Search Results

Search found 1236 results on 50 pages for 'nat papovich'.

Page 32/50 | < Previous Page | 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39  | Next Page >

• Draytek Vigor 2820 static IP's

  - by dannymcc

  I have a Draytek Vigor 2820 router which is connected to our ADSL provider (British Telecom, BT). We currently have one static IP address which is accessible from anywhere outside of our network and points at a simple web server on port 80. We have just been given 5 more static IP addresses which I would like to point at five servers that have static IP's. As an example: Current static IP - 80.123.123.123 New Static IP's - 100.100.100.100-105 Server IP's - 192.168.1.129-133 I have confused myself completely between NAT addresses, static routes and WAN IP aliases. If anyone can give me a clear idea of what I need to do it would be greatly appreciated.

  Read the article

• iptables prerouting to redirect source ip address on ethernet

  - by Kevin Campion

  I have 2 ip adresses on the Internet who redirect on the same machine. On this machine, one Debian runs on OpenVZ. I can set iptables rules to redirect all http request to the Debian. iptables prerouting -d ip_address_2 DNAT --to ip_address_local_1 +--------------+ | | | V | ip_address_local_1 I| +------+ +----------+ N|ip_address_1 | |-----|Debian1 VE|-- Apache's log T|-----------------|OpenVZ| +----------+ [client ip_address_1] E| | | | R|ip_address_2 | | | N|--------------+ | | E| +------+ T| Iptables' rules : iptables -t nat -A PREROUTING -p tcp -i eth0 -d ip_address_2 --dport 80 -j DNAT --to ip_address_local_1:80 iptables -A FORWARD -p tcp -i eth0 -o venet0 -d ip_address_local_1 --dport 80 -j ACCEPT iptables -A FORWARD -p tcp -i venet0 -o eth0 -s ip_address_local_1 --sport 80 -j ACCEPT When I go to webpage with "http://ip_address_2", I can see the good content but the ip address on access log file is ip_address_1, I would like to see my ISP's ip address. Any ideas?

  Read the article

• iptables openvpn forward selectively from eth to tun

  - by Bryan Hunt

  Simple for those who know, indecipherable for those who don't... I'm running openVPN on (hypothetical) 66.66.66.66, I want to FORWARD incoming traffic, arriving on interface eth0 to interface tun0. It would also be nice to filter - based on destination IP address. I'm doing the NAT later on, but like to lock down early wherever possible. So onto the main course... This works: #Enable forwarding from eth0 to tun0 iptables -A FORWARD -i eth0 -o tun+ -j ACCEPT But this doesn't pass any packets whatsoever: #Stricter version iptables -A FORWARD -i eth0 -o tun+ --dst 66.66.66.66 -j ACCEPT Am I being unacceptably foolish?

  Read the article

• Installing Windows Server 2003 on AMD environment

  - by santhosh kumar

  Hi all, Our organisation we have 25 computers and we are trying to setup Windows Server 2003. We are planning to configure Active Directory NAT DNS server Visual Studio Team Foundation Server Subversion (SVN) Trac (Bug tracking tool) FTP server And our Hardware configuration is AMD Athlon 64 X2 Dual (Core processor 5600+, 2.60 GHz) Asus motherboard (M2N series) Transcend 4 GB RAM (800 MHz) 500 GB Hard Disk (RAID enabled) But my colleague is advising me AMD won't suite for servers platforms, and use Intel environment. Also they telling we can't install all the services to one server. I got confusion what to do?... Is really can`t install above services to AMD computer? Thanks...

  Read the article

• Gre Tunnel Cisco Linux traffic forwarding

  - by mezgani

  I setup a gre tunnel a cisco router and a Linux machine, the tunnel interface in the Linux box named pic. Well i have to forward traffic coming from cisco through the Linux box. the rules i've set in the Linux box is described as follow: echo "1" /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_forward iptables -A INPUT -p 47 -j ACCEPT iptables -A FORWARD -i ppp0 -j ACCEPT iptables -A FORWARD -i pic -o ppp0 -m state --state ESTABLISHED,RELATED -j ACCEPT iptables -A FORWARD -i ppp0 -o pic -m state --state ESTABLISHED,RELATED -j ACCEPT iptables -A FORWARD -m state --state ESTABLISHED,RELATED -j ACCEPT iptables -t nat -A POSTROUTING -o ppp0 -j MASQUERADE I see the traffic coming from tunnel and forwarded to internet but no reply from sent packet. May i miss something like a routing rule.

  Read the article

• Multiple home routers

  - by netvope

  Suppose I have the following configuration: Router A: WAN port connected to the Internet, LAN = 192.168.1.0/24 Computer A: Connected to router A as 192.168.1.101 Router B: WAN port connected to router A as 192.168.1.102, LAN = 192.168.2.0/24 Computer B: Connected to router B as 192.168.2.101 Now I want computer A to communicate with computer B seamlessly (e.g. can establish a TCP connection by running nc 192.168.2.101 <port>) by means of routing, rather than merging the two networks into one (which can be easily accomplished using router B as a switch). Most routers are shipped with NAT turned on, of which I definitely need to turn off in router B. But what other steps do I need to take so that packets from computer A to computer B would go through router B? I could manually add a routing table entry in computer A so that all packets targeted to 192.168.2.0/24 go through gateway 192.168.1.102, but I would prefer an automatic way if it exist.

  Read the article

• Multiple home routers

  - by netvope

  Suppose I have the following configuration: Router A: WAN port connected to the Internet, LAN = 192.168.1.0/24 Computer A: Connected to router A as 192.168.1.101 Router B: WAN port connected to router A as 192.168.1.102, LAN = 192.168.2.0/24 Computer B: Connected to router B as 192.168.2.101 Now I want computer A to communicate with computer B seamlessly (e.g. can establish a TCP connection by running nc 192.168.2.101 <port>) by means of routing, rather than merging the two networks into one (which can be easily accomplished using router B as a switch). Most routers are shipped with NAT turned on, of which I definitely need to turn off in router B. But what other steps do I need to take so that packets from computer A to computer B would go through router B? I could manually add a routing table entry in computer A so that all packets targeted to 192.168.2.0/24 go through gateway 192.168.1.102, but I would prefer an automatic way if it exist.

  Read the article

• logparser Message with error codes

  - by nsr81

  Hi All, Is there anyway to get complete error message using LogParser? When I run the following query: logparser -i:EVT -o:NAT "SELECT TimeGenerated,EventID,Message from System WHERE EventTypeName='Error event'" I get the following output: 2009-09-02 19:35:44 7000 The USB Mass Storage Driver service failed to start due to the following error: %%1058 The full "Message" in EventViewer is: Description: The USB Mass Storage Driver service failed to start due to the following error: The service cannot be started, either because it is disabled or because it has no enabled devices associated with it. How can I obtain complete message using logparser?

  Read the article

• Juniper Networks SRX240 as a office router?

  - by Jordan Mendelson

  We're a small (7 person) fast growing startup who just got our new office and we're having a 100 Mbps line installed from Cogent. I'm not familiar with Juniper devices, however the equivalent Cisco appears to be rather expensive. Features we'd like: Offsite VPN access (PPTP or L2TP IPsec) - something Mac compatible IPv6 support NAT - ideally supporting multiple outside addresses mapped to VLANs DHCP DNS forwarding would be nice QoS to keep our SIP phones happy (managed through RingCentral) VLANs for guest/internal The device is going to be connected to a set of SIP phones as well as two Ruckus 7962s for wireless access. Eventually I'd like to connect it to a Juniper ESX switch as we grow. Would a Juniper SRX240 handle this ok?

  Read the article

• Fedora12, XP and connection sharing via iptables

  - by Paul L

  Just a quick question ( I Hope ) To find out if what I'm trying is even possible. I am trying to share internet connection with Fedora12 as default gateway and XP machine hooked up via NIC using iptables commands as shown in Mark Sobell's book 'A Practical Guide To Fedora And Red Hat Enterprise Linux' These are the commands as placed in /etc/rc.local iptables -A FORWARD -i eth1 -o eth0 -m state --state ESTABLISHED,RELATED -j ACCEPT iptables -A FORWARD -i eth0 -o eth1 -j ACCEPT iptables -A FORWARD -j LOG iptables -t NAT -A POSTROUTING -o eth1 -j MASQUERADE I did flip the in and out parameters to match my NIC configuration ( as opposed to example from book ) but other than that followed example. One thing to note is that Sobell did not mention whether this should work with mix of Linux and XP. One other note ( maybe meaningless ) is that I do have samba working between the two machines. Thanks for any insights anyone might have. PL

  Read the article

• workstation 7 and host-only no connectivity

  - by Steff

  hello, I have a WinXP 32 host (IBM T400) with VWware workstation 7 (7.0.1 build-227600) and some guest OS (Win xp, NT, etc.) I can ping from the host to guest OS and vice versa, but... every other "protocols" do not work at all. No http from host to guest, no CIFS, nothing, nothing, nothing. Windows firewall is turned off, TCP/IP filer is turned off. i re-installed VMware workstation, then the networking started working again, but, after some reboots... it stopped again. Connectivity among guest OS... it works FINE. Can not understand... problems exist just between host and guest. Host-only or NAT... it is the same. Any suggestion?

  Read the article

• workstation 7 and host-only no connectivity

  - by Steff

  hello, I have a WinXP 32 host (IBM T400) with VWware workstation 7 (7.0.1 build-227600) and some guest OS (Win xp, NT, etc.) I can ping from the host to guest OS and vice versa, but... every other "protocols" do not work at all. No http from host to guest, no CIFS, nothing, nothing, nothing. Windows firewall is turned off, TCP/IP filer is turned off. i re-installed VMware workstation, then the networking started working again, but, after some reboots... it stopped again. Connectivity among guest OS... it works FINE. Can not understand... problems exist just between host and guest. Host-only or NAT... it is the same. Any suggestion?

  Read the article

• Best MTA setup for home or laptop computers - not server

  - by thomasrutter

  Hello, What is a good MTA (e.g. Postfix or something else) setup for a home computer behind a NAT, or a laptop that connects to various different wifi networks? I've read a lot of Postfix tutorials on how to set it up this way or that, but they are usually geared towards computers that are servers ie they have a static IP have a domain name are always connected to the same network My requirements are, I guess: Ability to forward mail for "root" to another server of my choosing. No listening for incoming SMTP connections - outgoing only Ability to route outgoing mail via an external SMTP server with authentication (and perhaps encryption) If not Postfix, I need an MTA which can queue up mails in case it temporarily has no internet connection.

  Read the article

• Problem with shared ssh keys

  - by warren

  Following the process I've used in other environments, I've tried setting-up shared keys between my Mac and my CentOS 4 webserver. I've seen the same problem with my older Ubuntu 7.10 workstation trying to connect via keys to the same webserver. I have tried both dsa and rsa keytypes (sshkeygen -t <type>). The sshd_config file on my webserver seems to be allowing key-based logins: RSAAuthentication yes PubkeyAuthentication yes AuthorizedKeysFile .ssh/authorized_keys And my .ssh/authorized_keys has my dsa and rsa keys added. Where should I be looking for what to change next to make key-based logins "Just Work™"? Is it related to the line, #UseDNS yes and sshd is trying to do a reverse-lookup on my IP, but cannot because it's NAT'd?

  Read the article

• VM can't connect to outside in bridged mode

  - by Kamal

  I am not able to ping any machine(not even the host) from Guest VM in bridged mode. But I got an IP which is on the same subnet as host. I can ping my guest VM from the host and can use ssh to connect to the guest. I am using Vmware workstation 6.5. Guest VM is a centos VM and host is windows xp. Every thing works fine in NAT mode. Any clues as to what could be happening. I tried disabling all the firewalls I have.

  Read the article

• Windows 2008 RRAS and PPPoE

  - by Massimo

  I'm trying to use Windows Server 2008's Routing and Remote Access Server to share an ADSL connection which uses PPPoE, but I'm having no luck. I can setup the connection as a broadband Internet connection in Windows, and it works. I can share it using Internet Connection sharing, and it works (but it's not what I need). I have installed and enabled the Routing and Remote Access Service and configured it for NAT with a demand-dial interface; I create the aforementioned interface using PPPoE with the exact same parameters used on the Windows connection; I connected it, and it seems to work: I can also see it gets its public IP address and DNS assigned correctly. But it just doesn't work. The server has no Internet connectivity at all, and PINGing anything on the Internet results in a cryptic "general error". Any help?

  Read the article

• FreeBSD Can't recognize my network

  - by Mascarpone

  I'm trying to install FreeBSD on VirtualBox in my Ubuntu 11.10 . When I try to download the packages via FTP, the systems fails to correctly configure the DHCP. There are two possible behaviors, randomly picked every time I retry: The DHCP is almost correctly configured, except my host is .fastwebnet.it rather than the real namehost.fastwebnet.it . Whenever I try to add something before the . , the system edit the field and revert it to .fastwebnet.it Only the netmask is configured, everything else is blank. I can't edit the fields. I tried both with NAT and Bridged adapter in my VirtualBox settings.

  Read the article

• SSH via DHCP server

  - by SFault

  I have a DHCP server setup and I can't seem to connect to anything through SSH. When I'm logged in to the server itself, I can SSH. But when I connect any machine to the DHCP server, that machine can SSH but every server I SSH to asks for a password when the normal behavior (when not connected to the DHCP server) does not. Here are the contents of my iptables script that are related to port 22. $IPT -t nat -A PREROUTING -i $LAN -p tcp --dport 22 -j REDIRECT --to-port 22 $IPT -A FORWARD -i $LAN -p tcp --dport 22 -j ACCEPT $IPT -A INPUT -i $LAN -p tcp --dport 22 -j ACCEPT $IPT -A INPUT -i $WAN -p tcp --dport 22 -j ACCEPT $IPT -A OUTPUT -p tcp --sport 22 -m state --state ESTABLISHED -j ACCEPT $IPT -A INPUT -i $LAN -p tcp --dport 22 -m state --state NEW,ESTABLISHED -j ACCEPT Am I missing something?

  Read the article

• How to DNAT to different local IP based on what public IP was accessed with Shorewall?

  - by mikl

  My server has several public IPs, and is running a bunch of virtual machines with private IP adresses. As an example, I want to map ports 80, 443 and 8080 on 232.21.23.23 (public) to 192.168.122.12 (private). I have tried a couple of different NAT mappings, but none of them seem to work: # This doesn't work. DNAT net loc:192.168.122.12 tcp 80,443,8080 - 232.21.23.23 # Neither does this. DNAT $FW loc:192.168.122.12 tcp 80,443,8080 - 232.21.23.23 # Nor this. DNAT net:232.21.23.23 loc:192.168.122.12 tcp 80,443,8080 # I have no idea what I'm doing. DNAT $FW:232.21.23.23 loc:192.168.122.12 tcp 80,443,8080 Can anyone point me in the right direction?

  Read the article

• Forcing logon to Air Watch server upon joining wifi

  - by DKNUCKLES

  I'm setting up a wireless controller that I would like to leave as unsecured. When a user connects to this network they need to be forwarded to a specific page where they can authenticate with the Air Watch system they have in place. Once authentication takes place, a profile will be downloaded to their device and we can administer the devices accordingly. I'm mulling over how I can force the page to the user when they log in. The methodology I'm thinking about working with is creating a NAT rule for that VSC that would forward all port 80 and 443 traffic to the airwatch server. Once they authenticate, a profile will be downloaded which will connect the devices to an Virtual Access Point who's SSID isn't broadcasted. Is this methodology correct or can someone think of an easier / more efficient way of accomplishing this? The controller is an HP MSM720 for what it's worth.

  Read the article

• Virtual PC network connection setting issue

  - by George2

  Hello everyone, I am using Virtual PC 2007 on Windows Vista Enterprise x86. My confusion is about the network setting for guest OS. In the network setting, I can set the network adaptor of guest OS to one of my physical network adaptors of my host OS (I have tested that it works for guest OS to use the physical network adaptor of host OS to access external network). But in this way, 1. since both host OS and guest OS will use the same physical network adaptor, will there be any conflicts (e.g. same H/W serves two OS)? 2. will guest OS share a part of network bandwidth of the host OS of the physical network adaptor? 3. What means NAT setting in guest OS network connection adaptor? thanks in advance, George

  Read the article

• Huawei b260a gsm modem not forwarding gre for pptp tunnel

  - by Priit

  I have a huawei gsm modem that does not want to let gre through. The goal is to connect into a pptp server thats behind the huawei. In the modems port forwarding settings theres a ready made profile for pptp (1723). After activating that the MS pptp test tools show that connection is being initiated but no gre packets make it to the server. After taking a closer look into the modems iptables rules theres nothing in there about gre. So I tried making gre rules manualy into forward and preroute chains without any success what so ever. As far as I can tell theres no ip_gre module present on the device is that needed for gre forwarding? Thats what I'm afraid of that it doesn't support gre in NAT but how would I turn it into a bridge? The wan interface is ppp0 so bridging it with eth0 would not work right? Is there some iptables rule I could use to make the modem let all the traffic just straight through?

  Read the article

• Linux box acting as wireless access point to share the internet connection

  - by Suresh

  A linux machine is connected to internet over two interfaces ppp0 and ppp1 using two modems. Also this machine acts as wireless access point through an interface say, eth0 with ip address 192.168.1.1 and acts as gateway for the connected devices through this network with subnet mask 255.255.255.0 Now is it possible to achieve the following: When any of the connected devices through wireless AP needs internet connection linux machine has to use ppp1 interface for internet. If any of the applications on the linux machine needs internet connection linux machine should use ppp0 interface for the internet. Can this be achieved by adding rules to chains in filter/nat tables? If the kernel routing table has a default rule to route the default traffic through interface ppp0, wil kernel completely ignore ppp1 for internet? PS: new to networking and routing concepts, If the question is not clear leave a comment, will try to give more information.

  Read the article

• LVS TCP connection timeouts - lingering connections

  - by Jon Topper

  I'm using keepalived to load-balance connections between a number of TCP servers. I don't expect it matters, but the service in this case is rabbitmq. I'm using NAT type balancing with weighted round-robin. A client connects to the server thus: [client]-----------[lvs]------------[real server] a b If a client connects to the LVS and remains idle, sending nothing on the socket, this eventually times out, according to timeouts set using ipvsadm --set. At this point, the connection marked 'a' above correctly disappears from the output of netstat -anp on the client, and from the output of ipvsadm -L -n -c on the lvs box. Connection 'b', however, remains ESTABLISHED according to netstat -anp on the real server box. Why is this? Can I force lvs to properly reset the connection to the real server?

  Read the article

• VirtualBox networking problem, host XP, guest Debian

  - by Silma

  Hi, I'm trying to set up a development environment in a virtual machine on my laptop, with debian os. I have both lan and wlan available on the host machine, yet I can't connect to the internet using either. As I said the host OS is windows XP and the guest OS will be the latest Debian, we downloaded the business card net install so we need internet access from the beginning, besides we need the virtual machine to be visible on the local network (for my fellow developers). We tried host-only networking, NAT, bridging, with proxy (the local network uses a proxy to connect to the internet) and without proxy, nothing seems to work. What else can we do? Thanks a lot.

  Read the article

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