine tune incident reporting. Note that any changes to an asset's monitoring policy will detach it from the default, creating a new monitoring policy for the asset. If you'd like, you can extract a monitoring policy from an asset, which allows you to save it and apply the customized monitoring profile to other OS assets. Solution #1: Modify the Reporting Thresholds In some cases, you may want to modify the basic conditions for incident reporting in your file system. The changes you make to a default monitoring rule will apply to all of the file systems associated with your operating system. Selecting the File Systems Used Space Percentage entry and clicking the "Edit Alert Monitoring Rule Parameters" button opens a pop-up dialog which allows you to modify the rule. The first screen lets you decide when you will check for file system usage, and how long you will wait before opening an incident in Ops Center. By default, Ops Center monitors continuously and reports disk utilization issues which exist for more than 15 minutes. The second screen lets you define actual threshold values. By default, Ops Center opens a Warning level incident is utilization rises above 80%, and a Critical level incident for utilization above 95% Solution #2: Disable Incident Reporting for File System If you'd rather not report file system incidents, you can disable the monitoring rules altogether. In this case, you can select the monitoring rules and click the "Disable Alert Monitoring Rule(s)" button to open the pop-up confirmation dialog. Like the first solution, this option affects all file system monitoring. It allows you to completely disable incident reporting for NAS library status or file system space consumption. Solution #3: Create New Monitoring Rules for Specific File Systems If you'd like to have the greatest flexibility when monitoring file systems, you can create entirely new rules. Clicking the "Add Alert Monitoring Rule" (the icon with the green plus sign) opens a wizard which allows you to define a new rule.  This rule will be based on a threshold, and will be used to monitor operating system assets. We'd like to add a rule to track disk utilization for a specific file system - the /nfs-guest directory. To do this, we specify the following attribute FileSystemUsages.name=/nfs-guest.usedSpacePercentage The value of name in the attribute allows us to define a specific NFS shared directory or file system... in the case of this OS, we could have chosen any of the values shown in the File Systems Utilization chart at the beginning of this article. usedSpacePercentage lets us define a threshold based on the percentage of total disk space used. There are a number of other values that we could use for threshold-based monitoring of FileSystemUsages, including freeSpace freeSpacePercentage totalSpace usedSpace usedSpacePercentage The final sections of the screen allow us to determine when to monitor for disk usage, and how long to wait after utilization reaches a threshold before creating an incident. The next screen lets us define the threshold values and severity levels for the monitoring rule: If historical data is available, Ops Center will display it in the screen. Clicking the Apply button will create the new monitoring rule and active it in your monitoring policy. If you combine this with one of the previous solutions, you can precisely define which file systems will generate incidents and notifications. For example, this monitoring policy has the default "File System Used Space Percentage" rule disabled, but the new rule reports ONLY on utilization for the /nfs-guest directory. Stay Connected: Twitter |  Facebook |  YouTube |  Linkedin |  Newsletter

    Read the article

  • am i properly setting this up correctly? [closed]

    - by codrgii
    i'm having a problem with mod_security. I have installed it, but i am not sure on how to make the rules for it, i want the rules to prevent all major attacks like cross site scripting, remote file inclusion etc i'm using mod security 2.6.5, apache 2.2 with php 5.3.10. i went to this site http://www.gotroot.com/mod_security+rules but i am not sure how to set up the rules or which one to use, or how i add them properly in httpd.conf, would someone please explain the process and also recommend rules for someone in my position?

    Read the article

  • Is there a Windows 7 compatible IPSec VPN client that allows protocol and port specific rules?

    - by Sani Huttunen
    As the title says, I need to find a IPSec VPN client for Windows 7. On XP and Vista we've used SafeNet SoftRemote in which you can set up rules for specific protocols and ports. But SoftRemote isn't compatible with Windows 7. 172.xxx.xxx.1 TCP 1433 172.xxx.xxx.2 TCP 1433 172.xxx.xxx.10 ALL ... Since the VPN gateway is configured this way the client must mirror these settings. I've tried TheGreenBow, NCP Secure Entry, Cisco VPN Client and Shrew Soft VPN but none of these allows you to configure by protocol and port. Does anyone have any other suggestions? EDIT: Forgot to mention that agressive mode is also a requirement. --UPDATE-- I've got some news... I've managed to get SoftRemote to work on Windows 7 x64 through Windows XP Mode. After scouring all corners of the Internet for idéas I had enough information to construct a working solution. This solution will probably benefit other clients as well! You'll find a post here with detailed instructions of how I went about.

    Read the article

  • Variant Management– Which Approach fits for my Product?

    - by C. Chadwick
    Jürgen Kunz – Director Product Development – Oracle ORACLE Deutschland B.V. & Co. KG Introduction In a difficult economic environment, it is important for companies to understand the customer requirements in detail and to address them in their products. Customer specific products, however, usually cause increased costs. Variant management helps to find the best combination of standard components and custom components which balances customer’s product requirements and product costs. Depending on the type of product, different approaches to variant management will be applied. For example the automotive product “car” or electronic/high-tech products like a “computer”, with a pre-defined set of options to be combined in the individual configuration (so called “Assembled to Order” products), require a different approach to products in heavy machinery, which are (at least partially) engineered in a customer specific way (so-called “Engineered-to Order” products). This article discusses different approaches to variant management. Starting with the simple Bill of Material (BOM), this article presents three different approaches to variant management, which are provided by Agile PLM. Single level BOM and Variant BOM The single level BOM is the basic form of the BOM. The product structure is defined using assemblies and single parts. A particular product is thus represented by a fixed product structure. As soon as you have to manage product variants, the single level BOM is no longer sufficient. A variant BOM will be needed to manage product variants. The variant BOM is sometimes referred to as 150% BOM, since a variant BOM contains more parts and assemblies than actually needed to assemble the (final) product – just 150% of the parts You can evolve the variant BOM from the single level BOM by replacing single nodes with a placeholder node. The placeholder in this case represents the possible variants of a part or assembly. Product structure nodes, which are part of any product, are so-called “Must-Have” parts. “Optional” parts can be omitted in the final product. Additional attributes allow limiting the quantity of parts/assemblies which can be assigned at a certain position in the Variant BOM. Figure 1 shows the variant BOM of Agile PLM. Figure 1 Variant BOM in Agile PLM During the instantiation of the Variant BOM, the placeholders get replaced by specific variants of the parts and assemblies. The selection of the desired or appropriate variants is either done step by step by the user or by applying pre-defined configuration rules. As a result of the instantiation, an independent BOM will be created (Figure 2). Figure 2 Instantiated BOM in Agile PLM This kind of Variant BOM  can be used for „Assembled –To-Order“ type products as well as for „Engineered-to-Order“-type products. In case of “Assembled –To-Order” type products, typically the instantiation is done automatically with pre-defined configuration rules. For „Engineered- to-Order“-type products at least part of the product is selected manually to make use of customized parts/assemblies, that have been engineered according to the specific custom requirements. Template BOM The Template BOM is used for „Engineered-to-Order“-type products. It is another type of variant BOM. The engineer works in a flexible environment which allows him to build the most creative solutions. At the same time the engineer shall be guided to re-use existing solutions and it shall be assured that product variants of the same product family share the same base structure. The template BOM defines the basic structure of products belonging to the same product family. Let’s take a gearbox as an example. The customer specific configuration of the gearbox is influenced by several parameters (e.g. rpm range, transmitted torque), which are defined in the customer’s requirement document.  Figure 3 shows part of a Template BOM (yellow) and its relation to the product family hierarchy (blue).  Figure 3 Template BOM Every component of the Template BOM has links to the variants that have been engineeried so far for the component (depending on the level in the Template BOM, they are product variants, Assembly Variant or single part variants). This library of solutions, the so-called solution space, can be used by the engineers to build new product variants. In the best case, the engineer selects an existing solution variant, such as the gearbox shown in figure 3. When the existing variants do not fulfill the specific requirements, a new variant will be engineered. This new variant must be compliant with the given Template BOM. If we look at the gearbox in figure 3  it must consist of a transmission housing, a Connecting Plate, a set of Gears and a Planetary transmission – pre-assumed that all components are must have components. The new variant will enhance the solution space and is automatically available for re-use in future variants. The result of the instantiation of the Template BOM is a stand-alone BOM which represents the customer specific product variant. Modular BOM The concept of the modular BOM was invented in the automotive industry. Passenger cars are so-called „Assembled-to-Order“-products. The customer first selects the specific equipment of the car (so-called specifications) – for instance engine, audio equipment, rims, color. Based on this information the required parts will be determined and the customer specific car will be assembled. Certain combinations of specification are not available for the customer, because they are not feasible from technical perspective (e.g. a convertible with sun roof) or because the combination will not be offered for marketing reasons (e.g. steel rims with a sports line car). The modular BOM (yellow structure in figure 4) is defined in the context of a specific product family (in the sample it is product family „Speedstar“). It is the same modular BOM for the different types of cars of the product family (e.g. sedan, station wagon). The assembly or single parts of the car (blue nodes in figure 4) are assigned at the leaf level of the modular BOM. The assignment of assembly and parts to the modular BOM is enriched with a configuration rule (purple elements in figure 4). The configuration rule defines the conditions to use a specific assembly or single part. The configuration rule is valid in the context of a type of car (green elements in figure 4). Color specific parts are assigned to the color independent parts via additional configuration rules (grey elements in figure 4). The configuration rules use Boolean operators to connect the specifications. Additional consistency rules (constraints) may be used to define invalid combinations of specification (so-called exclusions). Furthermore consistency rules may be used to add specifications to the set of specifications. For instance it is important that a car with diesel engine always is build using the high capacity battery.  Figure 4 Modular BOM The calculation of the car configuration consists of several steps. First the consistency rules (constraints) are applied. Resulting from that specification might be added automatically. The second step will determine the assemblies and single parts for the complete structure of the modular BOM, by evaluating the configuration rules in the context of the current type of car. The evaluation of the rules for one component in the modular BOM might result in several rules being fulfilled. In this case the most specific rule (typically the longest rule) will win. Thanks to this approach, it is possible to add a specific variant to the modular BOM without the need to change any other configuration rules.  As a result the whole set of configuration rules is easy to maintain. Finally the color specific assemblies respective parts will be determined and the configuration is completed. Figure 5 Calculated Car Configuration The result of the car configuration is shown in figure 5. It shows the list of assemblies respective single parts (blue components in figure 5), which are required to build the customer specific car. Summary There are different approaches to variant management. Three different approaches have been presented in this article. At the end of the day, it is the type of the product which decides about the best approach.  For „Assembled to Order“-type products it is very likely that you can define the configuration rules and calculate the product variant automatically. Products of type „Engineered-to-Order“ ,however, need to be engineered. Nevertheless in the majority of cases, part of the product structure can be generated automatically in a similar way to „Assembled to Order“-tape products.  That said it is important first to analyze the product portfolio, in order to define the best approach to variant management.

    Read the article

  • Iptables and system-config-firewall

    - by nivde92
    I had a set of netfilter rules set with iptables, but someone else told me to use system-config-firewall to add a rule for sharing files with Windows. (Samba) This rewrote the iptables rules file and I lost my own custom rules. I have a backup copy, but am having trouble restoring them. Edit: The server is Centos, I already tried to restore the rules with iptables-restore < /root/working.iptables.rules but for some reason the rules don't change. What are you trying to do? Trying to restore the iptable rules that I have in a backup file. What have you tried in order to make it happen? I've tried to modify the iptables file with vim, since the command iptables-restore was no help. What results did you expect? To get the old rules back. What actually happened? Nothing, when I run the command or edit the file by hand the file doesn't change at all. Maybe something else it's overwriting.

    Read the article

  • Where to put data management rules for complex data validation in ASP.NET MVC?

    - by TheRHCP
    Hello, I am currently working on an ASP.NET MVC2 project. This is the first time I am working on a real MVC web application. The ASP.NET MVC website really helped me to get started really fast, but I still have some obscure knowledge concerning datamodel validation. My problem is that I do not really know where to manage my filled datamodel when it comes to complex validation rules. For example, validating a string field with a Regex is quite easy and I know that I just have to decorate my field with a specific attribute, so data management rules are implemented in the model. But if I have multiple fields that I need to validate which each other, for example multiple datetime that need to be correctly set following a specific time rule, where do I need to validate them? I know that I could create my own validation attributes, but sometimes validation ask a specific validation path which is to complex to be validated using attributes. This first question also leads me to a related question which is, is it right to validate a model in the controller? Because for the moment that is the only way I found for complex validation. But I find this a bit dirty and I feel it does not really fit a the controller role and much harder to test (multiple code path). Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Why do mozilla and webkit prepend -moz- and -webkit- to CSS3 rules?

    - by egarcia
    CSS3 rules bring lots of interesting features. Take border-radius, for example. The standard says that if you write this rule: div.rounded-corners { border-radius: 5px; } I should get a 5px border radius. But neither mozilla nor webkit implement this. However, they implement the same thing, with the same parameters, with a different name (-moz-border-radius and -webkit-border-radius, respectively). In order to satisfy as many browsers as possible, you end up with this: div.rounded-corners { border-radius: 5px; -moz-border-radius: 5px; -webkit-border-radius: 5px; } I can see two obvious disadvantages: Copy-paste code. This has obvious risks that I will not discuss here. The W3C CSS validator will not validate these rules. At the same time, I don't see any obvious advantages. I believe that the people behind mozilla and webkit are more intelligent than myself. There must be some good reasons to have things structured this way. It's just that I can't see them. So, I must ask you people: why is this?

    Read the article

  • Looking for something to add some standard rules for my c++ project.

    - by rkb
    Hello all, My team is developing a C++ project on linux. We use vim as editor. I want to enforce some code standard rules in our team in such a way that if the code is not in accordance with it, some sort of warning or error will be thrown when it builds or compiles. Not necessarily it builds but at least I can run some plugin or tools on that code to make sure it meets the standard. So that before committing to svn everyone need to run the code through some sort of plugin or script and make sure it meets the requirement and then only he/she can commit. Not sure if we can add some rules to vim, if there are any let me know about it. For eg. In our code standards all the member variables and private functions should start with _ class A{ private: int _count; float _amount; void _increment_count(){ ++_count; } } So I want to throw some warning or error or some sort of messages for this class if the variables are declared as follows. class A{ private: int count; float amount; void increment_count(){ ++_count; } } Please note that warning and error are not from compiler becoz program is still valid. Its from the tool I want to use so that code goes to re-factoring but still works fine on the executable side. I am looking for some sort of plugin or pre parsers or scripts which will help me in achieving all this. Currently we use svn; just to anser the comment.

    Read the article

  • URL Rewrite – Multiple domains under one site. Part II

    - by OWScott
    I believe I have it … I’ve been meaning to put together the ultimate outgoing rule for hosting multiple domains under one site.  I finally sat down this week and setup a few test cases, and created one rule to rule them all.  In Part I of this two part series, I covered the incoming rule necessary to host a site in a subfolder of a website, while making it appear as if it’s in the root of the site.  Part II won’t work without applying Part I first, so if you haven’t read it, I encourage you to read it now. However, the incoming rule by itself doesn’t address everything.  Here’s the problem … Let’s say that we host www.site2.com in a subfolder called site2, off of masterdomain.com.  This is the same example I used in Part I.   Using an incoming rewrite rule, we are able to make a request to www.site2.com even though the site is really in the /site2 folder.  The gotcha comes with any type of path that ASP.NET generates (I’m sure other scripting technologies could do the same too).  ASP.NET thinks that the path to the root of the site is /site2, but the URL is /.  See the issue?  If ASP.NET generates a path or a redirect for us, it will always add /site2 to the URL.  That results in a path that looks something like www.site2.com/site2.  In Part I, I mentioned that you should add a condition where “{PATH_INFO} ‘does not match’ /site2”.  That allows www.site2.com/site2 and www.site2.com to both function the same.  This allows the site to always work, but if you want to hide /site2 in the URL, you need to take it one step further. One way to address this is in your code.  Ultimately this is the best bet.  Ruslan Yakushev has a great article on a few considerations that you can address in code.  I recommend giving that serious consideration.  Additionally, if you have upgraded to ASP.NET 3.5 SP1 or greater, it takes care of some of the references automatically for you. However, what if you inherit an existing application?  Or you can’t easily go through your existing site and make the code changes?  If this applies to you, read on. That’s where URL Rewrite 2.0 comes in.  With URL Rewrite 2.0, you can create an outgoing rule that will remove the /site2 before the page is sent back to the user.  This means that you can take an existing application, host it in a subfolder of your site, and ensure that the URL never reveals that it’s in a subfolder. Performance Considerations Performance overhead is something to be mindful of.  These outbound rules aren’t simply changing the server variables.  The first rule I’ll cover below needs to parse the HTML body and pull out the path (i.e. /site2) on the way through.  This will add overhead, possibly significant if you have large pages and a busy site.  In other words, your mileage may vary and you may need to test to see the impact that these rules have.  Don’t worry too much though.  For many sites, the performance impact is negligible. So, how do we do it? Creating the Outgoing Rule There are really two things to keep in mind.  First, ASP.NET applications frequently generate a URL that adds the /site2 back into the URL.  In addition to URLs, they can be in form elements, img elements and the like.  The goal is to find all of those situations and rewrite it on the way out.  Let’s call this the ‘URL problem’. Second, and similarly, ASP.NET can send a LOCATION redirect that causes a redirect back to another page.  Again, ASP.NET isn’t aware of the different URL and it will add the /site2 to the redirect.  Form Authentication is a good example on when this occurs.  Try to password protect a site running from a subfolder using forms auth and you’ll quickly find that the URL becomes www.site2.com/site2 again.  Let’s term this the ‘redirect problem’. Solving the URL Problem – Outgoing Rule #1 Let’s create a rule that removes the /site2 from any URL.  We want to remove it from relative URLs like /site2/something, or absolute URLs like http://www.site2.com/site2/something.  Most URLs that ASP.NET creates will be relative URLs, but I figure that there may be some applications that piece together a full URL, so we might as well expect that situation. Let’s get started.  First, create a new outbound rule.  You can create the rule within the /site2 folder which will reduce the performance impact of the rule.  Just a reminder that incoming rules for this situation won’t work in a subfolder … but outgoing rules will. Give it a name that makes sense to you, for example “Outgoing – URL paths”. Precondition.  If you place the rule in the subfolder, it will only run for that site and folder, so there isn’t need for a precondition.  Run it for all requests.  If you place it in the root of the site, you may want to create a precondition for HTTP_HOST = ^(www\.)?site2\.com$. For the Match section, there are a few things to consider.  For performance reasons, it’s best to match the least amount of elements that you need to accomplish the task.  For my test cases, I just needed to rewrite the <a /> tag, but you may need to rewrite any number of HTML elements.  Note that as long as you have the exclude /site2 rule in your incoming rule as I described in Part I, some elements that don’t show their URL—like your images—will work without removing the /site2 from them.  That reduces the processing needed for this rule. Leave the “matching scope” at “Response” and choose the elements that you want to change. Set the pattern to “^(?:site2|(.*//[_a-zA-Z0-9-\.]*)?/site2)(.*)”.  Make sure to replace ‘site2’ with your subfolder name in both places.  Yes, I realize this is a pretty messy looking rule, but it handles a few situations.  This rule will handle the following situations correctly: Original Rewritten using {R:1}{R:2} http://www.site2.com/site2/default.aspx http://www.site2.com/default.aspx http://www.site2.com/folder1/site2/default.aspx Won’t rewrite since it’s a sub-sub folder /site2/default.aspx /default.aspx site2/default.aspx /default.aspx /folder1/site2/default.aspx Won’t rewrite since it’s a sub-sub folder. For the conditions section, you can leave that be. Finally, for the rule, set the Action Type to “Rewrite” and set the Value to “{R:1}{R:2}”.  The {R:1} and {R:2} are back references to the sections within parentheses.  In other words, in http://domain.com/site2/something, {R:1} will be http://domain.com and {R:2} will be /something. If you view your rule from your web.config file (or applicationHost.config if it’s a global rule), it should look like this: <rule name="Outgoing - URL paths" enabled="true"> <match filterByTags="A" pattern="^(?:site2|(.*//[_a-zA-Z0-9-\.]*)?/site2)(.*)" /> <action type="Rewrite" value="{R:1}{R:2}" /> </rule> Solving the Redirect Problem Outgoing Rule #2 The second issue that we can run into is with a client-side redirect.  This is triggered by a LOCATION response header that is sent to the client.  Forms authentication is a common example.  To reproduce this, password protect your subfolder and watch how it redirects and adds the subfolder path back in. Notice in my test case the extra paths: http://site2.com/site2/login.aspx?ReturnUrl=%2fsite2%2fdefault.aspx I want to remove /site2 from both the URL and the ReturnUrl querystring value.  For semi-readability, let’s do this in 2 separate rules, one for the URL and one for the querystring. Create a second rule.  As with the previous rule, it can be created in the /site2 subfolder.  In the URL Rewrite wizard, select Outbound rules –> “Blank Rule”. Fill in the following information: Name response_location URL Precondition Don’t set Match: Matching Scope Server Variable Match: Variable Name RESPONSE_LOCATION Match: Pattern ^(?:site2|(.*//[_a-zA-Z0-9-\.]*)?/site2)(.*) Conditions Don’t set Action Type Rewrite Action Properties {R:1}{R:2} It should end up like so: <rule name="response_location URL"> <match serverVariable="RESPONSE_LOCATION" pattern="^(?:site2|(.*//[_a-zA-Z0-9-\.]*)?/site2)(.*)" /> <action type="Rewrite" value="{R:1}{R:2}" /> </rule> Outgoing Rule #3 Outgoing Rule #2 only takes care of the URL path, and not the querystring path.  Let’s create one final rule to take care of the path in the querystring to ensure that ReturnUrl=%2fsite2%2fdefault.aspx gets rewritten to ReturnUrl=%2fdefault.aspx. The %2f is the HTML encoding for forward slash (/). Create a rule like the previous one, but with the following settings: Name response_location querystring Precondition Don’t set Match: Matching Scope Server Variable Match: Variable Name RESPONSE_LOCATION Match: Pattern (.*)%2fsite2(.*) Conditions Don’t set Action Type Rewrite Action Properties {R:1}{R:2} The config should look like this: <rule name="response_location querystring"> <match serverVariable="RESPONSE_LOCATION" pattern="(.*)%2fsite2(.*)" /> <action type="Rewrite" value="{R:1}{R:2}" /> </rule> It’s possible to squeeze the last two rules into one, but it gets kind of confusing so I felt that it’s better to show it as two separate rules. Summary With the rules covered in these two parts, we’re able to have a site in a subfolder and make it appear as if it’s in the root of the site.  Not only that, we can overcome automatic redirecting that is caused by ASP.NET, other scripting technologies, and especially existing applications. Following is an example of the incoming and outgoing rules necessary for a site called www.site2.com hosted in a subfolder called /site2.  Remember that the outgoing rules can be placed in the /site2 folder instead of the in the root of the site. <rewrite> <rules> <rule name="site2.com in a subfolder" enabled="true" stopProcessing="true"> <match url=".*" /> <conditions logicalGrouping="MatchAll" trackAllCaptures="false"> <add input="{HTTP_HOST}" pattern="^(www\.)?site2\.com$" /> <add input="{PATH_INFO}" pattern="^/site2($|/)" negate="true" /> </conditions> <action type="Rewrite" url="/site2/{R:0}" /> </rule> </rules> <outboundRules> <rule name="Outgoing - URL paths" enabled="true"> <match filterByTags="A" pattern="^(?:site2|(.*//[_a-zA-Z0-9-\.]*)?/site2)(.*)" /> <action type="Rewrite" value="{R:1}{R:2}" /> </rule> <rule name="response_location URL"> <match serverVariable="RESPONSE_LOCATION" pattern="^(?:site2|(.*//[_a-zA-Z0-9-\.]*)?/site2)(.*)" /> <action type="Rewrite" value="{R:1}{R:2}" /> </rule> <rule name="response_location querystring"> <match serverVariable="RESPONSE_LOCATION" pattern="(.*)%2fsite2(.*)" /> <action type="Rewrite" value="{R:1}{R:2}" /> </rule> </outboundRules> </rewrite> If you run into any situations that aren’t caught by these rules, please let me know so I can update this to be as complete as possible. Happy URL Rewriting!

    Read the article

  • How has RIA Technology and what technology stack currently rules this domain ?

    - by Rachel
    I am new to RIA and have not been actively with this technology with all my projects as all of them we using server side Java Technology but I want to gain some experience with RIA and so my question is How has RIA Technology evolved and what technology stack currently rules this domain ? What are the recommended resources for learning RIA and in general what is the suggested approach to get started on RIA Journey ? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • How has RIA technology evolved and what technology stack currently rules this domain?

    - by Rachel
    I am new to RIA and have not been actively involved with this technology in my projects as we using server-side Java, but I want to gain some experience with RIA. My questions are: How has RIA technology evolved and in your opinion? What technology stack currently rules this domain? What are the recommended resources for learning RIA? In general what is the suggested approach for getting started on the RIA journey?

    Read the article

  • Do you think functional language is good for applications that have a lot of business rules but very

    - by StackUnderflow
    I am convinced that functional programming is an excellent choice when it comes to applications that require a lot of computation (data mining, AI, nlp etc). But is it wise to use functional programming for a typical enterprise application where there are a lot of business rules but not much in terms of computation? Please disregard the fact that there are very few people using functional programming and that it's kind of tough. Thanks

    Read the article

  • Class-Level Model Validation with EF Code First and ASP.NET MVC 3

    - by ScottGu
    Earlier this week the data team released the CTP5 build of the new Entity Framework Code-First library.  In my blog post a few days ago I talked about a few of the improvements introduced with the new CTP5 build.  Automatic support for enforcing DataAnnotation validation attributes on models was one of the improvements I discussed.  It provides a pretty easy way to enable property-level validation logic within your model layer. You can apply validation attributes like [Required], [Range], and [RegularExpression] – all of which are built-into .NET 4 – to your model classes in order to enforce that the model properties are valid before they are persisted to a database.  You can also create your own custom validation attributes (like this cool [CreditCard] validator) and have them be automatically enforced by EF Code First as well.  This provides a really easy way to validate property values on your models.  I showed some code samples of this in action in my previous post. Class-Level Model Validation using IValidatableObject DataAnnotation attributes provides an easy way to validate individual property values on your model classes.  Several people have asked - “Does EF Code First also support a way to implement class-level validation methods on model objects, for validation rules than need to span multiple property values?”  It does – and one easy way you can enable this is by implementing the IValidatableObject interface on your model classes. IValidatableObject.Validate() Method Below is an example of using the IValidatableObject interface (which is built-into .NET 4 within the System.ComponentModel.DataAnnotations namespace) to implement two custom validation rules on a Product model class.  The two rules ensure that: New units can’t be ordered if the Product is in a discontinued state New units can’t be ordered if there are already more than 100 units in stock We will enforce these business rules by implementing the IValidatableObject interface on our Product class, and by implementing its Validate() method like so: The IValidatableObject.Validate() method can apply validation rules that span across multiple properties, and can yield back multiple validation errors. Each ValidationResult returned can supply both an error message as well as an optional list of property names that caused the violation (which is useful when displaying error messages within UI). Automatic Validation Enforcement EF Code-First (starting with CTP5) now automatically invokes the Validate() method when a model object that implements the IValidatableObject interface is saved.  You do not need to write any code to cause this to happen – this support is now enabled by default. This new support means that the below code – which violates one of our above business rules – will automatically throw an exception (and abort the transaction) when we call the “SaveChanges()” method on our Northwind DbContext: In addition to reactively handling validation exceptions, EF Code First also allows you to proactively check for validation errors.  Starting with CTP5, you can call the “GetValidationErrors()” method on the DbContext base class to retrieve a list of validation errors within the model objects you are working with.  GetValidationErrors() will return a list of all validation errors – regardless of whether they are generated via DataAnnotation attributes or by an IValidatableObject.Validate() implementation.  Below is an example of proactively using the GetValidationErrors() method to check (and handle) errors before trying to call SaveChanges(): ASP.NET MVC 3 and IValidatableObject ASP.NET MVC 2 included support for automatically honoring and enforcing DataAnnotation attributes on model objects that are used with ASP.NET MVC’s model binding infrastructure.  ASP.NET MVC 3 goes further and also honors the IValidatableObject interface.  This combined support for model validation makes it easy to display appropriate error messages within forms when validation errors occur.  To see this in action, let’s consider a simple Create form that allows users to create a new Product: We can implement the above Create functionality using a ProductsController class that has two “Create” action methods like below: The first Create() method implements a version of the /Products/Create URL that handles HTTP-GET requests - and displays the HTML form to fill-out.  The second Create() method implements a version of the /Products/Create URL that handles HTTP-POST requests - and which takes the posted form data, ensures that is is valid, and if it is valid saves it in the database.  If there are validation issues it redisplays the form with the posted values.  The razor view template of our “Create” view (which renders the form) looks like below: One of the nice things about the above Controller + View implementation is that we did not write any validation logic within it.  The validation logic and business rules are instead implemented entirely within our model layer, and the ProductsController simply checks whether it is valid (by calling the ModelState.IsValid helper method) to determine whether to try and save the changes or redisplay the form with errors. The Html.ValidationMessageFor() helper method calls within our view simply display the error messages our Product model’s DataAnnotations and IValidatableObject.Validate() method returned.  We can see the above scenario in action by filling out invalid data within the form and attempting to submit it: Notice above how when we hit the “Create” button we got an error message.  This was because we ticked the “Discontinued” checkbox while also entering a value for the UnitsOnOrder (and so violated one of our business rules).  You might ask – how did ASP.NET MVC know to highlight and display the error message next to the UnitsOnOrder textbox?  It did this because ASP.NET MVC 3 now honors the IValidatableObject interface when performing model binding, and will retrieve the error messages from validation failures with it. The business rule within our Product model class indicated that the “UnitsOnOrder” property should be highlighted when the business rule we hit was violated: Our Html.ValidationMessageFor() helper method knew to display the business rule error message (next to the UnitsOnOrder edit box) because of the above property name hint we supplied: Keeping things DRY ASP.NET MVC and EF Code First enables you to keep your validation and business rules in one place (within your model layer), and avoid having it creep into your Controllers and Views.  Keeping the validation logic in the model layer helps ensure that you do not duplicate validation/business logic as you add more Controllers and Views to your application.  It allows you to quickly change your business rules/validation logic in one single place (within your model layer) – and have all controllers/views across your application immediately reflect it.  This help keep your application code clean and easily maintainable, and makes it much easier to evolve and update your application in the future. Summary EF Code First (starting with CTP5) now has built-in support for both DataAnnotations and the IValidatableObject interface.  This allows you to easily add validation and business rules to your models, and have EF automatically ensure that they are enforced anytime someone tries to persist changes of them to a database.  ASP.NET MVC 3 also now supports both DataAnnotations and IValidatableObject as well, which makes it even easier to use them with your EF Code First model layer – and then have the controllers/views within your web layer automatically honor and support them as well.  This makes it easy to build clean and highly maintainable applications. You don’t have to use DataAnnotations or IValidatableObject to perform your validation/business logic.  You can always roll your own custom validation architecture and/or use other more advanced validation frameworks/patterns if you want.  But for a lot of applications this built-in support will probably be sufficient – and provide a highly productive way to build solutions. Hope this helps, Scott P.S. In addition to blogging, I am also now using Twitter for quick updates and to share links. Follow me at: twitter.com/scottgu

    Read the article

  • How to put foreign key constraints on a computed fields in sql server?

    - by Asaf R
    Table A has a computed field called Computed1. It's persisted and not null. Also, it always computes to an expression which is char(50). It's also unique and has a unique key constraint on it. Table B has a field RefersToComputed1, which should refer to a valid Computed1 value. Trying to create a foreign key constraint on B's RefersToComputed1 that references A' Computed1 leads to the following error: Error SQL01268: .Net SqlClient Data Provider: Msg 1753, Level 16, State 0, Line 1 Column 'B.RefersToComputed1' is not the same length or scale as referencing column 'A.Computed1' in foreign key 'FK_B_A'. Columns participating in a foreign key relationship must be defined with the same length and scale. Q: Why is this error created? Are there special measures needed for foreign keys for computed columns, and if so what are they? Summary: The specific problem rises from computed, char based, fields being varchar. Hence, Computed1 is varchar(50) and not char(50). It's best to have a cast surrounding a computed field's expression to force it to a specific type. Credit goes to Cade Roux for this tip.

    Read the article

  • How can I place validating constraints on my method input parameters?

    - by rcampbell
    Here is the typical way of accomplishing this goal: public void myContractualMethod(final String x, final Set<String> y) { if ((x == null) || (x.isEmpty())) { throw new IllegalArgumentException("x cannot be null or empty"); } if (y == null) { throw new IllegalArgumentException("y cannot be null"); } // Now I can actually start writing purposeful // code to accomplish the goal of this method I think this solution is ugly. Your methods quickly fill up with boilerplate code checking the valid input parameters contract, obscuring the heart of the method. Here's what I'd like to have: public void myContractualMethod(@NotNull @NotEmpty final String x, @NotNull final Set<String> y) { // Now I have a clean method body that isn't obscured by // contract checking If those annotations look like JSR 303/Bean Validation Spec, it's because I borrowed them. Unfortunitely they don't seem to work this way; they are intended for annotating instance variables, then running the object through a validator. Which of the many Java design-by-contract frameworks provide the closest functionality to my "like to have" example? The exceptions that get thrown should be runtime exceptions (like IllegalArgumentExceptions) so encapsulation isn't broken.

    Read the article

  • Why DB constraints are not added during table creation.

    - by Pratik
    Hi All, What is the difference between these to ways of table creation. CREATE TABLE TABLENAME( field1.... field2... add constraint constraint1; add constraint constraint2; ) AND CREATE TABLE TABLENAME( field1.... field2... ) ALTER TABLE TABLENAME add constaint1 ALTER TABLE TABLENAME add constaint2 Moreover the first scripts fails on the SQL+ but they pass on sqldeveloper Thanks! Pratik

    Read the article

  • How to handle security constraints using GWT 2.1's RequestFactory?

    - by Marc
    I am currently developing a GWT 2.1 application that is to be deployed on Google App Engine. I would like to realise the server communication using the new RequestFactory. Now my question is how to handle fine-grained security issues in this context? Some server actions (of those declared in the RequestContext stubs) shall be restricted to certain users (possibly depending on the parameters of the remote call). If a call is unauthorised, I would like the client to show a login page (so that one may log in as a different user, for example). From the Expenses example, I know how to implement an automatic redirection to a login page, but in this example, the security model is quite simple: A client is allowed to access the servlet if and only if a user is logged in. Shall I raise a custom UnAuthorizedException in my server-side service? Where should I intercept this exception? (Can I do this in a servlet filter like the GaeAuthFilter of the Expenses example?)

    Read the article

  • Can you automatically create a mysqldump file that doesn't enforce foreign key constraints?

    - by Tai Squared
    When I run a mysqldump command on my database and then try to import it, it fails as it attempts to create the tables alphabetically, even though they may have a foreign key that references a table later in the file. There doesn't appear to be anything in the documentation and I've found answers like this that say to update the file after it's created to include: set FOREIGN_KEY_CHECKS = 0; ...original mysqldump file contents... set FOREIGN_KEY_CHECKS = 1; Is there no way to automatically set those lines or export the tables in the necessary order (without having to manually specify all table names as that can be tedious and error prone)? I could wrap those lines in a script, but was wondering if there is an easy way to ensure I can dump a file and then import it without manually updating it.

    Read the article

  • One or more rows contain values violating non-null, unique, or foreign-key constraints in SQL Script

    - by Musikero31
    Need help on this. I'm just wondering why this error occurred. Below is the script concerned. SELECT loc.ID ,loc.LocCode ,loc.LocName ,st.StateName ,reg.RegionName ,ctry.CountryName ,ISNULL(CONVERT(DATE, loc.UpdatedDate), CONVERT(DATE,loc.CreatedDate)) AS [ModifiedDate] ,stf.Name AS [ModifiedBy] FROM Spkr_Country AS ctry WITH (NOLOCK) INNER JOIN Spkr_Location AS loc WITH (NOLOCK) ON ctry.ID = loc.CountryID INNER JOIN Spkr_State AS st WITH (NOLOCK) ON loc.StateID = st.ID INNER JOIN Spkr_Region AS reg WITH (NOLOCK) ON loc.RegionID = reg.ID INNER JOIN Staff AS stf ON ISNULL(loc.UpdatedBy, loc.CreatedBy) = stf.StaffId WHERE (loc.IsActive = 1) AND ( (@LocCode = '') OR ( @LocCode <> '' AND loc.LocCode LIKE @LocCode + '%' ) ) AND ( (@RegionID < 1) OR ( @RegionID > 0 AND loc.RegionID = @RegionID ) ) AND ( (@StateID < 1) OR ( @StateID > 0 AND loc.StateID = @StateID ) ) AND ( (@CountryID < 1) OR ( @CountryID > 0 AND loc.CountryID = @CountryID ) ) The error probably occurred here INNER JOIN Staff AS stf ON ISNULL(loc.UpdatedBy, loc.CreatedBy) = stf.StaffId The requirement that I wanted is that if the loc.UpdatedBy is null, it will use the loc.CreatedBy column. However, when I used this, it generated the error mentioned. In the database, the loc.CreatedBy is not null while the loc.UpdatedBy is nullable. I checked it by running the script but it's working fine. How do I do with it? What's wrong with my code? Please help.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37  | Next Page >