Search Results

Search found 1454 results on 59 pages for 'eth0'.

Page 32/59 | < Previous Page | 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39  | Next Page >

• Using public interfaces on a server connected through a GRE tunnel

  - by Evan

  I'm pretty new to networking so please forgive any terminology mistakes. I have 2 servers connected with a GRE tunnel. Server1 (10.0.0.1) ---- Server2 (10.0.0.2) I want to be able to bind to the public IPs on Server2 using Server1. To do this, I setup virtual interfaces with Server2's public IPs on Server1 and then used routing rules on Server1 to route the packets through the GRE tunnel. On Server1: ip rule add from [Server2's first public IP] table gre ip rule add from [Server2's second public IP] table gre ip route add default via 10.0.0.2 dev gre1 table gre This works great and I can see the packets arriving via GRE on Server2. I can see the packet exiting the tunnel on Server2's gre1 device as shown: From Server1: ping -I [Server2's public ip] google.com tcpdump from Server2's GRE tunnel device: 12:07:17.029160 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 64, id 0, offset 0, flags [DF], proto ICMP (1), length 84) [Server2's public ip] > 74.125.225.38: ICMP echo request, id 6378, seq 50, length 64 This is exactly the packet I want. However, I'm not seeing it go out at all on eth0:0 (where Server2's public IP is bound to). I've tried to use routing rules to get packets coming from Server2's public IP (which would be coming out of dev gre1) to go through dev eth0 on the public default gateway and that doesn't work either. I'm at a loss, thank you to anyone who can help.

  Read the article

• Ubuntu Laptop as a wireless hotspot on bridge mode

  - by nixnotwin

  I have a wired router to which my ubuntu laptop connects via ethernet. The wierless NIC of the laptop acts as a wireless hotspot on master mode. I use hostapd fo this. I have bridged eth0 and wlan0, so my wireless clients that connect to my laptop over wifi get ip from the wired router via dhcp, so the devices get registered at the wired router ( and the laptop is just an access point). I use the following commands to get my laptop+accesspoint working: sudo brctl addbr br0 sudo brctl addif br0 eth0 sudo hostapd /etc/hostapd/hostapd.conf & sudo dhclient -d br0 & sudo ifconfig wlan0 192.168.1.15 netmask 255.255.255.0 up sudo brctl addif br0 wlan0 These commands enable me to access internet on my wireless clients and also on the laptop which is acting as wireless accesspoint. But if I reboot the wired router (without rebooting the laptop that is acting as accesspoint), Internet access on the laptop+accesspoint gets lost, but on wireless clients it works fine. Even I have not been able to figure out a command which will reset the laptop interfaces to default settings, so everytime the router reboots, I have to reboot the laptop too to get into default settings so that I can re-enter the above mentioned commands. My first question is How can I have my bridge+accesspoint up and running even-though the router reboots? And is there a command to set the interfaces to a default state? (ifdown -a doesn't work, after issuing the command the bridge still remained).

  Read the article

• Ubuntu Laptop as a wireless hotspot on bridge mode

  - by nixnotwin

  I have a wired router to which my ubuntu laptop connects via ethernet. The wierless NIC of the laptop acts as a wireless hotspot on master mode. I use hostapd fo this. I have bridged eth0 and wlan0, so my wireless clients that connect to my laptop over wifi get ip from the wired router via dhcp, so the devices get registered at the wired router ( and the laptop is just an access point). I use the following commands to get my laptop+accesspoint working: sudo brctl addbr br0 sudo brctl addif br0 eth0 sudo hostapd /etc/hostapd/hostapd.conf & sudo dhclient -d br0 & sudo ifconfig wlan0 192.168.1.15 netmask 255.255.255.0 up sudo brctl addif br0 wlan0 These commands enable me to access internet on my wireless clients and also on the laptop which is acting as wireless accesspoint. But if I reboot the wired router (without rebooting the laptop that is acting as accesspoint), Internet access on the laptop+accesspoint gets lost, but on wireless clients it works fine. Even I have not been able to figure out a command which will reset the laptop interfaces to default settings, so everytime the router reboots, I have to reboot the laptop too to get into default settings so that I can re-enter the above mentioned commands. My first question is How can I have my bridge+accesspoint up and running even-though the router reboots? And is there a command to set the interfaces to a default state? (ifdown -a doesn't work, after issuing the command the bridge still remained).

  Read the article

• fedora, dhcpd fails to start

  - by soxs060389

  History: I got a tiny shiny plugserver which I want to plug to my ADSL router (or however you want to call it) on one end (eth0), and the other end (eth1) I want to run a dhcp server for my LAN. ATM I am stuck with getting LAN to work. OS is fedora 12. I configured my /etc/dhcp/dhcpd.conf like this: # # DHCP Server Configuration file. # see /usr/share/doc/dhcp*/dhcpd.conf.sample # see 'man 5 dhcpd.conf' # option domain-name "unknown.org"; option domain-name-servers 192.168.44.1; option subnet-mask 255.255.255.0; option broadcast-address 192.168.44.255; default-lease-time 86400; max-lease-time 172800; subnet 192.168.44.0 netmask 255.255.255.0 { host fedorabigbox { hardware ethernet 00:19:66:8E:61:74; fixed-address 192.168.44.21; } #host mobile #{ # hardware ethernet ***; # fixed-address 192.168.44.22; #} range 192.168.44.100 192.168.44.110; option routers 192.168.44.1; } # this is just dummy, as read many howtos, some suggesting to add a subnet blah netmask blah for each interface subnet 192.168.33.0 netmask 255.255.255.0 { range 192.168.33.100 192.168.33.110; option routers 192.168.33.1; } But the server fails to start when trying to start it via /etc/init.d/dhcpd start In general it would be nice if someone can point me to a in detail explanation of how network works, I am pretty new to this stuff. More concrete question: How to point the subnets to eth1 and the other to eth0, how can this be achieved? Does someone see any errors or flaws? Syntax should be correct, allready checked that with the dhcpd syntax check. Thanks for any help

  Read the article

• Bridging my laptop's wireless and wired adaptors

  - by stacey.richards

  I would like to be able to connect a desktop computer that does not have a wireless adapter to my wireless network. I could just run a network cable from my ADSL/wireless router to the desktop computer but sometimes this is not practical. What I would really like to do is bridge my laptop's wireless and wired adapters in such a way that I can run a network cable from my laptop to a switch and another network cable from the switch to a desktop computer so that the desktop computer can access the Internet through my ADSL/wireless router via my latop: +--------------------+ |ADSL/wireless router| +--------------------+ | +-------------------------+ |laptop's wireless adaptor| | | |laptop's wired adaptor | +-------------------------+ | +------+ |switch| +------+ | +-----------------------+ |desktop's wired adapter| +-----------------------+ A bit of Googling suggests that I can do this by bridging my laptop's wireless and wired adapters. In Windows XP's Network Connections I select both the Local Area Connection and the Wireless Network Connection, right click and select Bridge Connections. From what I gather, this (layer 2?) bridge will examine the MAC address of traffic coming from the wireless network and pass it through to the wired network if it suspects that a network adapter with that MAC address may be on the wired side, and vice-versa. If this is the case, I would assume that when the desktop computer attempts to get an IP address from a DHCP server (which is running on the ADSL/wireless router), it would send a DHCP broadcast packet which would pass through the laptop's bridge to the router and the reply would return through the laptop's bridge back to the desktop. This doesn't happen. With some more Googling I find some instruction how this can be done with Linux. I reboot to Ubuntu 9.10 and type the following: sudo apt-get install bridge-utils sudo brctl addbr br0 sudo brctl addif br0 wlan0 sudo brctl addif br0 eth0 sudo ipconfig wlan0 0.0.0.0 sudo ipconfig eth0 0.0.0.0 Once again, the desktop cannot reach the ADSL/wireless router. I suspect that I'm missing some simple important step. Can anyone shed some light on this for me?

  Read the article

• Solaris 10 invalid ARP requests from 0.0.0.0? Link up/down every hour or 2

  - by JWD

  The guys at the data center where I'm hosting a server running Solaris 10 are telling me that my server is making a lot of invalid arp requests. This is an example of a portion of what was sent to me from the logs (with Mac addresses and IP addresses changed). [mymacaddress]/0.0.0.0/0000.0000.0000/[myipaddress]/[Datestamp]) It's being logged every hour. I don't see anything in the arp tables (arp -a) or routing tables (netstat -r) and I don't see anything relating to 0.0.0.0 when snoping the arp requests. The only place I see any reference to 0.0.0.0 is if I do netstat -a for the SCTP SCTP: Local Address Remote Address Swind Send-Q Rwind Recv-Q StrsI/O State ------------------------------- ------------------------------- ------ ------ ------ ------ ------- ----------- 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 0 0 102400 0 32/32 CLOSED But not really sure what that means. Doesn't seem like I can disable SCTP. There are some tunable SCTP parameters but it's not something I'm familiar with. Do I have to add changes to /etc/system? Looks like sctp_heartbeat_interval might be what I need to change? If it makes any difference, I have a few solaris zones running on this server, each with their own IP address on a virtual interface. eth0:0, eth0:1, etc. Does anyone have any idea what might be causing this and how to stop it? I think the switch I'm connected to doesn't like it and momentarily drops the connection. Is there anyway to at least block those requests using ipfilter or something else? Update: This was happening more frequently but now it seems to be happening roughly every hour or every two hours. It's not consistent. I tried setting setting the link speed and duplex to match the switch port and that seemed to make it stop happening for a few hours but then it started again.

  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

• Tunneling a public IP to a remote machine

  - by Jim Paris

  I have a Linux server A with a block of 5 public IP addresses, 8.8.8.122/29. Currently, 8.8.8.122 is assigned to eth0, and 8.8.8.123 is assigned to eth0:1. I have another Linux machine B in a remote location, behind NAT. I would like to set up an tunnel between the two so that B can use the IP address 8.8.8.123 as its primary IP address. OpenVPN is probably the answer, but I can't quite figure out how to set things up (topology subnet or topology p2p might be appropriate. Or should I be using Ethernet bridging?). Security and encryption is not a big concern at this point, so GRE would be fine too -- machine B will be coming from a known IP address and can be authenticated based on that. How can I do this? Can anyone suggest an OpenVPN config, or some other approach, that could work in this situation? Ideally, it would also be able to handle multiple clients (e.g. share all four of spare IPs with other machines), without letting those clients use IPs to which they are not entitled.

  Read the article

• Route all wlan0 traffic over tun0

  - by Tuinslak

  I'm looking for a way to route all wlan0 traffic (tcp and udp) over tun0 (openvpn). However, all other traffic originating from the device itself should not be routed through tun0. I'm guessing this could be realized using iptables or route, but none of my options seem to work. # route add -net 0.0.0.0 gw 172.27.0.1 dev wlan0 SIOCADDRT: No such process Info: This is because the VPN server is not redundant, and wlan users are not really important. However, all services running on the device are fairly important and having a VPN virtual machine with no SLA on it is just a bad idea. Trying to minimize the odds of something going wrong. So setting the VPN server as default gateway is not really an option. I also want all wlan0 user to use the VPN server's IP address as external IP. Edit with the script provided: root@ft-genesi-xxx ~ # route -n Kernel IP routing table Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref Use Iface 172.27.0.17 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.255 UH 0 0 0 tun0 192.168.1.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth0 10.13.37.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 wlan0 172.27.0.0 172.27.0.17 255.255.192.0 UG 0 0 0 tun0 0.0.0.0 192.168.1.1 0.0.0.0 UG 0 0 0 eth0 root@ft-genesi-xxx ~ # ./test.sh RTNETLINK answers: No such process root@ft-genesi-xxx ~ # cat test.sh #!/bin/sh IP=/sbin/ip # replace with the range of your wlan network, or use fwmark instead ${IP} rule add from 10.13.37.0/24 table from-wlan ${IP} route add default dev tun0 via 127.72.0.1 table from-wlan ${IP} route add 10.13.37.0/24 dev wlan0 table from-wlan

  Read the article

• Linux server: Dropped packets

  - by Lars

  I see dropped packets using ifconfig on my eth0 interface: eth0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:15:17:0d:03:ca inet addr:10.0.1.2 Bcast:10.0.1.255 Mask:255.255.255.0 UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:9000 Metric:1 RX packets:30268348 errors:0 dropped:70721 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:133076885 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:1000 RX bytes:8699434077 (8.6 GB) TX bytes:194937313025 (194.9 GB) Interrupt:16 Memory:feae0000-feb00000 When i use ethtool -S i dont see anything wrong: NIC statistics: rx_packets: 30267138 tx_packets: 133074510 rx_bytes: 8699356158 tx_bytes: 194934147340 rx_broadcast: 35296 tx_broadcast: 5435 rx_multicast: 0 tx_multicast: 0 rx_errors: 0 tx_errors: 0 tx_dropped: 0 multicast: 0 collisions: 0 rx_length_errors: 0 rx_over_errors: 0 rx_crc_errors: 0 rx_frame_errors: 0 rx_no_buffer_count: 0 rx_missed_errors: 0 tx_aborted_errors: 0 tx_carrier_errors: 0 tx_fifo_errors: 0 tx_heartbeat_errors: 0 tx_window_errors: 0 tx_abort_late_coll: 0 tx_deferred_ok: 0 tx_single_coll_ok: 0 tx_multi_coll_ok: 0 tx_timeout_count: 0 tx_restart_queue: 0 rx_long_length_errors: 0 rx_short_length_errors: 0 rx_align_errors: 0 tx_tcp_seg_good: 5757001 tx_tcp_seg_failed: 0 rx_flow_control_xon: 8649 rx_flow_control_xoff: 62072 tx_flow_control_xon: 0 tx_flow_control_xoff: 0 rx_long_byte_count: 8699356158 rx_csum_offload_good: 30212111 rx_csum_offload_errors: 0 rx_header_split: 10857552 alloc_rx_buff_failed: 0 tx_smbus: 0 rx_smbus: 0 dropped_smbus: 0 rx_dma_failed: 0 tx_dma_failed: 0 I am running Ubuntu 12.04 with kernel 3.2.0-30-generic #48-Ubuntu SMP I have pinged every device on my internal network for about 24 hours, without packet loss. Also checked my router and my interface to the WAN, also no errors there. Does anyone have any clue?

  Read the article

• IPTables Rule for Google Apps SMTP

  - by XpresServers

  I am trying to add iptables rule to allow traffic on ports 465 & 587 to google apps smtp servers. But I got not luck. My WHMCS installation works fine with google apps when I turn off iptables but iptables turn on itself again and email stop working. Please add rules to allow traffic from port 465 and 587. Following are my IPTables rules grabbed from /etc/sysconfig/iptables # Generated by iptables-save v1.3.5 on Fri Oct 5 01:33:52 2012 *filter :INPUT ACCEPT [2191:434537] :FORWARD ACCEPT [0:0] :OUTPUT ACCEPT [2390:987151] :acctboth - [0:0] -A INPUT -j acctboth -A OUTPUT -p tcp -m multiport --dports 25,465,587 -m owner --gid-owner mailman -j ACCEPT -A OUTPUT -p tcp -m multiport --dports 25,465,587 -m owner --gid-owner mail -j ACCEPT -A OUTPUT -d 127.0.0.1 -p tcp -m multiport --dports 25,465,587 -m owner --uid-owner cpanel -j ACCEPT -A OUTPUT -p tcp -m multiport --dports 25,465,587 -m owner --uid-owner root -j ACCEPT -A OUTPUT -j acctboth -A OUTPUT -o eth0 -p tcp -m tcp --sport 587 -m state --state ESTABLISHED -j ACCEPT -A OUTPUT -o eth0 -p tcp -m tcp --sport 465 -m state --state ESTABLISHED -j ACCEPT <<IN THIS SPACE RULES ARE RELATED TO SPECIFIC IPS ONLY>> -A acctboth -i ! lo COMMIT # Completed on Fri Oct 5 01:33:52 2012 # Generated by iptables-save v1.3.5 on Fri Oct 5 01:33:52 2012 *nat :PREROUTING ACCEPT [196:12398] :POSTROUTING ACCEPT [191:15070] :OUTPUT ACCEPT [190:15010] -A OUTPUT -p tcp -m multiport --dports 25,465,587 -m owner --gid-owner mailman -j RETURN -A OUTPUT -p tcp -m multiport --dports 25,465,587 -m owner --gid-owner mail -j RETURN -A OUTPUT -d 127.0.0.1 -p tcp -m multiport --dports 25,465,587 -m owner --uid-owner cpanel -j RETURN -A OUTPUT -p tcp -m multiport --dports 25,465,587 -m owner --uid-owner root -j RETURN -A OUTPUT -p tcp -m multiport --dports 25,465,587 -j REDIRECT COMMIT # Completed on Fri Oct 5 01:33:52 2012 Thanks Hassan

  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

• In Icinga (Nagios), how do I configure hosts with multiple IPs?

  - by gertvdijk

  I'm setting up Icinga (Nagios fork) and I have some machines with multiple interfaces. Some services are only listening on one of them and to check them correctly, I like to know if it's possible to have multiple IP addresses configured for a single host in Icinga. Here's a minimal example: Remote Server: eth0: 1.2.3.4 (public IP) eth1: 10.1.2.3 (private IP, secure tunnel) Apache listening on 1.2.3.4:80. (public only) OpenSSH listening on 10.1.2.3:22. (internal network only) Postfix SMTP listening on 0.0.0.0:25 (all interfaces) Icinga Server: eth0: 10.2.3.4 (private IP, internet access) Now if I define a host: define host { use generic-host host_name server1 alias server1.gertvandijk.net address 10.1.2.3 } This will not check the HTTP status correctly. And defining an additional host: define host { use generic-host host_name server1-public alias server1.gertvandijk.net address 1.2.3.4 } will check everything, but shows up as two independent hosts. Now I want to 'aggregate' these two hosts to show up as a single host, yet providing an easy configuration to check the services on their proper address. What is the most elegant number-of-configuration-lines-saving solution to this? I read about several plugins available to workaround this, but I can't figure out what is the current way to address it. Solutions go back to 2003, but I'm running Icinga 1.7.1, already capable of the address6 option, yet that triggers IPv6-only resolving on the hostname... Ideally, I wish to configure Icinga to be intelligent enough to know that the Postfix instance running on 10.1.2.3:25 is the same as 1.2.3.4:25 and thus not triggering two alarms. I guess this must have been tackled before and sysadmins have it set up now. Please share your solution to this. Thanks! :)

  Read the article

• System and Router configuration for setting up a home firewall based on Zentyal

  - by Ako

  I am not much of a system administrator, so please be patient if this looks too simple for you. I have a several computers at home, and all of them connect using an ADSL modem/router (and Wireless AP). I have been attacked several times (mainly from Russia and Ukraine), so I thought I should have some kind of firewall, besides the ESET firewall on my Windows 7. So now I have these (new) configuration: I have a small ADSL modem (Zyxel brand) which has only one Ethernet port. This modem is used to connect to internet and is configured in NAT mode. The interface has is configured with IP address 192.168.1.1. I have an old PC and I have installed zentyal on it. It has two Ethernet ports, eth0 and eth1. Eth0 is connected to the Zyxel modem with IP 192.168.1.2 and is checked as the WAN interface (external). I have another ADSL modem which is also a router with 4 Ethernet ports and Wireless AP. One of the Ethernet ports is connected to eth1 on Zentyal box. The Ethernet port's IP is 192.168.2.1 and Zentyal's eth1 is 192.168.2.2. Now, I want to enable other computers to connect to internet through the router both using Wireless and Ethernet. The problem is that I don't know how to configure the router so it routes connections to the Zentyal box. Does anyone have any clue? Again I am sorry if this looks stupid. Thanks.

  Read the article

• Does anyone know how to "tcpdump" traffic decrypted by Mallory MITM? [migrated]

  - by chriv

  I'm looking for some help in capturing network traffic that I can analyze in Wireshare (or other tools). The tool I'm using is mallory. If anyone is familiar with mallory, I could use some help. I've got it configured and running correctly, but I don't know how to get the output that I want. The setup is on my private network. I have a VM (running Ubuntu 12.04 - precise) with two NICs: eth0 is on my "real" network eth1 is only on my "fake" network, and is using dnsmasq (for DNS and DHCP for other devices on the "fake" network) Effectively eth0 is the "WAN" on my VM, and eth1 is the "LAN" on my VM. I've setup mallory and iptables to intercept, decrypt, encrypt and rewrite all traffic coming in on destination port 443 on eth1. On the device I want intercepted, I have imported the ca.cer that mallory generated as a trusted root certificate. I need to analyze some strange behavior in the HTTPS stream between the client and server, so that's why mallory is setup in between for this MITM. I would like to take the decrypted HTTPS traffic and dump it to either a logfile or a socket in a format compatible with tcpdump/wireshark (so I can collect it later and analyze it). Running tcpdump on eth1 is too soon (it's encrypted), and running tcpdump on eth2 is too late (it's been re-encrypted). Is there a way to make mallory "tcpdump" the decrypted traffic (in both directions)?

  Read the article

• esx5 debian VM vlan setup

  - by Kstro21

  i have a server with ESX5, have a switch with about 20 vlans, this is how setup the trunk port interface GigabitEthernet0/1/1 description ToOper port link-type trunk undo port trunk allow-pass vlan 1 port trunk allow-pass vlan 2 to 14 stp disable ntdp enable ndp enable bpdu enable then, i created a standar switch(sw1) using the vSphere Client, the VLAN ID is set to All (4095), i also created a VM with Debian 6, with a NIC connected to sw1, now, i want to configure this NIC for a selected group of vlans auto vlan10 iface vlan10 inet static address 11.10.1.0 netmask 255.255.255.224 mtu 1500 vlan_raw_device eth0 auto vlan14 iface vlan14 inet static address 11.10.1.65 netmask 255.255.255.248 mtu 1500 vlan_raw_device eth0 so, when i restart the network using /etc/init.d/networking restart, i got this error Reconfiguring network interfaces...SIOCSIFADDR: No such device vlan14: ERROR while getting interface flags: No such device SIOCSIFNETMASK: No such device SIOCSIFBRDADDR: No such device vlan14: ERROR while getting interface flags: No such device SIOCSIFMTU: No such device vlan14: ERROR while getting interface flags: No such device Failed to bring up vlan14. done. this is just part of the error, so, my questions is: is this possible?, i mean, what i'm trying to achieve using ESX Virtual Machines, VLANS, etc is this a Debian problem? can be solved? i've read about a file named z25_persistent-net.rules in Debian but it doesn't exist in my installation. in the In the vSphere Networking for ESX5 guide, you can read: If you enter 0 or leave the option blank, the port group can see only untagged (non-VLAN) traffic. If you enter 4095, the port group can see traffic on any VLAN while leaving the VLAN tags intact. So, in theory, it should work, right? Hope you can help me up with this one Thanks

  Read the article

• trying to route between two openvpn clients

  - by user42055

  I have two openvpn clients on the 10.0.1.0 (client1) and 192.168.0.0 (client2) subnets with the server's openvpn connection having the ip 192.168.150.1 The server has ip forwarding enabled. Currently, client1's vpn ip is 192.168.150.10 and the P-t-P ip is 192.168.150.9 I have created the following static route on client1: route add -net 10.0.1.0 netmask 255.255.255.0 gw 192.168.150.9 The routing table on client1 looks like this: Destination Gateway Genmask Flags MSS Window irtt Iface 192.168.150.9 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.255 UH 0 0 0 tun0 192.168.150.1 192.168.150.9 255.255.255.255 UGH 0 0 0 tun0 10.0.1.0 192.168.150.9 255.255.255.0 UG 0 0 0 tun0 192.168.0.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth0 127.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 255.0.0.0 U 0 0 0 lo 0.0.0.0 192.168.0.1 0.0.0.0 UG 0 0 0 eth0 I thought this would be correct to allow traffic from client1 to reach computers on client2's network, but it does not work. Is 192.168.150.9 (the P-t-P address) the correct one to be routing through ? I tried using 192.168.150.1 but I couldn't create the route. I hope this is clear.

  Read the article

• Wired to wireless bridge in Linux

  - by adrianmcmenamin

  I am attempting to set up my Raspberry Pi as a bridge (but I think this is not a question specific to the hardware) - using Debian wheezy. I have a hostapd.conf: (some details changed for security)... interface=wlan0 bridge=br0 driver=nl80211 auth_algs=1 macaddr_acl=0 ignore_broadcast_ssid=0 logger_syslog=-1 logger_syslog_level=0 hw_mode=g ssid=MY_SSID channel=11 wep_default_key=0 wep_key0=MY_KEY wpa=0 (yes, I know WEP is no good) And this in /etc/network/interfaces auto lo iface lo inet loopback iface eth0 inet dhcp allow-hotplug wlan0 iface wlan0 inet manual wpa-roam /etc/wpa_supplicant/wpa_supplicant.conf iface default inet dhcp auto br0 iface br0 inet dhcp bridge-ports eth0 wlan0 Everything seems to come up ok, but I cannot associate with the bridged wireless connection - even though the flashing lights on the USB stick suggest packets are being exchanged. I have read somewhere that not all cards/devices will run in hostap mode - they won't pass packets in one direction: is that right? (The info was a bit old)- this my card: [ 3.663245] usb 1-1.3.1: new high-speed USB device number 5 using dwc_otg [ 3.794187] usb 1-1.3.1: New USB device found, idVendor=0cf3, idProduct=9271 [ 3.804321] usb 1-1.3.1: New USB device strings: Mfr=16, Product=32, SerialNumber=48 [ 3.816994] usb 1-1.3.1: Product: USB2.0 WLAN [ 3.823790] usb 1-1.3.1: Manufacturer: ATHEROS [ 3.830645] usb 1-1.3.1: SerialNumber: 12345 So, what have I got wrong here?

  Read the article

• DHCP Relay setup in ubuntu server

  - by jerichorivera

  I have a network appliance (QNO) that works as traffic load balancer and dhcp server. I would like to add a linux server in between the network appliance and the client computers. The linux server will be used to monitor bandwidth usage. My problem is I still want DHCP to be served by the network appliance so that load balancing will still work efficiently. We are afraid that if we setup the linux server as the DHCP server the network appliance will not be able to load balance the traffic if it only sees the linux server as a single client connecting to it. I've been searching all over for a tutorial on how to setup DHCP relay but have not found any. How do I setup DHCP relay on my linux server given there are two NICs attached to it, one connects the linux server to the network appliance and the other connects the linux server to the client computers. EDIT Router (DHCP) ---- [eth0] Linux Server (Relay agent) [eth1] ----- PC (network) Router IP is 192.168.0.100 eth0 is on DHCP eth1 is static 192.168.2.11 (if I need to change this I can) Tried to do dhcrelay -i eth1 192.168.0.100, but the PC was not getting any DHCP lease from the DHCP router. I might be missing something here.

  Read the article

• Ubuntu server apt-get says "(-5 - No address associated with hostname)"

  - by Srini

  I have a ubuntu 12.04 server. Running sudo apt-get update on it produces errors like this: W: Failed to fetch http://au.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/dists/precise-backports/main/binary-i386/Packages Something wicked happened resolving 'au.archive.ubuntu.com:http' (-5 - No address associated with hostname) I am able to ping all the other hosts on the network and also Google's DNS 8.8.8.8. But am unable to ping www.google.com. So, I'm guessing something is wrong with my DNS setup, but not sure what. I use static IP and my /etc/network/interfaces looks like this: auto eth0 iface eth0 inet static address 192.168.1.50 netmask 255.255.255.0 network 192.168.1.0 broadcast 192.168.0.255 gateway 192.168.1.1 #dns-nameserver 203.12.160.35 203.12.160.36 #nameserver 203.12.160.35 203.12.160.36 My /etc/resolv.conf and /etc/resolvconf/resolv.conf.d/base are both empty and my /etc/resolvconf/resolv.conf.d/original says: nameserver 192.168.1.1 Any help would be greatly appreciated. P.S. I've googled it a bit and the common resolution is to switch to DHCP which I don't want to do since this is my home server. Thanks Srini

  Read the article

• Strange issue with 74.125.79.118

  - by Domenic

  I'm facing with a strange issue on a Linux server. After frequent crashes the analysis found that the server is led to collapse by a huge number of connections to the ip 74.125.79.118 departing from php scripts of the hosted web sites. After a depth analysis of the files I'm found that are not present any malware infections. Ip 74.125.79.118 is Google. I realize after a Google search that the connections to this ip are generated by embedded video from youtube on web sites, among other Google features like safe search. But I don't understand how this type of behavior can lead to the collapse the server and the uniqueness of the situation leads me to think that the situation is far from being attributable only to Google and Youtube. Also I've found that blocking connections from eth0 to 74.125.79.118:80 doesn't solve the issue but if I stop DNS traffic from eth0 to internet, connections to 74.125.79.118 stops. I'm really confused about this. Any suggestions? Cheers.

  Read the article

• Vmware Workstation, Win7 host, Ubuntu guests with Nat + Host-only networks but they cannot connect to the Internet

  - by Ikon

  I have a Win7 host machine with Vmware Workstation. In the workstation I have 3 Ubuntu installed. All 3 Ubuntu guests have a Nat network - to access the internet without asking the router for a local address - and a Host-only network - to connect all Ubuntu quests and the host in a private network for internal communication, without touching the router. When I try to make any of the Ubuntu quests to get data from the internet - assuming that they would figure out that the Nat-ed interface can access the requested data - they fail and report that there is no route to my query. If I disconnect the 2nd interface on the Ubuntu guests with the Host-only network and restart networking, they start to know the route to the internet. Odd, during the installation of the guests they asked which of the 2 given interfaces - with Nat and Host-only config - should be used to get updates during installation and they oddly managed to get the updates. Not so after the installation has finished and rebooted. I have checked the Virtual Network Editor that the Nat interface should use my real network card to access the net, so there should be no problem. I wish not to use the router's dhcp service to give the Ubuntu quests an address, and also I don't want the guests to be accessable from the local network directly, but only by the host - that's the Host-only network is for. Any suggestions? Edit: 192.168.189.0 is the Nat interface and 192.168.7.0 is the Host-only. $ route -n Kernel IP routing table Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref Use Iface 192.168.7.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth1 192.168.189.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth0 0.0.0.0 192.168.189.2 0.0.0.0 UG 100 0 0 eth0

  Read the article

• OpenVPN + iptables / NAT routing

  - by Mikeage

  Hi, I'm trying to set up an OpenVPN VPN, which will carry some (but not all) traffic from the clients to the internet via the OpenVPN server. My OpenVPN server has a public IP on eth0, and is using tap0 to create a local network, 192.168.2.x. I have a client which connects from local IP 192.168.1.101 and gets VPN IP 192.168.2.3. On the server, I ran: iptables -A INPUT -i tap+ -j ACCEPT iptables -A FORWARD -i tap+ -j ACCEPT iptables -t nat -A POSTROUTING -s 192.168.2.0/24 -o eth0 -j MASQUERADE On the client, the default remains to route via 192.168.1.1. In order to point it to 192.168.2.1 for HTTP, I ran ip rule add fwmark 0x50 table 200 ip route add table 200 default via 192.168.2.1 iptables -t mangle -A OUTPUT -j MARK -p tcp --dport 80 --set-mark 80 Now, if I try accessing a website on the client (say, wget google.com), it just hangs there. On the server, I can see $ sudo tcpdump -n -i tap0 tcpdump: verbose output suppressed, use -v or -vv for full protocol decode listening on tap0, link-type EN10MB (Ethernet), capture size 96 bytes 05:39:07.928358 IP 192.168.1.101.34941 > 74.125.67.100.80: S 4254520618:4254520618(0) win 5840 <mss 1334,sackOK,timestamp 558838 0,nop,wscale 5> 05:39:10.751921 IP 192.168.1.101.34941 > 74.125.67.100.80: S 4254520618:4254520618(0) win 5840 <mss 1334,sackOK,timestamp 559588 0,nop,wscale 5> Where 74.125.67.100 is the IP it gets for google.com . Why isn't the MASQUERADE working? More precisely, I see that the source showing up as 192.168.1.101 -- shouldn't there be something to indicate that it came from the VPN? Edit: Some routes [from the client] $ ip route show table main 192.168.2.0/24 dev tap0 proto kernel scope link src 192.168.2.4 192.168.1.0/24 dev wlan0 proto kernel scope link src 192.168.1.101 metric 2 169.254.0.0/16 dev wlan0 scope link metric 1000 default via 192.168.1.1 dev wlan0 proto static $ ip route show table 200 default via 192.168.2.1 dev tap0

  Read the article

• Adding Multiple Interfaces to EC2 Ubuntu 12.04

  - by nocode

  I have a m1.medium Ubuntu 12.04 instance with two ENI's. I have a VPC setup with a private and public subnet. Private: 10.50.1.0/24 Public: 10.50.101.0/24 I initiated the instance on the private subnet. I configured a NAT instance and route all servers in the private subnet internet access. The route tables on the private subnet point towards the NAT instance and the route table on the public subnet point to the internet gateway. I am trying to add a public interface on the machine so that I can put it behind a ELB. When I added the second ENI and configured a static IP in /etc/network/interfaces and restarted the network services, I can no longer access from the Public subnet to the Private Subnet. Works Private private Private public Does not work Public private From Public Private, I ran a TCPDUMp on the private machine and can see the request coming in. My guess is it's trying to route over the new Public interface instead of the Private. Here's my route: default 10.50.1.1 0.0.0.0 UG 100 0 0 eth0 10.50.1.0 * 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth0 10.50.101.0 * 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth1 My networking knowledge is limited and I believe I have to add some routes but unsure of what command/syntax needs to be.

  Read the article

• Have servers behind OpenVPN subnet reach connecting clients

  - by imaginative

  I am trying to find some relevant documentation or what directives I need in either the OpenVPN server configuration or client configuration to accommodate for this use case. I have an OpenVPN server that clients connect to. The OpenVPN server can communicate directly with any of the clients already, this is not an issue. The client is able to reach any machine on the private subnet where OpenVPN resides, this is also not an issue. My issue is that the reverse is currently not possible - I have servers on the same subnet as the OpenVPN box that cannot reach any of the connecting clients. I'd like to be able to SSH to them and more, the same way the client can reach the servers behind the OpenVPN subnet. What do I need to do to make this possible? I already have masquerading rules set on the OpenVPN box: iptables -t nat -A POSTROUTING -s 192.168.50.0/24 -o eth0 -j MASQUERADE IP Forwarding is enabled: echo 1 >/proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_forward I added a route on the server behind the private subnet to be aware of the route: 192.168.50.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth0 What am I missing?

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39  | Next Page >