Search Results

Search found 2097 results on 84 pages for 'guest'.

Page 37/84 | < Previous Page | 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44  | Next Page >

• High I/O latency with software RAID, LUKS encrypted and LVM partitioned KVM setup

  - by aef

  I found out a performance problems with a Mumble server, which I described in a previous question are caused by an I/O latency problem of unknown origin. As I have no idea what is causing this and how to further debug it, I'm asking for your ideas on the topic. I'm running a Hetzner EX4S root server as KVM hypervisor. The server is running Debian Wheezy Beta 4 and KVM virtualisation is utilized through LibVirt. The server has two different 3TB hard drives as one of the hard drives was replaced after S.M.A.R.T. errors were reported. The first hard disk is a Seagate Barracuda XT ST33000651AS (512 bytes logical, 4096 bytes physical sector size), the other one a Seagate Barracuda 7200.14 (AF) ST3000DM001-9YN166 (512 bytes logical and physical sector size). There are two Linux software RAID1 devices. One for the unencrypted boot partition and one as container for the encrypted rest, using both hard drives. Inside the latter RAID device lies an AES encrypted LUKS container. Inside the LUKS container there is a LVM physical volume. The hypervisor's VFS is split on three logical volumes on the described LVM physical volume: one for /, one for /home and one for swap. Here is a diagram of the block device configuration stack: sda (Physical HDD) - md0 (RAID1) - md1 (RAID1) sdb (Physical HDD) - md0 (RAID1) - md1 (RAID1) md0 (Boot RAID) - ext4 (/boot) md1 (Data RAID) - LUKS container - LVM Physical volume - LVM volume hypervisor-root - LVM volume hypervisor-home - LVM volume hypervisor-swap - … (Virtual machine volumes) The guest systems (virtual machines) are mostly running Debian Wheezy Beta 4 too. We have one additional Ubuntu Precise instance. They get their block devices from the LVM physical volume, too. The volumes are accessed through Virtio drivers in native writethrough mode. The IO scheduler (elevator) on both the hypervisor and the guest system is set to deadline instead of the default cfs as that happened to be the most performant setup according to our bonnie++ test series. The I/O latency problem is experienced not only inside the guest systems but is also affecting services running on the hypervisor system itself. The setup seems complex, but I'm sure that not the basic structure causes the latency problems, as my previous server ran four years with almost the same basic setup, without any of the performance problems. On the old setup the following things were different: Debian Lenny was the OS for both hypervisor and almost all guests Xen software virtualisation (therefore no Virtio, also) no LibVirt management Different hard drives, each 1.5TB in size (one of them was a Seagate Barracuda 7200.11 ST31500341AS, the other one I can't tell anymore) We had no IPv6 connectivity Neither in the hypervisor nor in guests we had noticable I/O latency problems According the the datasheets, the current hard drives and the one of the old machine have an average latency of 4.12ms.

  Read the article

• What is the most suitable way to manage iSCSI storage for Virtual Environments?

  - by Gabriel Talavera

  We are planning to place a HP MSA P2000 with two FC/iSCSI controllers in our network. We have two options to provide more storage to Virtual Machines (We are running Hyper-V): A) Add iSCSI targets to the Virtual Hosts and then create VHD that we would add to each guest server. B) Directly add iSCSI targets in each guest server. Just wondering if one of those options is better than the other, and which is the common practice in a virtualized environment. Thanks in advance for any input!

  Read the article

• Switches with 802.1x "supplicant timeout" feature?

  - by chris

  I'm looking for a complete list of switches which will allow 802.1x and normal (non-supplicant) enabled hosts to connect to the same ports on a switch. This is useful for areas where there are semi-open ports such as a lobby area or a library where corporate and guest users may use the same ports but you want them to have different access profiles and where it isn't expected that guests would have 802.1x configured on their system. For instance, Enterasys and Extreme Networks both have a feature where if the switch doesn't see an EAPOL packet from the client in a certain amount of time, it puts the port into a "guest" VLAN; if it sees an 802.1x supplicant, it tries to authenticate the user via 802.1x and if they succeed, it does what the radius server tells it to do with that port (IE put the port into a certain VLAN, apply certain ACLs, etc) Do other vendors have this sort of feature, or is it expected that a switch will do both 802.1x and MAC authentication, and the "supplicant timeout" feature is implemented with a blanket allow on the MAC authentication?

  Read the article

• Authenticating a Windows client to a Samba share

  - by hekevintran

  I have a Samba network share being served by a Linux machine. The share is read-only unless you give it a username and password. I want my Windows 7 client machine to connect to it. It appears that the Windows machine is connecting as a guest because it does not have write access. The Windows machine never asks me whether or not it should connect as a guest or with a username. How do I make the Windows machine authenticate? Where do I input my password? This seems like such a simple thing yet I am totally confused. On Mac OS and Linux, it simply asks you for a username.

  Read the article

• virtual machines and cryptography

  - by Unknown

  I suspect I'm a bit offtopic with the site mission, but it seems me more fitting for the question than stackoverflow i'm in preparing to create a vm with sensible data (personal use, it will be a web+mail+... appliance of sorts), i'd like to protect the data even with cryptography; the final choice have to be cross-platform for the host basically, I have to choose between guest system-level cryptography (say, dm-crypt or similar) or host level cryptography with truecrypt. do you think that the "truecrypt-volume contained virtualized disks" approach will hit the i/o performance of the vm badly (and therefore dm-crypt like approaches into the vm would be better), or is it doable? I'd like to protect all the guest data, not only my personal data, to be able to suspend the vm freely without worrying for the swap partition, etc

  Read the article

• kvm and qemu host: Is there a limit for max CPUs (Ubuntu 10.04)?

  - by Valentin

  Today we encountered a really strange behaviour on two identical kvm and qemu hosts. The host systems each have 4 x 10 Cores, which means that 40 physical cores are displayed as 80 within the operating system (Ubuntu Linux 10.04 64 Bit). We started a Windows 2003 32 Bit VM (1 CPU, 1 GB RAM, we changed those values multiple times) on one of the nodes and noticed that it took 15 minutes until the boot process began. During those 15 minutes, a black screen is shown and nothing happens. libvirt and the host system show that the qemu-kvm process for the guest is almost idling. stracing this process only shows some FUTEX entries, but nothing special. After those 15 minutes, the Windows VM suddenly starts booting and the Windows logo occurs. After a few seconds, the VM is ready to be used. The VM itself is very performant, so this is no performance issue. We tried to pin the CPUs with the virsh and taskset tools, but this only made things worse. When we boot the Windows VM with a Linux Live CD there is also a black screen for several minutes, but not as long as 15. When booting another VM on this host (Ubuntu 10.04) it also has the black screen problem, and also here the black screen is only shown for 2-3 minutes (instead of 15). So, summerinzing this: Each guest on each of those identical nodes suffers from idling a few minutes after being started. After a few minutes, the boot process suddenly starts. We have observed that the idling time happens right after the bios of the guest was initialized. One of our employees had the idea to limit the amount of CPUs with maxcpus=40 (because of 40 physical cores existing) within Grub (kernel parameter) and suddenly the "black-screen-idling"-behaviour disappeared. Searching the KVM and Qemu mailing lists, the internet, forums, serverfault and other various sites for known bugs etc. showed no useful results. Even asking in the dev IRC channels brought no new ideas. The people there recommend us to use CPU pinning, but as stated before it didn't help. My question is now: Is there a sort of limit of CPUs for a qemu or kvm host system? Browsing the source code of those two tools showed that KVM would send a warning if your host has more than 255 CPUs. But we are not even scratching on that limit. Some stuff about the host system: 3.0.0-20-server kvm 1:84+dfsg-0ubuntu16+0.14.0+noroms+0ubuntu4 kvm-pxe 5.4.4-7ubuntu2 qemu-kvm 0.14.0+noroms-0ubuntu4 qemu-common 0.14.0+noroms-0ubuntu4 libvirt 0.8.8-1ubuntu6 4 x Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E7-4870 @ 2.40GHz, 10 Cores

  Read the article

• Problem with Xen, xvda and sda

  - by Javier J. Salmeron Garcia

  I am creating a cloud for my university using Eucalyptus with Xen (PCs have Debian Squeeze 64 bit installed). I have a problem with the following guest configuration: # # Configuration file for the Xen instance evenmorefinalfoo, created # by xen-tools 4.2 on Thu May 26 11:03:06 2011. # # # Kernel + memory size # kernel = '/boot/vmlinuz-2.6.32-5-xen-amd64' ramdisk = '/boot/initrd.img-2.6.32-5-xen-amd64' vcpus = '1' memory = '128' # # Disk device(s). # root = '/dev/sda2 ro' disk = [ 'file:/home/xen/domains/evenmorefinalfoo/disk.img,sda2,w', 'file:/home/xen/domains/evenmorefinalfoo/swap.img,sda1,w', ] As you can see, the disk and swap images are meant to be mounted on sda1 and sda2. However, when I start the guest, these are mounted on xvda1 xvda2, provoking an error. Is there anything that I can do about that? It seems like it is a Xen error. Thank you in advance,

  Read the article

• Move virtual machine hard disk to a separate physical hard disk for better performance?

  - by joeeoj

  I have a dual-core machine with the host OS and many guest virtual OSs. Although I have 8GB of RAM, I notice a slowdown when I turn some virtual machine on (and it takes only 1GB RAM). I was told that I should move virtual machine hard disk file to a separate (another) physical hard drive in my PC to get better performance. This way the head of the hard disk would not have to jump from the virtual OS to the host OS as each hard drive would have its own head to deal with the OS: hard drive 1 head for host OS and hard drive 2 head for guest OS. Is this true? Should I get another hard disk only for virtual machine hard disk files?

  Read the article

• How do I get write access to ubuntu files from Windows?

  - by Steven

  I'm running Ubuntu 11.10 on my Virtual Machine as a web server. I've mounted the W:/ drive in Win 7 to my /www folder in Ubuntu. I can read the files, but I'm not able to write to the files. In Samba, I have created the following user: <www-data> = "<www-data>" And given guest ok for the www folder: [www] comment = Ubuntu WWW area path = /var/www browsable = yes guest ok = yes read only = no create mask = 0755 ;directory mask = 0775 force user = www-data force group = www-data I've also run sudo chmod -R 755 www to make ensure correct rw access. What am I missing in order to get write access to my ubuntu files from Windows?

  Read the article

• Restore access to Cisco Connect after changing router settings

  - by StasM

  I have recently bought Cisco Valet Plus (M20) wireless router (which I recognize now was a mistake, but nevermind). It has two setup options - Cisco Connect software and web-based setup. Cisco Connect software allows changing very small set of settings, web-based setup allows access to almost all settings, except settings for guest network. The problem is that when I use web-based setup, Cisco Connect after some changes refuses to talk to the router, so I can't change guest settings anymore (since web interface doesn't allow to change them). It must be because of some config parameter not matching or some password set wrong - but I don't know where Cisco Connect stores them. So, does anybody have any idea how to make Cisco Connect talk to the router again once I changed the settings through the web interface?

  Read the article

• VirtualBox - multiple guests, each with a single bridged adapter?

  - by Martin

  I am running a dedicated server (located at Hetzner, Germany) that runs VirtualBox in order to virtualize several services accross multiple virtual guests. Those guests are supposed to communicate with each other (for instance, a virtual web server has to access a virtual database server); to be reachable from the dedicated server (for instance, SSH access); and to access the Internet via the dedicated server (for instance, to download security updates) Currently, this is achieved by having host-only adapter vboxnet0 on the dedicated server and two virtual interfaces on each guest. There, virtual adapter eth0 is attached to vboxnet0 (to achieve (1) and (2)), virtual adapter eth1 is attached to VirtualBox' NAT (to achieve (3)). Via eth0, the guests have access to a DHCP and a DNS server, both running on the dedicated server (there, bound to vboxnet0). This allows me to assign custom IP addresses and names. Via eth1, VirtualBox pushes a proper route that enables each guest to access the Internet (via eth0 on the dedicated server). This setup with two virtual adapters frequently leads to problems and at leasts complicates many things. For instance, on the dedicated server there is OpenVPN which allows to access the virtual machines via the Internet; futhermore, there is Shorwall that controls the incoming and outgoing network traffic between the Internet, the dedicated server, and the individual virtual machines. Not to mention automatic installation of servers via PXE... Therefore, I would prefer to have only one single virtual adapter on each guest which would be used for both incoming and outgoing connections. As far as I understand, one would basically use a bridged interface for that very purpose. Now the question arises: Which interface on the dedicated server would the bridge use? eth0 on the host server is not an option, as this is prohibited by the provider. A virtual interface eth0:0 would not make any sense, as a bridge always uses a physical interface (eth0 in this case). Would it be possible to create a bridged interface in each virtual machine that would "dangle in the air"? Thus, without a complement on the dedicated server? How would I have to set up the routing on the host server? Please note that the host / dedicated server has only one network adapter (eth0) which is connected to the provider's network. Regards, Martin

  Read the article

• Virtual Machine files on ramdisk doesn't run faster than on physical disk

  - by Landy

  I installed total 36G memory (4x8G + 2x2G) in the host (Windows 7) and I used ImDisk to create a 32G ramdisk and format it to NTFS file system. Then I copied the virtual machine (in VMware Workstation format) folder, including vmx, vmdk, etc... to the new created ram disk. Then I tried to power on it in VMware Workstation. What made me surprised is that the performance is not better than before. It cost almost the same time to power on the Windows 7 VM. I check the Resource Monitor in the Windows 7 host, and the statistics of CPU, disk, network are rather normal. The memory has reported 3000+ hard fault/sec when guest OS boot then drop to 0 after the guest powered on. Any idea about this issue? I had thought the performance of ramdisk will be better than physical disk in this case. Am I wrong? Thanks.

  Read the article

• Problem with keyboard layout when OS X 10.6.3 -> Fedora 13

  - by user20196

  Hi, I have VMware installed on Fedora 13 (host OS) /amd 64bit. When I log to it from console VMware works good. I wanted to start remotely from OS X 10.6.3, so I installed NX client. Everything is fine with the keyboard layout if I do not use VMware. When I try to run the guest OS on VMware my keyboard is cut off completely. The host and the guest OSes are setup for "us" layout and for "generic 105 keys" keyboard.

  Read the article

• How to keep group-writeable shares on Samba with OSX clients?

  - by Oliver Salzburg

  I have a FreeNAS server on a network with OSX and Windows clients. When the OSX clients interact with SMB/CIFS shares on the server, they are causing permission problems for all other clients. Update: I can no longer verify any answers because we abandoned the project, but feel free to post any help for future visitors. The details of this behavior seem to also be dependent on the version of OSX the client is running. For this question, let's assume a client running 10.8.2. When I mount the CIFS share on an OSX client and create a new directory on it, the directory will be created with drwxr-x-rx permissions. This is undesirable because it will not allow anyone but me to write to the directory. There are other users in my group which should have write permissions as well. This behavior happens even though the following settings are present in smb.conf on the server: [global] create mask= 0666 directory mask= 0777 [share] force directory mode= 0775 force create mode= 0660 I was under the impression that these settings should make sure that directories are at least created with rwxrwxr-x permissions. But, I guess, that doesn't stop the client from changing the permissions after creating the directory. When I create a folder on the same share from a Windows client, the new folder will have the desired access permissions (rwxrwxrwx), so I'm currently assuming that the problem lies with the OSX client. I guess this wouldn't be such an issue if you could easily change the permissions of the directories you've created, but you can't. When opening the directory info in Finder, I get the old "You have custom access" notice with no ability to make any changes. I'm assuming that this is caused because we're using Windows ACLs on the share, but that's just a wild guess. Changing the write permissions for the group through the terminal works fine, but this is unpractical for the deployment and unreasonable to expect from anyone to do. This is the complete smb.conf: [global] encrypt passwords = yes dns proxy = no strict locking = no read raw = yes write raw = yes oplocks = yes max xmit = 65535 deadtime = 15 display charset = LOCALE max log size = 10 syslog only = yes syslog = 1 load printers = no printing = bsd printcap name = /dev/null disable spoolss = yes smb passwd file = /var/etc/private/smbpasswd private dir = /var/etc/private getwd cache = yes guest account = nobody map to guest = Bad Password obey pam restrictions = Yes # NOTE: read smb.conf. directory name cache size = 0 max protocol = SMB2 netbios name = freenas workgroup = COMPANY server string = FreeNAS Server store dos attributes = yes hostname lookups = yes security = user passdb backend = ldapsam:ldap://ldap.company.local ldap admin dn = cn=admin,dc=company,dc=local ldap suffix = dc=company,dc=local ldap user suffix = ou=Users ldap group suffix = ou=Groups ldap machine suffix = ou=Computers ldap ssl = off ldap replication sleep = 1000 ldap passwd sync = yes #ldap debug level = 1 #ldap debug threshold = 1 ldapsam:trusted = yes idmap uid = 10000-39999 idmap gid = 10000-39999 create mask = 0666 directory mask = 0777 client ntlmv2 auth = yes dos charset = CP437 unix charset = UTF-8 log level = 1 [share] path = /mnt/zfs0 printable = no veto files = /.snap/.windows/.zfs/ writeable = yes browseable = yes inherit owner = no inherit permissions = no vfs objects = zfsacl guest ok = no inherit acls = Yes map archive = No map readonly = no nfs4:mode = special nfs4:acedup = merge nfs4:chown = yes hide dot files force directory mode = 0775 force create mode = 0660

  Read the article

• Getting kernel errors when manually mounting VirtualBox shared folders

  - by Ross

  Updated: I've rephrased this problem as I understand it a bit more now (and have encountered another problem). I'm using a Fedora 15 guest on a Windows 7 host using VirtualBox. I am trying to mount a partition on the host PC as a shared folder for use in the guest. The folder appears in /media and is accessible when I use the auto-mount feature when setting up the shared folder, but when I attempt to mount without auto-mount I get the following error: $ sudo mount.vboxsf data /mnt/host_data /sbin/mount.vboxsf: Could not add an entry to the mount table.: Invalid argument In addition a popup appears (part of Fedora/GNOME) reporting a crash in the kernel package: WARNING: at lib/list_debug.c:26 __list_add+0x3e/0x81() However the shared folder seems to work, I can certainly browse it (although everything seems to be executable, probably down to a Windows host). Is there something wrong with what I'm doing or is this a bug (and in which case should it be reported to the Linux Kernel team or VirtualBox)?

  Read the article

• VMWare Workstation can't read CD/DVD drive

  - by Chris W

  A fresh install of VMWare Workstation 7 (7.1.1 build 282343) on Windows 7 64 bit. When I try to read a CD/DVD from a guest (either to install a fresh guest or to read a CD within an existing VM I get the following error: Cannot connect virtual device ide1:0 because no corresponding device is available on the host. I've tried fiddling with the IDE channels as well as tried SCSI with no joy. What am I missing? I can run ISOs fine but I don't want to have to convert everything to an ISO when I presume that this should just work fine.

  Read the article

• Linux-Vserver: How to do upgrade Debian 5.0 to 6.0 on vservers and main machine?

  - by Bartosz Kowalczyk

  I have server with debian lenny. I installed vserver on this server a few years ago. Summary I have 5 guest of vservers and main system, now. Each guest is debian lenny. Now, I'm wanting upgrade from lenny to squeezy on this servers (each Vservers and main machine). Do you do it? I should upgrade as usually system ? First I should upgrade every vserver next main machines and I have to do reset all machines and vservers? Please, advise me how to do it ?

  Read the article

• Set up a root server using Ubuntu and Virtualization

  - by Daniel Völkerts

  Hello, I'd like to setup a fresh root server and install a linux based virtualization on it. My thoughts are on: Intel VTs Hardware Ubuntu 9.10 KVM based virt. The access to the root server will only be SSH for Administration. Has anybody done this before, what was your glues discovered in the daily use? My requirements are: very secure, so the root server only has ssh to the dom-0 and minimalistic ports for the guest (e.g. http/s). good monitoring of host/guest (my idea is to using zabbix for it) easy and fast administration (how are the command line tools working for you? cryptiv? high learning curve?) I'm pleased to learn from your suggestions. Regards, Daniel Völkerts

  Read the article

• How to get back-to-work with a Windows 7 PC that has no admin account?

  - by Nam Gi VU

  Hi everyone, I have a PC which doesn't have the Administrator account active and the only user account left is a Guest user. I want to get back the admin account but I don't know how to do that with a guest user. I have tried searching the internet and try to use the Recovery Mode but adding/activating the admin account from DOS not working for me at all. Please help if you meet & solve it before! Thank you, Nam. ps. You can see my diigo try on solving this problem.

  Read the article

• Virtual Server 2005 R2 kungfu

  - by AngryHacker

  Does Virtual Server 2005 R2 have a command line interface, that's versatile enough? Here is a situation. I run a Win2k VM on an old memory constrained machine. I allocate it 378MB of RAM and the VM runs just fine. Once a month, inside the VM, I backup the (a very large) database, compress it using 7Zip and ftp it to the backup site (all in a script). Unfortunately the compression part takes a massive amount of RAM (far exceeding the 378MB), it goes for the paging file and brings absolutely everything to a crawl and literally takes 2-3 days, if left unattended. So to fix this, I have to shutdown the VM, give it temporarily 768MB of RAM and then the whole thing finishes in 20 minutes. So, is there a way do the following automatically from the host machine in a script? Shutdown the guest OS (I think, I got this part) Change the RAM allocation from 378 to 768 Start the guest OS again then, 1 hour later, do everything in reverse.

  Read the article

• Windows user cannot connect via application, but can via Remote Desktop

  - by C. Ross

  I have an application (ASG-Zena) giving an 1385 error (Logon failure: the user has not been granted the requested logon type at this computer) when trying to run a batch job. I have checked on "Access this computer from the network" includes Everyone and Administrators and many others. "Deny access to this computer from the network" make sure that Guest is not listed there. If you still have problems, then maybe make sure that nothing is listed there. Administrative tools...local security policy..security options "Network access sharing and security model for local accounts" there are 2 options either classic or 'guest only'. Mine is set to classic. (These diagnostics come from this post) The account in question is added to the Administrator group on this computer. I know the login is valid because I regularly login to the server via remote Desktop. What other settings should I check?

  Read the article

• Virtualbox fullscreen mode problem

  - by AtharvaI

  hi all I have a slightly weird issue with virtualbox. My host OS is Win7 (64-bit) and guest OS is Ubuntu 10.10(64-bit). When I switch to fullscreen mode in virtualbox, ubuntu display resizes to fit my screen size. however, after that the display is not updated. So if i click a menu or something I don't see it appear. but it seems to work in the background. if i click a menu in fullscreen mode, i don't see anything happen, but if then switch to windowed mode I see the menu already open. I have installed virtuabox guest additions. if any has a similar issue or has found a solution please let me know thanks.

  Read the article

• How can I run 2 already installed OS at the same time?

  - by eran

  I have Win7 and Ubuntu installed on my PC, and I can choose which to run at boot time. I would like to be able to run the Ubuntu from within the Win7. Tools like VMWare allows one to create a new installation of a guest OS, which could then be run alongside the hosting OS. However, I already have the Ubuntu fully installed on my hard drive, and I'd like to maintain the dual boot option. Ideally, I'd like to be able to create a new virtual machine on my Win7, but instead of installing a new guest OS, just direct it to the existing installation. Is that possible?

  Read the article

• VMware 1.0.1 Windows7 - Ubuntu hostnames

  - by Kyle K

  I'm trying to run Ubuntu as the guest OS using VMWware 1.0.10 with Windows 7 Ultimate as the host OS. I had this set up previously with Win XP as the host OS and in fact I'm using the same .vmx My problem is I can't get either Win7 or Ubuntu to be able to ping the other by hostname. After installing Samba and Winbind on Ubuntu, I was able to get this working when under WinXP, but for some reason I can't get it to work under Win7. I can ping by IP Address, and the guest OS even shows up by hostname under the Windows networking panel (but of course I can't do anything with it), but pinging using short hostnames just won't work. Also, Win7 firewall is turned off completely.

  Read the article

• Access VirtualBox-ed server from behind the router

  - by migajek

  I'm having the following configuration: Windows 7 hosting VirtualBox and it's guest: Ubuntu The machine (physical) which runs VirtualBox is behind the router and has the address of 192.168.0.110 VirtualBox runs the Bridged network, and the IP of VirtualBox-ed Ubuntu (eth0) is 192.168.0.200 Host (Win7) is running HTTP service on port 80, while guest (Ubuntu) is running it's service on port 9000 I can access both services from inside the network by typing the ip_address:port and this works fine. Both ports are forwarded on the router to their's respective IPs: 80 -> 192.168.0.110:80 9000 -> 192.168.0.200:9000 Unfortunately, accessing the router's external IP doesn't work as expected. While external_ip:80 works correctly, external_ip:9000 - doesn't I believe the problem is VBox - related, since the same network is running also other physical machine with Ubuntu and http service on 8000 and this one is forwarded correctly.

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44  | Next Page >