Search Results

Search found 1671 results on 67 pages for 'packets'.

Page 47/67 | < Previous Page | 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54  | Next Page >

  • Count all received packet using Tshark

    - by user1269592
    i am build application who start capturing via Tshark with command line and i am looking for option to count all the received packets after i am start Tshark process this is my function who start the process: int _interfaceNumber; string _pcapPath; Process tshark = new Process(); tshark.StartInfo.FileName = _tshark; tshark.StartInfo.Arguments = string.Format(" -i " + _interfaceNumber + " -V -x -s " + _packetLimitSize + " -w " + _pcapPath); tshark.StartInfo.RedirectStandardOutput = true; tshark.StartInfo.UseShellExecute = false; tshark.StartInfo.CreateNoWindow = true; tshark.StartInfo.WindowStyle = ProcessWindowStyle.Hidden; tshark.Start(); maybe someone had an idea ?

    Read the article

  • How do I stop someone from saturating my line & wasting CPU cycles

    - by JoshRibs
    My web host shows inbound & outbound traffic with mrtg. I have a steady 3.5mbps inbound traffic from Nigeria. Even assuming the source IPs & destination ports are blocked with Iptables & verifying nothing is listening on those ports, will the traffic still always pass through the switch & "get" to my server (where my server wastes CPU cycles "dropping" the packets)? Assuming I was setup with a hardware firewall, the traffic would still show in mrtg assuming the firewall is behind the switch? So is there any way to stop someone from saturating your 100mbps line, if they also have a 100mbps line? Other than filing an abuse complaint with the kind folks in Nigeria?

    Read the article

  • How a router decides destination of packet?

    - by user58859
    I have basic networking question. Scenario : Two pc's are communicating on a wan. Both the pc's ate behind routers or modems. My question : Both the pc's have public IP of each other. That public IP is most of the time is either of the router or of the modem. There can be more then one pc's behind those routers and modems. Then how the pc's are communicating. I can understand the packets can reach upto those routers or modems. But what after that. In the packet , destination IP is public IP. Then how the router or modem decides where to send the packet? Can anybody explain me this please. Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • OpenVZ multiple networks on CTs

    - by user6733
    I have Hardware Node (HN) which has 2 physical interfaces (eth0, eth1). I'm playing with OpenVZ and want to let my containers (CTs) have access to both of those interfaces. I'm using basic configuration - venet. CTs are fine to access eth0 (public interface). But I can't get CTs to get access to eth1 (private network). I tried: # on HN vzctl set 101 --ipadd 192.168.1.101 --save vzctl enter 101 ping 192.168.1.2 # no response here ifconfig # on CT returns lo (127.0.0.1), venet0 (127.0.0.1), venet0:0 (95.168.xxx.xxx), venet0:1 (192.168.1.101) I believe that the main problem is that all packets flows through eth0 on HN (figured out using tcpdump). So the problem might be in routes on HN. Or is my logic here all wrong? I just need access to both interfaces (networks) on HN from CTs. Nothing complicated.

    Read the article

  • Rate of UDP packet loss over WLAN

    - by Martin
    While testing something with TFTP I noticed lots of timeouts (and slow speed as result) when I used my WLAN - and no problems when using a network cable. A quick test program sending/receiving UDP revealed that there are about 3-5% packets lost. While it's obvious that WLAN has to be less reliable than LAN, I have no knowledge what loss rates are considered 'normal' - and when there is a need to further investigate the network infrastructure. Are there 'typical' packet loss rates on WLAN (and other network technologies e.g. PowerLAN, WAN, ...? Thanks

    Read the article

  • Windows 7 with two network cards doesn't route traffic

    - by Tomek
    I have simple task to do: I have wni7 with two nics.I want to connect another comp(osx) to win7 through second nic to connect it to internet. I already changed the registry. Win7 interface with 192.168.2.1 has no gateway set (no point to do that) OSX interface with 192.168.2.2 has gateway set to 192.168.2.1 I do not add any routes on win7, every thing seems to be already there network on second nic is detected as "undefined network" (probably effect of no gateway) i can achieve any connectivity to internet from OSX only by enabling network connection sharing on nic with 192.168.2.1, but it enables NAT and I'm interested only in pure routing without nat(it's a setup for some research). firewall is off. It seems to me that win7 refuses to forward packets for some reason. Perhaps "undefined network" and NLA service is to blame, although i couldn't find any info about that. Below ascii schematics of my setup: internet<--router(192.168.1.1)<--(192.168.1.1) WIN7 (192.168.2.1)<--(192.168.2.2)OSX Thanks

    Read the article

  • outlook iptables configuration [update]

    - by mediaexpert
    I've a Debian mail server, but only the outlook users can't be able to download the emails. I've seen a lot of post about some kind of forwarding port configuration, I've tried some commands, but I don't be able to solve this problem, please help me. [LAST UPDATE] I find a lot of TIME WAIT on ipv6 netstat tcp6 0 0 my.mailserver.it:imap2 200-62-245-188.ip2:17060 TIME_WAIT - below some config files: pop3d I think the problem was here ##NAME: POP3AUTH:1 # # To advertise the SASL capability, per RFC 2449, uncomment the POP3AUTH # variable: # # POP3AUTH="LOGIN" # # If you have configured the CRAM-MD5, CRAM-SHA1 or CRAM-SHA256, set POP3AUTH # to something like this: # # POP3AUTH="LOGIN CRAM-MD5 CRAM-SHA1" POP3AUTH="" ##NAME: POP3AUTH_ORIG:1 # # For use by webadmin POP3AUTH_ORIG="PLAIN LOGIN CRAM-MD5 CRAM-SHA1 CRAM-SHA256" ##NAME: POP3AUTH_TLS:1 # # To also advertise SASL PLAIN if SSL is enabled, uncomment the # POP3AUTH_TLS environment variable: # # POP3AUTH_TLS="LOGIN PLAIN" POP3_TLS_REQUIRED = 0 POP3AUTH_TLS="" ##NAME: POP3AUTH_TLS_ORIG:0 # # For use by webadmin POP3AUTH_TLS_ORIG="LOGIN PLAIN" ##NAME: POP3_PROXY:0 # # Enable proxying. See README.proxy # # For use by webadmin POP3AUTH_TLS_ORIG="LOGIN PLAIN" ##NAME: POP3_PROXY:0 # # Enable proxying. See README.proxy POP3_PROXY=0 ##NAME: PROXY_HOSTNAME:0 # # Override value from gethostname() when checking if a proxy connection is # required. # PROXY_HOSTNAME= ##NAME: PORT:1 ##NAME: PROXY_HOSTNAME:0 # # Override value from gethostname() when checking if a proxy connection is # required. # PROXY_HOSTNAME= ##NAME: PORT:1 # # Port to listen on for connections. The default is port 110. # # Multiple port numbers can be separated by commas. When multiple port # numbers are used it is possibly to select a specific IP address for a # given port as "ip.port". For example, "127.0.0.1.900,192.68.0.1.900" # accepts connections on port 900 on IP addresses 127.0.0.1 and 192.68.0.1 # The ADDRESS setting is a default for ports that do not have a specified # IP address. # Port to listen on for connections. The default is port 110. # # Multiple port numbers can be separated by commas. When multiple port # numbers are used it is possibly to select a specific IP address for a # given port as "ip.port". For example, "127.0.0.1.900,192.68.0.1.900" # accepts connections on port 900 on IP addresses 127.0.0.1 and 192.68.0.1 # The ADDRESS setting is a default for ports that do not have a specified # IP address. PORT=110 ##NAME: ADDRESS:0 # # IP address to listen on. 0 means all IP addresses. ADDRESS=0 ##NAME: TCPDOPTS:0 # ##NAME: ADDRESS:0 # # IP address to listen on. 0 means all IP addresses. ADDRESS=0 ##NAME: TCPDOPTS:0 # # Other couriertcpd(1) options. The following defaults should be fine. # TCPDOPTS="-nodnslookup -noidentlookup" ##NAME: LOGGEROPTS:0 # # courierlogger(1) options. # LOGGEROPTS="-name=pop3d" ##NAME: DEFDOMAIN:0 # # Optional default domain. If the username does not contain the # first character of DEFDOMAIN, then it is appended to the username. # If DEFDOMAIN and DOMAINSEP are both set, then DEFDOMAIN is appended # only if the username does not contain any character from DOMAINSEP. # You can set different default domains based on the the interface IP # address using the -access and -accesslocal options of couriertcpd(1). DEFDOMAIN="@interzone.it" ##NAME: POP3DSTART:0 # # POP3DSTART is not referenced anywhere in the standard Courier programs # or scripts. Rather, this is a convenient flag to be read by your system # startup script in /etc/rc.d, like this: # # . /etc/courier/pop3d DEFDOMAIN="@mydomain.com" ##NAME: POP3DSTART:0 # # POP3DSTART is not referenced anywhere in the standard Courier programs # or scripts. Rather, this is a convenient flag to be read by your system # startup script in /etc/rc.d, like this: # # . /etc/courier/pop3d # case x$POP3DSTART in # x[yY]*) # /usr/lib/courier/pop3d.rc start # ;; # esac # # The default setting is going to be NO, until Courier is shipped by default # with enough platforms so that people get annoyed with having to flip it to # YES every time. # x[yY]*) # /usr/lib/courier/pop3d.rc start # ;; # esac # # The default setting is going to be NO, until Courier is shipped by default # with enough platforms so that people get annoyed with having to flip it to # YES every time. POP3DSTART=YES ##NAME: MAILDIRPATH:0 # # MAILDIRPATH - directory name of the maildir directory. # MAILDIRPATH=.maildir iptables Chain INPUT (policy DROP 20 packets, 1016 bytes) pkts bytes target prot opt in out source destination 60833 16M ACCEPT tcp -- eth0 * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 tcp dpt:143 state NEW,ESTABLISHED 18970 971K ACCEPT tcp -- * * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 tcp spts:1024:65535 dpt:110 state NEW,ESTABLISHED Chain FORWARD (policy DROP 0 packets, 0 bytes) pkts bytes target prot opt in out source destination 0 0 ACCEPT tcp -- * * 192.168.0.0/24 0.0.0.0/0 tcp dpt:110 0 0 ACCEPT all -- * * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 state RELATED,ESTABLISHED 0 0 ACCEPT tcp -- * * 192.168.1.0/24 0.0.0.0/0 tcp dpt:110 0 0 ACCEPT all -- * * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 state RELATED,ESTABLISHED 0 0 ACCEPT tcp -- * * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 state NEW tcp dpt:25 0 0 ACCEPT tcp -- * * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 state NEW tcp dpt:110 pop3d.cnf RANDFILE = /usr/lib...pop3d.rand [req] default_bits = 1024 encrypt_key = yes distinguidhed_name = req_dn x509_extensions = cert_type prompt = no [req_dn] C=US ST=NY L= New York O=Courier Mail Server OU=Automatically-generated POP3 SSL key CN=localhost [email protected] [cert_type] nsCertType = server

    Read the article

  • How to configure something like "Reflexive ACL" on OpenBSD?

    - by Earlz
    My U-Verse modem has something called "Reflexive ACL" described as Reflexive ACL: When IPv6 is enabled, you can enable Reflexive Access Control Lists to deny inbound IPv6 traffic unless this traffic results from returning outgoing packets (except as configured through firewall rules). This seems like a pretty good way to keep from having to maintain a firewall on each computer behind my router that gets handed an IPv6 address. It sounds about like a NAT, which for my small home network is all I want right now. Now my modem sucks as a router though, so I'm in the process of configuring an OpenBSD router to do that. I've got IPv6 supported and all that and my OpenBSD router will hand out IPv6 addresses by rtadvd. Now I want to keep people from having instant access to my local network through IPv6. How would I best do something like Reflexive ACL with pf in OpenBSD 5.0?

    Read the article

  • Dns works, can ping, but cannot load web pages in browser

    - by user1224595
    Yesterday I changed routers, and my desktop computer started acting up. I could ping websites, and nslookup was able to resolve names to addresses, but neither chrome, firefox, nor ie could load any webpages. None of my other computers connected to the same wireless router have any problems. I connect my desktop to the router through a cheap wifi dongle. I did a wireshark capture of the browser request, and I have uploaded the pcap here. https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B7AsPdhWc-SwbTV0bUJLQXo4UUE/edit?usp=sharing One strange thing I noticed was the spamming of ssdp packets. I am not super familiar with networking, but it seems that it is not a problem with the router, as dns works, and so does dhcp (the desktop is assigned an address correctly). Any help would be appreciated.

    Read the article

  • Mitigating the 'firesheep' attack at the network layer?

    - by pobk
    What are the sysadmin's thoughts on mitigating the 'firesheep' attack for servers they manage? Firesheep is a new firefox extension that allows anyone who installs it to sidejack session it can discover. It does it's discovery by sniffing packets on the network and looking for session cookies from known sites. It is relatively easy to write plugins for the extension to listen for cookies from additional sites. From a systems/network perspective, we've discussed the possibility of encrypting the whole site, but this introduces additional load on servers and screws with site-indexing, assets and general performance. One option we've investigated is to use our firewalls to do SSL Offload, but as I mentioned earlier, this would require all of the site to be encrypted. What's the general thoughts on protecting against this attack vector? I've asked a similar question on StackOverflow, however, it would be interesting to see what the systems engineers thought.

    Read the article

  • how do I create a bidirectional bridge using iptables

    - by Kolzoi
    Setup: I have a samsung LCD TV that is connected via eth0 to a T41 Thinkpad running Ubuntu 10.10 which is wirelessly connected to the home router. I am trying to get Samsung's remote control app working on my iPad but the app won't allow me to put in an ip address and only discovers the tv if it's on the same subnet as the iPad (lame). So I need the laptop to route packets from eth0 to the wireless interface (wlan0), and I need about 3 ports on the wlan0 interface to be forwarded to the samsung tv. Hopefully all this makes sense. I've been messing around with iptables and samsung is now able to access internet via laptop wireless, but mapping from wlan0 back to the samsung tv is eluding me.

    Read the article

  • Restricting output to only allow localhost using iptables

    - by Dave Forgac
    I would like to restrict outbound traffic to only localhost using iptables. I already have a default DROP policy on OUTPUT and a rule REJECTing all traffic. I need to add a rule above that in the OUTPUT chain. I have seen a couple different examples for this type of rule, the most common being: -A OUTPUT -o lo -j ACCEPT and -A OUTPUT -o lo -s 127.0.0.1 -d 127.0.0.1 -j ACCEPT Is there any reason to use the latter rather than the former? Can packets on lo have an address other than 127.0.0.1?

    Read the article

  • High frequency, kernel bypass vs tuning kernels?

    - by Keith
    I often hear tales about High Frequency shops using network cards which do kernel bypass. However, I also often hear about them using operating systems where they "tune" the kernel. If they are bypassing the kernel, do they need to tune the kernel? Is it a case of they do both because whilst the network packets will bypass the kernel due to the card, there is still all the other stuff going on which tuning the kernel would help? So in other words, they use both approaches, one is just to speed up network activity and the other makes the OS generally more responsive/faster? I ask because a friend of mine who works within this industry once said they don't really bother with kernel tuning anymore-because they use kernel bypass network cards? This didn't make too much sense as I thought you would always want a faster kernel for all the CPU-offloaded calculations.

    Read the article

  • Is there a suitable chain for iptables when eth is in Promisc mode?

    - by user1495181
    I have a fron-end machine. Machine have2 eth cards. I want to use netfilter queue to do some checks on the packets. I set eth like this: ifconfig eth0 0.0.0.0 promisc up ifconfig eth1 0.0.0.0 promisc up I want to have an iptable rule like this(only example): iptables -A INPUT -i eth0 -j LOG --log-prefix " eth0 packet " but the packet is no passed through the iptables ,because it dosnt target to this MAC. Promisc mode didnt help. I saw that there is a way to add iptables chain for PROMISC, but need compilation... Is there any simplier way to have iptables rule when packet is not target to this eth. Currently i bypass this by creating a bridge between 2 eth and put rule on the FORWARD, but i done want to create bridge.

    Read the article

  • How to open a server port outside of an OpenVPN tunnel with a pf firewall on OSX (BSD)

    - by Timbo
    I have a Mac mini that I use as a media server running XBMC and serves media from my NAS to my stereo and TV (which has been color calibrated with a Spyder3Express, happy). The Mac runs OSX 10.8.2 and the internet connection is tunneled for general privacy over OpenVPN through Tunnelblick. I believe my anonymous VPN provider pushes "redirect_gateway" to OpenVPN/Tunnelblick because when on it effectively tunnels all non-LAN traffic in- and outbound. As an unwanted side effect that also opens the boxes server ports unprotected to the outside world and bypasses my firewall-router (Netgear SRX5308). I have run nmap from outside the LAN on the VPN IP and the server ports on the mini are clearly visible and connectable. The mini has the following ports open: ssh/22, ARD/5900 and 8080+9090 for the XBMC iOS client Constellation. I also have Synology NAS which apart from LAN file serving over AFP and WebDAV only serves up an OpenVPN/1194 and a PPTP/1732 server. When outside of the LAN I connect to this from my laptop over OpenVPN and over PPTP from my iPhone. I only want to connect through AFP/548 from the mini to the NAS. The border firewall (SRX5308) just works excellently, stable and with a very high throughput when streaming from various VOD services. My connection is a 100/10 with a close to theoretical max throughput. The ruleset is as follows Inbound: PPTP/1723 Allow always to 10.0.0.40 (NAS/VPN server) from a restricted IP range >corresponding to possible cell provider range OpenVPN/1194 Allow always to 10.0.0.40 (NAS/VPN server) from any Outbound: Default outbound policy: Allow Always OpenVPN/1194 TCP Allow always from 10.0.0.40 (NAS) to a.b.8.1-a.b.8.254 (VPN provider) OpenVPN/1194 UDP Allow always to 10.0.0.40 (NAS) to a.b.8.1-a.b.8.254 (VPN provider) Block always from NAS to any On the Mini I have disabled the OSX Application Level Firewall because it throws popups which don't remember my choices from one time to another and that's annoying on a media server. Instead I run Little Snitch which controls outgoing connections nicely on an application level. I have configured the excellent OSX builtin firewall pf (from BSD) as follows pf.conf (Apple App firewall tie-ins removed) (# replaced with % to avoid formatting errors) ### macro name for external interface. eth_if = "en0" vpn_if = "tap0" ### wifi_if = "en1" ### %usb_if = "en3" ext_if = $eth_if LAN="{10.0.0.0/24}" ### General housekeeping rules ### ### Drop all blocked packets silently set block-policy drop ### all incoming traffic on external interface is normalized and fragmented ### packets are reassembled. scrub in on $ext_if all fragment reassemble scrub in on $vpn_if all fragment reassemble scrub out all ### exercise antispoofing on the external interface, but add the local ### loopback interface as an exception, to prevent services utilizing the ### local loop from being blocked accidentally. ### set skip on lo0 antispoof for $ext_if inet antispoof for $vpn_if inet ### spoofing protection for all interfaces block in quick from urpf-failed ############################# block all ### Access to the mini server over ssh/22 and remote desktop/5900 from LAN/en0 only pass in on $eth_if proto tcp from $LAN to any port {22, 5900, 8080, 9090} ### Allow all udp and icmp also, necessary for Constellation. Could be tightened. pass on $eth_if proto {udp, icmp} from $LAN to any ### Allow AFP to 10.0.0.40 (NAS) pass out on $eth_if proto tcp from any to 10.0.0.40 port 548 ### Allow OpenVPN tunnel setup over unprotected link (en0) only to VPN provider IPs ### and port ranges pass on $eth_if proto tcp from any to a.b.8.0/24 port 1194:1201 ### OpenVPN Tunnel rules. All traffic allowed out, only in to ports 4100-4110 ### Outgoing pings ok pass in on $vpn_if proto {tcp, udp} from any to any port 4100:4110 pass out on $vpn_if proto {tcp, udp, icmp} from any to any So what are my goals and what does the above setup achieve? (until you tell me otherwise :) 1) Full LAN access to the above ports on the mini/media server (including through my own VPN server) 2) All internet traffic from the mini/media server is anonymized and tunneled over VPN 3) If OpenVPN/Tunnelblick on the mini drops the connection, nothing is leaked both because of pf and the router outgoing ruleset. It can't even do a DNS lookup through the router. So what do I have to hide with all this? Nothing much really, I just got carried away trying to stop port scans through the VPN tunnel :) In any case this setup works perfectly and it is very stable. The Problem at last! I want to run a minecraft server and I installed that on a separate user account on the mini server (user=mc) to keep things partitioned. I don't want this server accessible through the anonymized VPN tunnel because there are lots more port scans and hacking attempts through that than over my regular IP and I don't trust java in general. So I added the following pf rule on the mini: ### Allow Minecraft public through user mc pass in on $eth_if proto {tcp,udp} from any to any port 24983 user mc pass out on $eth_if proto {tcp, udp} from any to any user mc And these additions on the border firewall: Inbound: Allow always TCP/UDP from any to 10.0.0.40 (NAS) Outbound: Allow always TCP port 80 from 10.0.0.40 to any (needed for online account checkups) This works fine but only when the OpenVPN/Tunnelblick tunnel is down. When up no connection is possbile to the minecraft server from outside of LAN. inside LAN is always OK. Everything else functions as intended. I believe the redirect_gateway push is close to the root of the problem, but I want to keep that specific VPN provider because of the fantastic throughput, price and service. The Solution? How can I open up the minecraft server port outside of the tunnel so it's only available over en0 not the VPN tunnel? Should I a static route? But I don't know which IPs will be connecting...stumbles How secure would to estimate this setup to be and do you have other improvements to share? I've searched extensively in the last few days to no avail...If you've read this far I bet you know the answer :)

    Read the article

  • routing problems

    - by user174050
    I have an windows 7 laptop and I have installed openvpn 2.2x as client. The laptop has 2 ethernet cards, one of them is wireless. The wireless lan is 192.168.1.0/24 The Fix lan is 192.168.2.0/24 If I connect to the openvpn server useing the Fix lan the I can connect properly and for testing I ping to my openvpn server 10.0.0.1 that answers correctly. But if I connect to the openvpn server useing the wireless lan, I can establish the connection but pinging to the server isn´t possible. The packets goes allways lost. Why can this happen? In an other laptop where windows xp is installed and with the same lan configuratio everything works propperly. In both cases the firewall is configured to access the vnc server and the server directories useing samba. With the XP I have no problems. I will thank you for all help Ignacio

    Read the article

  • Process vsserv.exe attempts connection to unknown host (clients.your-server.de)

    - by pushpraj
    from past few day I notice a new connection is being made from my system, I discovered it within the outpost firewall, it is blocked by default with the reason Block Transit Packets in the image above you can see that the process vsserv.exe is attempting a connection to static.88-198-155-41.clients.your-server.de I tried to search on google but could not find any relevant info, however this link http://www.webmasterworld.com/search_engine_spiders/3963600.htm says that your-server.de hosts bad bots. I am bit concerned if something is not correct. Could you help me understand the same?

    Read the article

  • Cannot connect to internet with Clearwire modem

    - by ide
    I'm currently using a Motorola WiMAX modem (CPEi 25725) and cannot connect to the internet. I can connect to the modem at 192.168.15.1 and check its status. It says that it has good/excellent connectivity to the internet and shows all five signal bars. Additionally it has sent and received some WiMAX packets so I believe it is connected to a tower. I'm at a loss for what the problem is. Unplugging the modem, restarting it from software, and restarting my computer (Windows 7) have not helped. Windows still reports that it is not connected to the internet. Alternatively, could this be an ISP issue? I have heard that Clearwire is a not-so-reputable ISP that blocks VoIP, and I was using Skype recently. EDIT: I called Clear's tech support and apparently their network is having significant problems at the moment. Guess there's nothing an end-user can do about it.

    Read the article

  • Connect macbook to my LAN through a VPN - best solution? [closed]

    - by LewisMc
    So I have a LAN connected via a ADSL/PPPoA, this is using a bog-standard DLink router supplied by my ISP (talktalk UK). I have a NAS within the LAN that is running FreeNAS and I want to be able to connect to it when I'm out and about. It's running an atom so it's quite low on juice consumption but I don't want to have it on all day and night so I've been waking it via a magic packet and booting it down from the web admin when I need it. So I want to connect to the LAN, I presume via a VPN, to be able to send a magic packet. But what is the best method to accomplish this, or is there an easier way? I've been looking at the cisco 857 integrated router and the Netgear prosafe 318(behind modem) but not sure If I'm on the right track with what I want to achieve as I've not much experience or knowledge with VPN's or networking (software engineering student). I have tried port forwarding but to no avail, either with magic packets or even connecting outside the LAN via DYNDNS. Thanks,

    Read the article

  • How to reply some request from which routes its came from?

    - by tacoen
    I wonder if we can reply some request from which route its came from? My Situation is like this: eth0 192.168.10.1 --> gw: 192.168.10.254 nm: 24 eth1 192.168.11.1 --> gw: 192.168.11.254 nm: 24 Since this two IP is on the same machine, normally when we ping to 192.168.11.1 from 192.168.10.2. This machine will not reply to 192.168.10.2 because 192.168.10.0/24 it's on eth0, and the packets where requested via eth1. Can I make it works? I'm using Linux ubuntu, and the application will be listen to eth1 only.

    Read the article

  • Everytime I ping my server, it is pinging localhost instead?

    - by esac
    I recently setup a new server for use with SQL. When I tried to connect via SSMS remotely, it failed. When I pinged it, it is pinging localhost, what is going on here? Please let me know if more details will help. It is Windows Server 2008. C:\>ping 0x7F000001 Pinging 127.0.0.1 with 32 bytes of data: Reply from 127.0.0.1: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=128 Reply from 127.0.0.1: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=128 Reply from 127.0.0.1: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=128 Reply from 127.0.0.1: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=128 Ping statistics for 127.0.0.1: Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss), Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds: Minimum = 0ms, Maximum = 0ms, Average = 0ms

    Read the article

  • Vlan Tagging at Access Port in Switch

    - by singh
    I'm Confused from the fact that Vlan tagging is done at access port and trunk port always gets tagged packets (until its case of native vlan).But I still believe in other fact which says tagging happen only when a frame hit the trunk port which means trunk port gets untagged frame and tagging is not possible at access port. Would like to know where actually this tagging happens ? and also which command we can use to encapsulate 802.1q protocol to access port ? The way we do at trunk port is switchport trunk encapsulation dot1q Is the above command applicable for access mode also?

    Read the article

  • Multicast File copy with Unicast responses

    - by kirbuchi
    I'm trying to do some multicast big file copies over to remote clients on the other side of a satellite link. The idea is to minimize the amount of traffic going up to the satellite. I tried using uftp without luck. The problem is that, even though we can reach clients via multicast from our central Hub, they aren't able to respond to a multicast address (it's not supported by the return link). As uftp needs to respond to a multicast address in order to report any missing packets I'm out of luck. So does anyone have any recommendations or alternatives I can use to do the trasfers? Any tip or pointer would be appreciated.

    Read the article

  • Dowload size of Streaming Videos

    - by Excalibur2000
    I would like to know that if a website advertises a streaming download as say 100MB, would my download to my computer be 100MB ? Would there be streaming control packets that a service provider would charge for over and above the 100MB content ? Assume the latest RealPlayer viewer. The rub for me is that I have downloaded MIT lectures and according to my file manager the file sizes have matched up to the download sizes on YouTube. However my ISP seems to think that the streams were larger and charged me for more than the file size of the download. I am left wondering where the data came from.

    Read the article

  • "destination host unreachable" while ping attempt between 2 pc on 1 network

    - by Roberto Sadfasdf
    I have 2 computers in my network ones ip address is 192.168.2.31(PC-A) and the others is 192.168.2.33(PC-B). When I'm trying to ping from PC-B to PC-A it says: Pinging 192.168.2.33 with 32 bytes of data: Reply from 192.168.2.31: Destination host unreachable. Reply from 192.168.2.31: Destination host unreachable. Reply from 192.168.2.31: Destination host unreachable. Reply from 192.168.2.31: Destination host unreachable. Ping statistics for 192.168.2.33: Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss) And when i'm trying the otherwise it tells me same message with ip address switched..They are both can connect to the Internet

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54  | Next Page >