Search Results

Search found 1447 results on 58 pages for 'routes'.

Page 46/58 | < Previous Page | 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53  | Next Page >

  • management network to a network port for additional ones munin and monit

    - by paolo
    management network to a network port for additional ones munin and monit I want to build a separate Netzwek for server management. I have several network cards a linux / debian / ubuntu with computer. Set both network cards sin in the /etc/network/interfaces. # The primary network interface #allow-hotplug eth0 #iface eth0 inet dhcp auto eth0 iface eth0 inet static address 10.0.0.240 netmast 255.255.255.0 network 10.0.0.0 brodacast 10.0.0.255 gateway 10.0.0.254 auto eth1 iface eth1 inet static address 10.0.10.240 netmast 255.255.255.0 network 10.0.10.0 brodacast 10.0.10.255 post-up ip route add 10.0.0.0/24 dev eth0 src 10.0.0.240 table eth0-WAN post-up ip route add default via 10.0.0.254 table eth0-WAN post-up ip route add 10.0.10.0/24 dev eth1 src 10.0.10.240 table eth1-LAN post-up ip route add default via 10.0.10.200 table eth1-LAN post-up ip rule add from 10.0.0.240 table eth0-WAN post-up ip rule add from 10.0.10.240 table eth1-LAN still i adjusted / etc/iproute2/rt_tables and following routes set up in the /etc/network/interfaces I want to have both applications and the network interface separately as munin and monit only on eth1 and not have to eth0. it goes to the reboot but sometimes not always. # Traceroute-i eth1 10.0.10.200 not go what am I doing wrong?

    Read the article

  • Cannot connect to windows server by name over vpn connection

    - by ErocM
    I have a rented dedicated windows server on a public ip that is acting as a SQL Server and VPN server. I need to connect to this server via computer name to get replication in place. I cannot use an ip address due to this issue: So, due to this, we are going the VPN route. That is my primary issue: After I am connected to this server's vpn, I can connect to SQL Server using the ip address but I cannot connect by the computer's name as you can see below... Right now, there is no hardware firewall on it since I had it removed to test this issue. I am running Windows 2008 Enterprise Server as the VPN server. I am not sure if the route print will help any from the workstation trying to connect but here is the info: IPv4 Route Table Active Routes: Network Destination Netmask Gateway Interface Metric 10.0.0.0 255.0.0.0 10.0.0.1 10.0.0.2 21 10.0.0.2 255.255.255.255 On-link 10.0.0.2 276 Any other info needed? Thanks for the help! ========= CLARIFICATION ON A FEW THINGS #1 ========= This is the server's info: This is the workstation that is trying to connect: I connect to the server via "Control Panel\Network and Internet\Network and Sharing Center\Connect or Disconnect" You can see here that I am connected: ========= CLARIFICATION ON A FEW THINGS #2 ========= I've tried to connect directly to the Sql Server as I did above but with the computers name and I couldn't get to it. Here I am trying to net view it from the workstation and it couldn't find it:

    Read the article

  • append $myorigin to localpart of 'from', append different domain to localpart of incomplete recipient address

    - by PJ P
    We have been having some trouble getting Postfix to behave in a very specific fashion in which sender and recipient addresses with only a localpart (i.e. no @domain) are handled differently. We have a number of applications that use mailx to send messages. We would like to know the username and hostname of the sending party. For example, if root sends an email from db001.company.local, we would like the email to be addressed from [email protected]. This is accomplished by ensuring $myorigin is set to $myhostname. We also want unqualified recipients to have a different domain appended. For example, if a message is sent to 'dbadmin' it should qualify to '[email protected]'. However, by the nature of Postfix and $myorigin, an unqualified recipient would instead qualify to [email protected]. We do not want to adjust the aliases on all servers to forward appropriately. (in fact, every possible recipient doesn't have an entry in /etc/passwd) All company employees have mailboxes on Exchange, which Postfix eventually routes to, and no local Linux/Unix mailboxes are used or access. We would love to tell our application owners to ensure they use a fully qualified email address for all recipients, but the powers that be dictate that any negligence must be accommodated. If we were to keep $myorigin equal to $myhostname, we could resolve this issue by having an entry such as the following in 'recipient_canonical_maps': @$myorigin @company.com However, unfortunately, we cannot use variables in these map files. We also want to avoid having to manually enter and maintain the actual hostname in 'recipient_canonical_maps' for each server. Perhaps once our servers are 'puppetized' we can dynamically adjust this file, but we're not there yet. After an afternoon of fiddling I've decided to reach out. Any thoughts? Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • Private IP getting routed over Internet

    - by WernerCD
    We are setting up an internal program, on an internal server that uses the private 172.30.x.x subnet... when we ping the address 172.30.138.2, it routes across the internet: C:\>tracert 172.30.138.2 Tracing route to 172.30.138.2 over a maximum of 30 hops 1 6 ms 1 ms 1 ms xxxx.xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.org [192.168.28.1] 2 * * * Request timed out. 3 12 ms 13 ms 9 ms xxxxxxxxxxx.xxxxxx.xx.xxx.xxxxxxx.net [68.85.xx.xx] 4 15 ms 11 ms 55 ms te-7-3-ar01.salisbury.md.bad.comcast.net [68.87.xx.xx] 5 13 ms 14 ms 18 ms xe-11-0-3-0-ar04.capitolhghts.md.bad.comcast.net [68.85.xx.xx] 6 19 ms 18 ms 14 ms te-1-0-0-4-cr01.denver.co.ibone.comcast.net [68.86.xx.xx] 7 28 ms 30 ms 30 ms pos-4-12-0-0-cr01.atlanta.ga.ibone.comcast.net [68.86.xx.xx] 8 30 ms 43 ms 30 ms 68.86.xx.xx 9 30 ms 29 ms 31 ms 172.30.138.2 Trace complete. This has a number of us confused. If we had a VPN setup, it wouldn't show up as being routed across the internet. If it hit an internet server, Private IP's (such as 192.168) shouldn't get routed. What would let a private IP address get routed across servers? would the fact that it's all comcast mean that they have their routers setup wrong?

    Read the article

  • Homebrew large data cluster access for 2 user levels?

    - by Yegor
    The title probably makes little sense, so here is an example. I have a file hosting site, that serves a large amount of semi-randomly accessed files. The setup is as follows: High horsepower front-end +DB server that also does encoding for files that need encoding Fresh file server, which stores newly uploaded content, thats probably (and usually) rapidly accessible, which has 500GB of raided SSD storage, that can push over 3GBit of traffic. 3 cheap node servers, containing 2 x 750GB SATA drives in raid1, where files older than 2 weeks are archived, from the SSD server (mentioned above). Files on each server are accessed via subdomains (via modsec) in a straight forward fashion (server1.domain.com, server2.domain.com, etc) Where I have the problem is this. I introduced a "premium" service where people pay a small fee every month, and get ad-free, quick accesses to stuff on the site. Once they are logged in, they access same files via premium.server1.domain.com via a different modsec script, with a different pass phrase. That all works fine and dandy.... except the cheap node servers are all IO bound, so accessing the files on them via a different, unsaturated network makes no difference, since it cannot read off the drive fast enough. What would be a good way to make files on the site be accessible via 2 different network routes, 1 of which will be saturated (the "free network") while all other files are on an un-saturated "premium" network?

    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

  • MX setup for a domain registrar and web host with the same domain name

    - by Honus Wagner
    I have a client that has registered their domain through a registrar, then signed up for hosting on through a different provider, but used the same domain for said provider (didn't re-register the domain, I think the declaration of domain on the host was for CNAME records specifically). The registrar properly routes his emails at his domain name (email hosted by Google), but the problem is, on the hosted site, when an administration action occurs, he is supposed to get an email stating so. The site is sending him an email with PHP and he never receives an email when its to his address with the same domain name; all other domain addresses work just fine. I have to imagine its something misconfigured on the host. From what I can assume, I think that the host sees that the to and from domains are the same, and it decides not to route the email externally. Currently, the registrar uses the proper nameservers for the host, and there are MX records on both the registrar and the host (they are identical entries). I hope I've been clear in my question. If you need further clarification, or additional information of any kind, I can provide it. Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • How to bypass vpn talking to VMWare Guest?

    - by marc esher
    Greetings. Network/VPN n00b question here. I'm running VMWare Workstation with a Guest Windows 2003 Server. It has SQL Server 2000 installed. The sole purpose for this Guest is to house SQL Server... it needn't have internet access or access to any other resources on the network other than the host. When launch Check Point VPN software, the host routes through the company network before it connects to the guest ... i.e. it's no longer a direct connection. I assume this is just how things are supposed to work. However, what's happening is that the connection between my host and the SQL Server instance on the guest intermittently drops. It's not consistent, and some databases on the server will be responsive while others aren't. It appears that the databases with the most traffic on the guest (the ones I'm hitting with load tests) are the ones that become intermittently unresponsive. This problem only manifests when VPN is on; when it's off, I can pound away on this database with no troubles. Thanks for any advice!

    Read the article

  • Remote Desktop Connection issues

    - by stead1984
    I have a server at a remote site, the sites are connected to each other a site-to-site VPN connection using Cisco ASA 5510 firewalls. One end is managed by me, the other managed by the remote location's IT, between the 2 of us is another party who manage and route the connections. Remote desktop has been working fine with no problems then recently I noticed it was working for ONE server over the VPN which it previously had done. All the routes seem fine and I can still ping the remote server and even download files from an FTP site on the remote server.... so the VPN seems fine. Remote Desktop works fine to the remote server within the remote location but not over the VPN. I don't understand why it's stopped working, I originally thought it was a rule in place by the other party but they stress it's not them. The only thing that has changed on the server initiating the RDP connection is that it now runs file services sharing a folder. The source server (remote location) may or may not have had updates applied. Any idea's?

    Read the article

  • Is there any way for ME to improve routing to an overseas server? [migrated]

    - by Simon Hartcher
    I am trying to make a connection to a gaming server in Asia from Australia, but my ISP routes my connection through the US. Tracing route to worldoftanks-sea.com [116.51.25.54]over a maximum of 30 hops: 1 <1 ms <1 ms <1 ms 192.168.1.1 2 34 ms 42 ms 45 ms 10.20.21.123 3 40 ms 40 ms 43 ms 202.7.173.145 4 51 ms 42 ms 36 ms syd-sot-ken-crt1-ge-6-0-0.tpgi.com.au [202.7.171.121] 5 175 ms 200 ms 195 ms ge5-0-5d0.cir1.seattle7-wa.us.xo.net [216.156.100.37] 6 212 ms 228 ms 229 ms vb2002.rar3.sanjose-ca.us.xo.net [207.88.13.150] 7 205 ms 204 ms 206 ms 207.88.14.226.ptr.us.xo.net [207.88.14.226] 8 207 ms 215 ms 220 ms xe-0.equinix.snjsca04.us.bb.gin.ntt.net [206.223.116.12] 9 198 ms 201 ms 199 ms ae-7.r20.snjsca04.us.bb.gin.ntt.net [129.250.5.52] 10 396 ms 391 ms 395 ms as-6.r20.sngpsi02.sg.bb.gin.ntt.net [129.250.3.89] 11 383 ms 384 ms 383 ms ae-3.r02.sngpsi02.sg.bb.gin.ntt.net [129.250.4.178] 12 364 ms 381 ms 359 ms wotsg1-slave-54.worldoftanks.sg [116.51.25.54] Trace complete. Since I think it will be unlikely that my ISP will do anything, are there any ways to improve my routing to the server without them having to intervene? NB. The game runs predominately over UDP, so I believe most low ping services are out of the question, as they rely on TCP traffic.

    Read the article

  • Find slow network nodes between two data centers

    - by 2called-chaos
    I've got a problem with syncing big amount of data between two data centers. Both machines have got a gigabit connection and are not fully occupied but the fastest that I am able to get is something between 6 and 10 Mbit = not acceptable! Yesterday I made some traceroute which indicates huge load on a LEVEL3 router but the problem exists for weeks now and the high response time is gone (20ms instead of 300ms). How can I trace this to find the actual slow node? Thought about a traceroute with bigger packages but will this work? In addition this problem might not be related to one of our servers as there are much higher transmission rates to other servers or clients. Actually office = server is faster than server <= server! Any idea is appreciated ;) Update We actually use rsync over ssh to copy the files. As encryption tends to have more bottlenecks I tried a HTTP request but unfortunately it is just as slow. We have a SLA with one of the data centers. They said they already tried to change the routing because they say this is related to a cheap network where the traffic gets routed through. It is true that it will route through a "cheapnet" but only the other way around. Our direction goes through LEVEL3 and the other way goes through lambdanet (which they said is not a good network). If I got it right (I'm a network intermediate) they simulated a longer path to force routing through LEVEL3 and they announce LEVEL3 in the AS path. I basically want to know if they're right or they're just trying to abdicate their responsibility. The thing is that the problem exists in both directions (while different routes), so I think it is in the responsibility of our hoster. And honestly, I don't believe that there is a DC2DC connection which only can handle 600kb/s - 1,5 MB/s for weeks! The question is how to detect WHERE this bottleneck is

    Read the article

  • Two hosts on same subnet can't see each other

    - by Joey Hewitt
    I've got two routers with two separate public IP addresses on the same subnet, but I can't get them to talk to each other. Both are connected to the internet (ISP-provided gateway) via Ethernet ports provided by the landlord, but I don't have access to or knowledge of how those are physically connected or the protocols used to get back to the ISP. I can ping either from the outside, but they can't ping each other. Traceroutes in and out look the same, and they receive the same gateway over DHCP. I can ping other IPs on the subnet, so I assume this is not any sort of intentional isolation for security/privacy. Since I'm in a setup where my landlord provides internet and we don't have contact with the ISP, I can't really ask the ISP for help (doubt the landlord would know much either.) The situation is similar to the diagram at this question, but instead of the two servers, there's another router coming off the (presumed) switch, and I don't have access to the switch. I've tried giving them static routes to each other with the ISP internet gateway as the gateway, but that's not working. One is a Linksys WRT54GL running DD-WRT, the other is a Netgear WGR614v7, although I could get something more capable if necessary. I'd like to keep them each connected directly to the ISP on their WAN ports, but I can have an ethernet cable between them if necessary - I'm wondering if there's a way without that, and if there isn't, I'd appreciate advice on how to get that working. Sorry this is so nitpicky; there are reasons for all the constraints, but they don't apply to the real question, so I left them out. ;) Thank you!

    Read the article

  • Juniper router dropping pings to external interface

    - by Alexander Garden
    My organization has a Juniper SSG20-WLAN that routes our traffic to the outside world. We've been having intermittent problems with our internet connection so I wrote up a Python script to ping the internal interface of the router, the external interface, a couple of our internal servers, the ISP router our router talks to, their upstream provider, and Google and Yahoo for good measure. It does that about every minute. What I have found is that when our internet goes out, our Juniper router ceases responding to pings on the external interface. Everything past that is, of course, unreachable. The internal interface and our internal servers continue to echo back without interruption. None of the counters indicate dropped packets of any type. They all look normal. The logs complain about VIP servers being unavailable but otherwise nothing indicative of network issues. My questions are these: Does this exonerate our ISP? Or, contrawise, might a problem with the connection be causing the external interface to go down? Is there somewhere else in the SSG20, beside the system log and counters, that might help me track down info on the problem? UPDATE: Turned out that one of the switches between my monitoring box and the router was a router itself, and occasionally diverting from the gateway to itself. Kudos to those who made suggestions along those lines. Not really sure which answer to mark as accepted, as it was really stuff in the comments that turned out to be right. Thanks for the suggestions.

    Read the article

  • Routing for remote gateway over VPN in Vista/7 broken?

    - by Raymond
    Hi, Situation is as follows. Home computer running Windows 7, sets up VPN connection (LT2P + IPSec, "use remote gateway" disabled) to office. Subnet is 192.168.64.x Office has Draytek Vigor 2920 router, subnet is 192.168.32.x What happens? - VPN connection itself works fine - Can ping any machine on the remote network - When trying to open a webpage from a host in the remote network, the remote server logs the incoming request, but the browser hangs on "waiting for..." and eventually times out. I have observed this problem on Windows Vista and Windows 7. On Windows XP however there is no problem like described above. The only clue I have is that there is a difference in the routing between XP and Vista/7. The output of "route print" on Windows XP looks like this: (See www.latunyi.com/routing_xp.png) So here the gateway for the 192.168.32.x subnet is the IP address that the local computer has in the remote network. The output of "route print" on Windows 7 (and Windows Vista) looks like this: (See www.latunyi.com/routing_win7.png") Now the gateway for the 192.168.32.x subnet is the IP address of the VPN router (32.1). I don't know if that causes this trouble, but it seems a bit strange. Enabling "use default gateway on remote network" doesn't make a difference. Using the new option "Disable class based route addition" in Windows 7 only makes the route to the VPN router disappear. I am really puzzled here. I assume the VPN routing can't be broken in both Vista and Windows 7, and this should just work without manually adding routes. I hope someone has a solution for this problem :-). Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Virtualize SBS 2003 - P2V vs migrating to new VM

    - by jlehtinen
    I need to virtualize a SBS 2003 server in my work environment. I need some tips on what people think is the best way to proceed. Background: The SBS 2003 server is the primary DC for the domain and also hosts FTP, RRAS(VPN), DNS, and file shares. Exchange is NOT used, neither is SQL server. DHCP is done via a firewall appliance. I have added a Server 2003 VM to the domain and promoted it to the DC role. AD/DNS is replicating here correctly. This was mainly done to provide fault-tolerance to the domain, I was not intending to make this VM the primary DC. I've already asked about buying upgraded licensing for Server 2008/2012 but was refused due to cost. Options: I see (at least) two routes I could take to complete this. From what I've read option 2 is the "preferred" method, but there's a few steps where I'm not clear on what to expect. Option 1.) P2V the primary DC Power off primary DC Power off secondary DC (to prevent USN rollback in case P2V has issue) P2V (cold clone) primary DC Boot new PDC VM Allow new hardware to detect Remove old NIC hardware from device manager Assign old IPs to new virtual NICs Reboot PDC VM, confirm connectivity and no major issues Power on secondary DC, confirm replication Option 2.) Create new VM, transfer roles, remove original DC from domain Create new VM, install SBS 2003 Do I need the original SBS install discs for this? MS migration doc mentions this. Add VM to domain, promote to DC role Does this start 7 day timer where two SBS servers can be in same domain? Set up RRAS on new VM Set up IIS/FTP on new VM Move file shares to new VM Transfer FSMO roles to new VM DC dcpromo original primary DC out of domain

    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

  • Virtual IPv6 Network between VirtualBox VMs

    - by Ben
    I'm trying to create a virtual IPv6 network as a test environment. I have 5 VirtualBox VMs (Ubuntu Server) with network adapters using host-only networking. You can imagine them being connected in series and every machine connects 2 subnets. I want to ping the last machine from the first one: On: 2001:db8:aaaa::100 I want to ping 2001:db8:dddd::101 (Note: there is no cccc network in between) Only static configuration and routes are used: /etc/network/interfaces auto eth0 iface eth0 inet6 static address 2001:db8:aaaa::100 netmask 64 /etc/network/interfaces auto eth0 iface eth0 inet6 static address 2001:db8:aaaa::101 netmask 64 auto eth1 iface eth1 inet6 static address 2001:db8:bbbb::100 netmask 64 up ip -6 route add 2001:db8:dddd::/64 via 2001:db8:bbbb::101 dev eth1 down ip -6 route del 2001:db8:dddd::/64 via 2001:db8:bbbb::101 dev eth1 I thought there might be some automatic route discovery going on. Anyway, ping6 2001:db8:dddd::100 will not work from aaaa::100 When I add the route: ip -6 route add 2001:db8:dddd::/64 via 2001:db8:aaaa::101 it will work. But the next interface in the same network dddd::101 is not reachable. How could that be? There is a machine with an interface bbbb::101 and another dddd::100 and I can ping the latter one, but the machine connected to it, dddd::101 not?? I also have also turned on forwarding. Any ideas?

    Read the article

  • Nginx order of servers

    - by scrat
    I have 3 sites on my server. All are running on gunicorn and use unix sockets to communicate with nginx which routes requests. I got three records in nginx.conf like: server { listen 80; server_name site1.com; location / { proxy_pass http://unix:/tmp/site1.sock; proxy_redirect off; proxy_set_header Host $host; proxy_set_header X-Real-IP $remote_addr; proxy_set_header X-Forwarded-For $proxy_add_x_forwarded_for; } } For site1, site2, site3. If they are ordered as config for site1 goes first, and then goes config for site2 and site3 everything works good. But when I change the order for example to site2, site1, site3, then site1 becomes routed to site2. What am I doing wrong? Full server nginx.conf before servers configs: user www-data; worker_processes 4; pid /var/run/nginx.pid; events { worker_connections 768; # multi_accept on; } http { ## # Basic Settings ## sendfile on; tcp_nopush on; tcp_nodelay on; keepalive_timeout 65; types_hash_max_size 2048; include /etc/nginx/mime.types; default_type application/octet-stream; ## # Logging Settings ## access_log /var/log/nginx/access.log; error_log /var/log/nginx/error.log; ## # Gzip Settings ## gzip on; gzip_types text/css application/x-javascript text/x-component text/richtext image/svg+xml text/plain text/xsd text/xsl text/xml image/x-icon;

    Read the article

  • What's the best way to telnet from a remote Windows PC without using RDP?

    - by Rob D.
    Three Networks: 10.1.1.0 - Mine 172.1.1.0 - My Branch Office 172.2.2.0 - My Branch Office's VOIP VLAN. My PC is on 10.1.1.0. I need to telnet into a Cisco router on 172.2.2.0. The 10.1.1.0 network has no routes to 172.2.2.0, but a VPN connects 10.1.1.0 to 172.1.1.0. Traffic on 172.1.1.0 can route to 172.2.2.0. All PCs on 172.1.1.0 are running Windows XP. Without disrupting anyone using those PCs, I want to open a telnet session from one of those PCs to the router on 172.2.2.0. I've tried the following: psexec.exe \\branchpc telnet 172.2.2.1 psexec.exe \\branchpc cmd.exe telnet 172.2.2.1 psexec.exe \\branchpc -c plink -telnet 172.2.2.1 Methods 1 and 2 both failed because telnet.exe is not usable over psexec. Method 3 actually succeeded in creating the connection, but I cannot login because the session registers my carriage return twice. My password is always blank because at the "Username:" prompt I'm effectively typing: Routeruser[ENTER][ENTER] It's probably time to deploy WinRM... Does anyone know of any other alternatives? Does anyone know how I can fix plink.exe so it only receives one carriage return when I use it over psexec?

    Read the article

  • Finding default gateway in an openvpn environment in windows

    - by Alexander Trümper
    I need to find the default gateway in a openvpn scenario where the route output looks like that: IPv4 Route Table =========================================================================== Active Routes: Network Destination Netmask Gateway Interface Metric 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 10.49.73.1 10.49.73.24 10 0.0.0.0 128.0.0.0 10.8.0.1 10.8.0.2 30 So I googled around a bit and a found this script here: @For /f "tokens=3" %%* in ( 'route.exe print ^|findstr "\<0.0.0.0\>"' ) Do @Set "DefaultGateway=%%*" echo %DefaultGateway% This works, but matches both lines in the route output. But I need to find this line: 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 10.49.73.1 10.49.73.24 10 So I tried to modify the findstr parameter like this: findstr "\<0.0.0.0\>.\<0.0.0.0\>" in the expectation that '.' will match for the tab between the columns. But it doesn't. It will still set DefaultGateway to 10.8.0.1 I couldn't find a clue in MS documentation either. Maybe someone knows the right expression? Thanks a lot.

    Read the article

  • How to route broadcast packets from machine with two network interfaces on same subnet

    - by Syam
    I run RHEL 5 and have two NICs on one machine connected to the same subnet: eth0 192.168.100.10 eth1 192.168.100.11 My application needs to receive and transmit UDP packets (both unicast & broadcast) via these interfaces. I've found the way to handle the ARP problem and I've added routes to handle the routing problem: ip rule add from 192.168.100.10 lookup 10 ip route add table 10 default src 192.168.100.10 dev eth0 (and similarly, table 11 for eth1) The problem is that only unicast packets gets routed properly. Broadcast packets always go out through eth0. I tried removing the rule for 192.168.100.0 & 192.168.100.255 from table 255 and adding them to my tables. But then I see ARP requests being given out for packets to 192.168.100.255 (obviously, no nodes respond and nobody gets any data). Due to several techno-political issues, I'm stuck with this configuration and can't change subnets or try something different. I've tried SO_BINDTODEVICE and it works, but I'd prefer a solution that doesn't need my application to run as root. Is there a way to get this working? Any help is highly appreciated.

    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

  • Routing public IPs (each a /32) through a VPN to another server

    - by Lee S
    Hopefully the title makes sense; I have a server currently in a colo facility, with many IP addresses routed to it. They are individual IPs and not in a contiguous block. Due to vastly improved connectivity (fibre) at home I am slowly bringing my infrastructure in-house for managability and eventually, cost savings. What I would like to do though is use the IP addresses allocated to my existing server, at home. I have an IP block allocated to me on my new ISP connection, but for a couple of reasons I'd like to make use of the colo ones for now: Ease of transition - lots of domains, dns, hard-coded IPs in programs, etc. Connectivity fallback. If my primary line goes down and switches to fallback 1 (dsl) or fallback 2 (4G), I lose access to the ISP-allocated IP block of IPs that are only presented on the primary WAN interface. What I'd like to achieve is my home virtualisation server (Proxmox/Debian-based) "dials in" to the colo server in the colo facility (also Proxmox/Debian) via VPN or similar, and gets to make use of the IP addresses that currently terminate on the colo box. If the primary connection to my ISP goes down and one of the fallback routes kicks in, the VPN tunnel will just time out and then be re-established on the backup connection instead. I'm sure this is doable, but I have no idea how. I'm not afraid to get my hands dirty, I just don't really know where to start?

    Read the article

  • Two internet connections at once in Windows 7

    - by webmasters
    I have a 3G wireless modem and I have a LAN - Right now they are both connected. I need a way to choose which applications will use the 3G connection and which applications will use the LAN. My Operating System is windows 7. How can I do this? Any ideas? Here is a route print: - the 3G modem's IP is 10.81.132.96 Lets say, for example, map google.com to using the 3G internet connection. IPv4 Route Table =========================================================================== Active Routes: Network Destination Netmask Gateway Interface Metric 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 192.168.2.1 192.168.2.102 20 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 10.81.132.97 10.81.132.111 286 10.81.132.96 255.255.255.224 On-link 10.81.132.111 286 10.81.132.111 255.255.255.255 On-link 10.81.132.111 286 10.81.132.127 255.255.255.255 On-link 10.81.132.111 286 127.0.0.0 255.0.0.0 On-link 127.0.0.1 306 127.0.0.1 255.255.255.255 On-link 127.0.0.1 306 127.255.255.255 255.255.255.255 On-link 127.0.0.1 306 192.168.2.0 255.255.255.0 On-link 192.168.2.102 276 192.168.2.102 255.255.255.255 On-link 192.168.2.102 276 192.168.2.255 255.255.255.255 On-link 192.168.2.102 276 224.0.0.0 240.0.0.0 On-link 127.0.0.1 306 224.0.0.0 240.0.0.0 On-link 192.168.2.102 276 224.0.0.0 240.0.0.0 On-link 10.81.132.111 286 255.255.255.255 255.255.255.255 On-link 127.0.0.1 306 255.255.255.255 255.255.255.255 On-link 192.168.2.102 276 255.255.255.255 255.255.255.255 On-link 10.81.132.111 286 ===========================================================================

    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

< Previous Page | 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53  | Next Page >