Search Results

Search found 15595 results on 624 pages for 'ip forward'.

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

Page 41/624 | < Previous Page | 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48  | Next Page >

  • How can I tell if a host is bridged and acting as a router

    - by makerofthings7
    I would like to scan my DMZ for hosts that are bridged between subnets and have routing enabled. Since I have everything from VMWare servers, to load balancers on the DMZ I'm unsure if every host is configured correctly. What IP, ICMP, or SNMP (etc) tricks can I use to poll the hosts and determine if the host is acting as a router? I'm assuming this test would presume I know the target IP, but in a large network with many subnets, I'd have to test many different combinations of networks and see if I get success. Here is one example (ping): For each IP in the DMZ, arp for the host MAC Send a ICMP reply message to that host directed at an online host on each subnet I think that there is a more optimal way to get the information, namely from within ICMP/IP itself, but I'm not sure what low level bits to look for. I would also be interested if it's possible to determine the "router" status without knowing the subnets that the host may be connected to. This would be useful to know when improving our security posture.

    Read the article

  • Squid 2.7.6 not honoring ACL rules

    - by peppery
    Hello there, I have a /24 block of IP addresses assigned to a single server that I have been attempting to install Squid on an Ubuntu server machine. All of the IP addresses are set up correctly (aliases of eth0) in /etc/networking and work as they should be, using cURL I can specify an interface and it goes out on the correct address as it should be. I would like Squid to take the incoming IP address the request was sourced to and proxy the request out on the same IP (e.g incoming 123.123.123.1:3128 - 123.123.123.1, .2 - .2, etc) and have set up these ACL rules in /etc/squid.conf acl ip1 myip x.x.x.1 tcp_outgoing_address x.x.x.1 ip1 acl ip2 myip x.x.x.2 tcp_outgoing_address x.x.x.2 ip2 acl ip3 myip x.x.x.3 tcp_outgoing_address x.x.x.3 ip3 and so on, as this seems to be the only way to do what I want (from research). However, after much frustration, Squid seems to be ignoring these rules and sending requests out on the default interface. Does anybody have any suggestions? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • It is okay to set MASQUERADE at 2 network interfaces in a Linux server?

    - by Patrick L
    There is a Linux server with 3 network interfaces, eth0, eth1, eth2. IP forwarding has been turn on in this server. eth0 is connected to 10.0.1.0/24. Its IP is 10.0.1.1. eth1 is connected to 172.16.1.0/24. Its IP is 172.16.1.1. Server A can ping router C at 172.16.1.2. eth2 is connected to 192.168.1.0/24. Its IP is 192.168.1.1. Server A can ping server B at 192.168.1.2. Router C is able to route to 172.16.2.0/24 and 172.16.3.0/24. [10.0.1.0/24] | 172.16.2.0/24------| | [C]------172.16.1.0/24------[A]------192.168.1.0/24------[B] 172.16.3.0/24------| We have set MASQUERADE at eth0. When server B (192.168.1.2) connect to 10.0.1.0/24, IP MASQUERADE will happen at eth0. Can we set MASQUERADE at eth1? Is it okay to set MASQUERADE at more than 1 network interfaces in Linux?

    Read the article

  • Connecting two IPs like an URL

    - by czesuaf
    I haven't found answer anywhere, so here comes the question. My ISP connected me to a router with thousands of other clients, so my public IP is the same as many others. And I want to make a small private server which can be accessible across whole web. So my home router shows me IP 10.x.x.x and actually my public IP is 89.x.x.x. Is there any way to reach the IP 10.x.x.x from the Internet? Yeah I thought the same about IPv6 but it's still not accessible for me ;[

    Read the article

  • How does communication between 2 computers in a single network happen?

    - by learner
    Lets say I and my friend connect our computers with a LAN cable. I ping my friend with his IP address. How does it work? Since we are in the same network, we don't even need IP addresses, do we? Isn't IP addressing only relevant in case of inter-network communication? What will the ping command do with his IP address? How will it eventually find his physical address (NIC address)? (no ARP here, because that would involve a router at the edge of the network, which doesn't apply here). Am I wrong somewhere?

    Read the article

  • How to Use C Class IP Address Range

    Another very important thing that you have to remember is that your site should be able to feature in the very first page of a search engine or else it is of no use. This is how you can use C Class IP address Ranges.

    Read the article

  • Forward differing hostnames to different internal IPs through NAT router

    - by abrereton
    Hi, I have one public IP address, one router and multiple servers behind the router. I would like to forward differing domains (All using HTTP) through the router to different servers. For example: example1.com => 192.168.0.110 example2.com => 192.168.0.120 foo.example2.com => 192.168.0.130 bar.example2.com => 192.168.0.140 I understand that this could be accomplished using Port Forwarding, but I need all hosts running on port 80. I found some information about IP Masquerading, but I found this difficult to understand, and I am not sure if it is what I am after. Another solution I have found is to direct all traffic to Reverse Proxy server, which forwards the requests onto the appropriate server. What about iptables? I am using a Billion 7404 VNPX router. Is there a feature that this router has that can accomplish this? Are these my only options? Have I missed something completely? Is one recommended over the others? I have searched around but I don't think I am hitting the correct keywords. Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • ssh use with netcat to forward connections via bastion host to inside machine

    - by Registered User
    Hi, I am having a server in a corporate data centre who's sys admin is me. There are some virtual machines running on it.The main server is accessible from internet via SSH. There are some people who within the lan access the virtual machines whose IPs on LAN are 192.168.1.1 192.168.1.2 192.168.1.3 192.168.1.4 the main machine which is a bastion host for internet has IP 192.168.1.50 and only I have access to it. I have to give people on internet the access to the internal machines whose IP I mentioned above.I know tunnel is a good way but the people are fairly non technical and do not want to get into a tunnel etc jargons.So I came across a solution as explained on this link On the gateway machine which is 192.168.1.50 in the .ssh/config file I add following Host securehost.example.com ProxyCommand ssh [email protected] nc %h %p Now my question is do I need to create separate accounts on the bastion host (gateway) to those users who can SSH to the inside machines and in each of the users .ssh/config I need to make the above entry or where exactly I put the .ssh/config on the gateway. Also ssh [email protected] where user1 exists only on inside machine 192.168.1.1 and not on the gateway is that right syntax? Because the internal machines are accessilbe to outside world as site1.example.com site2.example.com site3.example.com site4.example.com But SSH is only for example.com and only one user.So How should I go for .ssh/config 1) What is the correct syntax for ProxyCommand on gateway's .ssh/config should I use ProxyCommand ssh [email protected] nc %h %p or I should use ProxyCommand ssh [email protected] in nc %h %p 2) Should I create new user accounts on gateway or adding them in AllowedUsers on ssh_config is sufficient?

    Read the article

  • Create a mailbox in qmail, then forward all incoming message to Gmail

    - by lorenzo-s
    I needed to let PHP send mails from my webserver to my web app users. So I installed qmail on my Debian server: sudo apt-get install qmail I also updated files in /etc/qmail specifing my domain name, and then I run sudo qmailctl reload and sudo qmailctl restart: /etc/qmail/defaultdomain # Contains 'mydomain.com' /etc/qmail/defaulthost # Contains 'mydomain.com' /etc/qmail/me # Contains 'mail.mydomain.com' /etc/qmail/rcpthosts # Contains 'mydomain.com' /etc/qmail/locals # Contains 'mydomain.com' Emails are sent without any problem from my PHP script to any email address, using the standard mail PHP library. Now the problem is that if I send mail from my PHP using [email protected] as sender address, I want that customer can reply to that address! And possibly, I want all mails sent to this address should be forwarded to my personal Gmail address. At the moment qmail seems to not accept any incoming mail because of "invalid mailbox name". Here is a complete SMTP session I established with my server: me@MYPC:~$ nc mydomain.com 25 220 ip-XX-XX-XXX-XXX.xxx.xxx.xxx ESMTP HELO [email protected] 250 ip-XX-XX-XXX-XXX.xxx.xxx.xxx MAIL FROM:<[email protected]> 250 ok RCPT TO:<[email protected]> 250 ok DATA 554 sorry, invalid mailbox name(s). (#5.1.1) QUIT I'm sure I missing something related to mailbox or alias creation, in fact I did nothing to define mailbox [email protected] anywhere. But I tried to search something on the net and on the numerous qmail man pages, bot I found nothing.

    Read the article

  • IPTables forward from only one ip on my server

    - by user1307079
    I was able to get my server to forward connections on a certain port to a different IP, but when I add -d to specify an IP to froward from, It does not work. This is what I am trying, iptables -t nat -A PREROUTING -d 173.208.230.107 -p tcp --dport 80 iptables -t nat -nvL-j DNAT --to-destination 38.105.20.226:80. It works fine without the -d. Here is my ifconfig dump: em1 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:A0:D1:ED:D0:54 inet addr:173.208.230.106 Bcast:173.208.230.111 Mask:255.255.255.248 inet6 addr: fe80::2a0:d1ff:feed:d054/64 Scope:Link UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 RX packets:100058 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:18941701 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:1000 RX bytes:12779711 (12.1 MiB) TX bytes:825498499 (787.2 MiB) Memory:fbde0000-fbe00000 em1:9 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:A0:D1:ED:D0:54 inet addr:173.208.230.107 Bcast:173.208.230.111 Mask:255.255.255.248 UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 Memory:fbde0000-fbe00000 em1:10 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:A0:D1:ED:D0:54 inet addr:173.208.230.108 Bcast:173.208.230.111 Mask:255.255.255.248 UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 Memory:fbde0000-fbe00000 em1:11 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:A0:D1:ED:D0:54 inet addr:173.208.230.109 Bcast:173.208.230.111 Mask:255.255.255.248 UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 Memory:fbde0000-fbe00000 em1:12 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:A0:D1:ED:D0:54 inet addr:173.208.230.110 Bcast:173.208.230.111 Mask:255.255.255.248 UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 Memory:fbde0000-fbe00000 lo Link encap:Local Loopback inet addr:127.0.0.1 Mask:255.0.0.0 inet6 addr: ::1/128 Scope:Host UP LOOPBACK RUNNING MTU:16436 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)

    Read the article

  • Segment register, IP register and memory addressing issue!

    - by Zia ur Rahman
    In the following text I asked two questions and I also described that what I know about these question so that you can understand my thinking. Your precious comments about the below text are required. Below is the Detail of 1ST Question As we know that if we have one mega byte memory then we need 20 bits to address this memory. Another thing is each memory cell has a physical address which is of 20 bits in 1Mb memory. IP register in IAPX88 is of 16 bits. Now my point of view is, we can not access the memory at all by the IP register because the memory need 20 bit address to be addressed but the IP register is of 16 bits. If we have a memory of 64k then IP register can access this memory because this memory needs 16 bits to be addressed. But incase of 1mb memory IP can’t.tell me am i right or not if not why? Suppose physical address of memory is 11000000000000000101 Now how can we access this memory location by 16 bits. Below is the detail of Next Question: My next question is , suppose IP register is pointing to memory location, and the segment register is also pointing to a memory location (start of the segment), the memory is of 1MB, how we can access a memory location by these two 16 bit registers tell me the sequence of steps how the 20 bits addressable memory location is accessed . If your answer is, we take the segment value and we shift it left by 4 bits and then add the IP value into it to get the 20 bits address, then this raises another question that is the address bus (the address bus should be 20 bits wide), the registers both the segment register and the IP register are of 16 bits each , now if address bus is 20 bits wide then this means that the address bus is connected to both these registers. If its not the case then another thing that comes into my mind is that both these registers generate a 20 bit address and there would be a register which can store 20 bits and this register would be connected to both these register and the address bus as well.

    Read the article

  • Android: forward search queries to one single activity that handles search

    - by Stefan Klumpp
    I have an activity handling search (ACTIVITY_1), which works perfectly when I use the search (via SEARCH button on the phone) within/from this activity. However, when I use search from another activity (ACTIVITY_2..x) by implementing onNewIntent and forward the query string to my Search_Activity.class (ACTIVITY_1) @Override protected void onNewIntent(Intent intent) { Log.i(TAG, "onNewIntent()"); if (Intent.ACTION_SEARCH.equals(intent.getAction())) { Log.i(TAG, "===== Intent: ACTION_SEARCH ====="); Intent myIntent = new Intent(getBaseContext(), Search_Activity.class); myIntent.setAction(Intent.ACTION_SEARCH); myIntent.putExtra(SearchManager.QUERY, intent.getStringExtra(SearchManager.QUERY)); startActivity(myIntent); } } it always pauses ACTIVITY_2 first and then goes to onCreate() of ACTIVITY_2. Why does it recreate my ACTIVITY_2 when it is already there and doesn't go to onNewIntent directly? Is there another way I can forward search queries directly to ACTIVITY_1? For example via a setting in the Manifest.xml Is it possible to generally forward all search queries automatically to ACTIVITY_1 without even implementing onNewIntent in all the other activities? Currently I have to put an <intent-filter> in every single activity to "activate" my custom search there and forward the query then to the activity that handles search via the onNewIntent (as shown above). <activity android:name=".Another_Activity" android:theme="@style/MyTheme"> <intent-filter> <action android:name="android.intent.action.SEARCH" /> <category android:name="android.intent.category.DEFAULT" /> </intent-filter> <meta-data android:name="android.app.searchable" android:resource="@xml/searchable" /> </activity>

    Read the article

  • Port forward to different port number

    - by ThatGuyYouKnow
    I have a router that sets up rules like so: TCP Any -> 5800 Any -> 5900 UDP Any -> 5800 Any -> 5900 Computer: ip-address This would allow someone 'outside' to connect to my router's port 5800 and 5900 and forward that to the same port on my computer. My issue is that I want the 'outside' port to be different without changing the port on my computer.

    Read the article

  • HAProxy - forward to a different web server based on URI

    - by Saggi Malachi
    I have an HTTP farm with the following configuration: listen webfarm 10.254.23.225:80 mode http balance roundrobin cookie SERVERID insert option httpclose option forwardfor option httpchk HEAD /check.txt HTTP/1.0 server webA 10.254.23.4:80 cookie A check server webB 10.248.23.128:80 cookie B check I would like to add some option which would forward all requests for a specific URI (i.e /special) to a 3rd web server. How should I do it?

    Read the article

  • Forward incoming mail to any domain not specified in relay_domains

    - by Frode Svendsen
    Hi, we have an internal test-server that uses real, live mail addresses to send out status mails sometimes. We don't want these mails to end up with our users but for different reasons we can't use a catch_all solution and we only have the one available mail server. What we need is a way to forward incoming mail from any domain not specified in relay_domains to a specified mailbox.

    Read the article

  • Domino 8.5.3 forward room reservation request to external email

    - by Cividan
    I have created a room reservation database on my notes server. Now my problem is that we have 2 company that will use this room and I would like to forward the meeting request sent to this room to external email address so that the other company email server receive the reservation request and update the calendar on their side to see the accurate availability of the room. How can I achive this. Thanks !

    Read the article

  • How can I port forward with iptables?

    - by stu
    I want connections coming in on ppp0 on port 8001 to route to 192.168.1.200 on eth0 on port 8080 I've got these two rules -A PREROUTING -p tcp -m tcp --dport 8001 -j DNAT --to-destination 192.168.1.200:8080 -A FORWARD -m state -p tcp -d 192.168.1.200 --dport 8080 --state NEW,ESTABLISHED,RELATED -j ACCEPT and it doesn't work, what am I missing?

    Read the article

  • bind named server - forward some requests to other servers

    - by Pentium100
    Is there a way to make bind answer some queries but forward all other queries (of the same domain) to another server, as in: example.com A 127.0.0.1 www.example.com A 127.0.0.1 everything not on this list (example.com MX, ftp.example.com A etc) - ask 192.168.0.1 (another DNS server) Essentially I want to intercept some (but not all) queries going to (in this example) 192.168.0.1 and answer for it. example.com A- intercept www.example.com - intercept example.com MX - pass trough ftp.example.com - pass trough

    Read the article

  • Forward spam is dangerous for my domain repute?

    - by Memiux
    I have Postfix with spamassassin and forward the emails (including spam) to gmail.com, my problem is that when I send "legitimate" emails to gmail.com it is marked as spam, I've done everything that the guidelines said like signing with DKIM, setup a SPF for my domains, require authentication for outbound mails, etc. Now I wonder what I'm doing wrong?

    Read the article

  • SSMTP to forward root@localhost mail

    - by Redconnection
    I would like to forward mail that gets sent root@localhost on multiple servers to our company admin account (e-mail is hosted on gmail) I have installed ssmtp on centos 5.5 via yum and configured it. i've also changed the last line in /etc/aliases to reflect where mail to root should go to. I've then tried sending mail to root - this gets delivered without a problem (mail -v root) I've also tried sending mail to root@localhost - this is not delivered to the specified gmail account.

    Read the article

  • VPC SSH port forward into private subnet

    - by CP510
    Ok, so I've been racking my brain for DAYS on this dilema. I have a VPC setup with a public subnet, and a private subnet. The NAT is in place of course. I can connect from SSH into a instance in the public subnet, as well as the NAT. I can even ssh connect to the private instance from the public instance. I changed the SSHD configuration on the private instance to accept both port 22 and an arbitrary port number 1300. That works fine. But I need to set it up so that I can connect to the private instance directly using the 1300 port number, ie. ssh -i keyfile.pem [email protected] -p 1300 and 1.2.3.4 should route it to the internal server 10.10.10.10. Now I heard iptables is the job for this, so I went ahead and researched and played around with some routing with that. These are the rules I have setup on the public instance (not the NAT). I didn't want to use the NAT for this since AWS apperantly pre-configures the NAT instances when you set them up and I heard using iptables can mess that up. *filter :INPUT ACCEPT [129:12186] :FORWARD ACCEPT [0:0] :OUTPUT ACCEPT [84:10472] -A INPUT -i lo -j ACCEPT -A INPUT -i eth0 -p tcp -m state --state NEW -m tcp --dport 1300 -j ACCEPT -A INPUT -d 10.10.10.10/32 -p tcp -m limit --limit 5/min -j LOG --log-prefix "SSH Dropped: " -A FORWARD -d 10.10.10.10/32 -p tcp -m tcp --dport 1300 -j ACCEPT -A OUTPUT -o lo -j ACCEPT COMMIT # Completed on Wed Apr 17 04:19:29 2013 # Generated by iptables-save v1.4.12 on Wed Apr 17 04:19:29 2013 *nat :PREROUTING ACCEPT [2:104] :INPUT ACCEPT [2:104] :OUTPUT ACCEPT [6:681] :POSTROUTING ACCEPT [7:745] -A PREROUTING -i eth0 -p tcp -m tcp --dport 1300 -j DNAT --to-destination 10.10.10.10:1300 -A POSTROUTING -p tcp -m tcp --dport 1300 -j MASQUERADE COMMIT So when I try this from home. It just times out. No connection refused messages or anything. And I can't seem to find any log messages about dropped packets. My security groups and ACL settings allow communications on these ports in both directions in both subnets and on the NAT. I'm at a loss. What am I doing wrong?

    Read the article

  • forward outbound traffic rule

    - by Claudiu
    I am trying to forward the outbound traffic to another server. Current rule is: /sbin/iptables -A OUTPUT -p tcp -s localhost -o 91.xxx.xxx.xxx --dport 65000:65010 -j ACCEPT but when I do a iptables -L, the rule its showed like this: ACCEPT tcp -- localhost.localdomain anywhere tcp dpts:65000:65010 So I guess my rule is bad written since the "destination" column shows "anywhere" Can you help me with this?

    Read the article

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

< Previous Page | 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48  | Next Page >