Search Results

Search found 4721 results on 189 pages for 'traffic'.

Page 47/189 | < Previous Page | 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54  | Next Page >

  • SEO Work For Small Business - The Importance of Prioritising This

    Prioritising your search engine optimisation (SEO) work is a decisive factor that will lead to the success of your small business. Even if SEO is just part of your entire marketing plan, it still has enormous significance as it is the one that generates traffic to your website. This traffic is where you will be able to get prospects, who will eventually be converted into clients.

    Read the article

  • The Difficult Task of Choosing an SEO Firm

    Search Engine Optimization service is must for online marketing. If you are thinking to start or already have some online business then you just cannot afford to ignore this special service aimed at providing greater traffic to your website. If you do not get high volume of website traffic then there is no possibility of making a sound business.

    Read the article

  • How to Sabotage Your Search Engine Optimizing Efforts

    Search engine optimizing is a key and ongoing strategy anybody marketing on the internet needs to adopt as part of their daily routine. Properly optimizing any sites or content will serve to increase the amount of search engine traffic you receive. Read on to discover 3 search engine optimization tips to help you get the absolute most traffic out of your optimizing efforts.

    Read the article

  • How to Sabotage Your Search Engine Optimizing Efforts

    Search engine optimizing is a key and ongoing strategy anybody marketing on the internet needs to adopt as part of their daily routine. Properly optimizing any sites or content will serve to increase the amount of search engine traffic you receive. Read on to discover 3 search engine optimization tips to help you get the absolute most traffic out of your optimizing efforts.

    Read the article

  • How to Improve Page Rank With Minimal Effort

    These days, SEO - "search engine optimization" is a hugely important step to get more traffic to your website. By ensuring that you are using the most up=to-date techniques, and that you have a firm knowledge of factors such as "pagerank", you'll be even closer to realizing the traffic potential of your website.

    Read the article

  • SEO Techniques Help in Getting Higher Ranks

    SEO plays a very important role in bringing adequate traffic to your website. And especially when you are in a web marketing business like selling products and services through internet, then the success of you company depends upon the traffic coming to your website.

    Read the article

  • Choosing Right Landing Pages For Your Keywords Part 2

    You can easily find bounce rates for your PPC campaign, by using some Google Analytics indicators. For example, you can open the Traffic Source section in the Google Analytics and then can navigate to AdWords Traffic which makes it easy for you to get the data you want for your PPC campaign.

    Read the article

  • SEO and Its Importance

    Search Engine optimization is a thing which is used to drive more traffic to your website. SEO plays an important role to drive traffic and to make your website higher rank in search engines such as Google and Yahoo.

    Read the article

  • How an SEO Company Optimizes a Business

    Search engine optimization or SEO enhances a business by generating traffic on a web site. Increased traffic is generated when a website is displayed at the very beginning of search results when a keyword/s is entered into a search engine, like Google.

    Read the article

  • Guaranteed SEO

    Search engine optimization is a method by which the traffic and number of hits on a particular website is increased. Most experts say that it is important not only to get a quantitative increase in the traffic to the website, but a qualitative increase as well.

    Read the article

  • Route specific HTTP requests through pfSense OpenVPN

    - by DennisQ
    Hi, to start, I have very little knowledge on routes, iptables, etc. That said, here's what I'm trying to accomplish and where I think I'm stumped: Problem: We have an external website which we recently firewalled so it only accepts traffic from our office IP addresses. This works well at the office, but doesn't work for remote access through VPN as we don't route all traffic through OpenVPN. I would rather avoid forcing everyone to route all traffic through just to accommodate this one site. Environment: Main router box is running pfSense. Em0 is internal IP, Em1 is external. Internal net is 10.23.x and VPN is 10.0.8.0/24 I believe what I need to do is add a route to the VPN server config to send all traffic to that IP over the VPN tunnel. I think that part's working, but I don't get a response back, so I'm assuming that I need some NAT config on the VPN server to route the response back over the tunnel? What I've found so far is to try the following, but since this is a pfSense box on FreeBSD, I can't run iptables, etc. Make sure ip forwarding is enabled: echo 1 /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_forward Setup NAT back out: iptables -t nat -A POSTROUTING -s 10.0.8.0/24 -o em0 -j MASQUERADE Am I on the right path, and if so how do I accomplish this through pfSense UI or FreeBSD CLI? Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Skype performance in IPSEC VPN

    - by dunxd
    I've been challenged to "improve Skype performance" for calls within my organisation. Having read the Skype IT Administrators Guide I am wondering whether we might have a performance issue where the Skype Clients in a call are all on our WAN. The call is initiated by a Skype Client at our head office, and terminated on a Skype Client in a remote office connected via IPSEC VPN. Where this happens, I assume the trafficfrom Client A (encrypted by Skype) goes to our ASA 5510, where it is furtehr encrypted, sent to the remote ASA 5505 decrypted, then passed to Client B which decrypts the Skype encryption. Would the call quality benefit if the traffic didn't go over the VPN, but instead only relied on Skype's encryption? I imagine I could achieve this by setting up a SOCKS5 proxy in our HQ DMZ for Skype traffic. Then the traffic goes from Client A to Proxy, over the Skype relay network, then arrives at Cisco ASA 5505 as any other internet traffic, and then to Client B. Is there likely to be any performance benefit in doing this? If so, is there a way to do it that doesn't require a proxy? Has anyone else tackled this?

    Read the article

  • How to avoid intrusion detection/anti spoofing issue on a sonicwall TZ series FW

    - by Ian
    We have a sonicwall tz series FW with two internet service providers connected. One of the providers has a wireless service which works a bit like an ethernet switch in that we have an ip with a /24 subnet and the gateway is .1. All other clients on the same subnet (say 195.222.99.0) have the same .1 gateway - this is important, read on. Some of our clients are also on the same subnet. Our config: X0 : Lan X1 : 89.90.91.92 X2 : 195.222.99.252/24 (GW 195.222.99.1) X1 and X2 are not connected, other than both being connected to the public Internet. Client config: X1 : 195.222.99.123/24 (GW 195.222.99.1) What fails, what works: Traffic 195.222.99.123 (client) <- 89.90.91.92 (X1) : Spoof alert Traffic 195.222.99.123 (client) <- 195.222.99.252 (X1) : OK - no spoof alert I have several clients with IPs in the 195.222.99.0 range and all provoke identical alerts. This is the alert I see on the FW: Alert Intrusion Prevention IP spoof dropped 195.222.99.252, 21475, X1 89.90.91.92, 80, X1 MAC address: 00:12:ef:41:75:88 Anti-spoofing is switched off on my FW (network-mac-ip-anti-spoofing - config for each interface) for all ports I can provoke the alerts by telneting to a port on X1 from the clients. You can't argue with the logic - this is suspicious traffic. X1 is receiving traffic with a source IP which corresponds to X2s subnet. Anyone know how can I tell the FW that packets with a src subnet of 195.222.99.0 can legitimately appear on X1? I know whats going wrong, I've seen the same thing before, but with higher end FWs you can avoid this with a few extra rules. I can't see how to do this here. And before you ask why we're using this service provider - they give us 3ms (yep 3ms, thats not an error) delay between routers.

    Read the article

  • Error applying iptables rules using iptables-restore

    - by John Franic
    Hi I'm using Ubuntu 9.04 on a VPS. I'm getting an error if I apply a iptables rule. Here is what I have done. 1.Saved the existing rules iptables-save /etc/iptables.up.rules Created iptables.test.rules and add some rules to it nano /etc/iptables.test.rulesnano /etc/iptables.test.rules This is the rules I added *filter # Allows all loopback (lo0) traffic and drop all traffic to 127/8 that doesn't use lo0 -A INPUT -i lo -j ACCEPT -A INPUT -i ! lo -d 127.0.0.0/8 -j REJECT # Accepts all established inbound connections -A INPUT -m state --state ESTABLISHED,RELATED -j ACCEPT # Allows all outbound traffic # You can modify this to only allow certain traffic -A OUTPUT -j ACCEPT # Allows HTTP and HTTPS connections from anywhere (the normal ports for websites) -A INPUT -p tcp --dport 80 -j ACCEPT -A INPUT -p tcp --dport 443 -j ACCEPT # Allows SSH connections # # THE -dport NUMBER IS THE SAME ONE YOU SET UP IN THE SSHD_CONFIG FILE # -A INPUT -p tcp -m state --state NEW --dport 22- j ACCEPT # Allow ping -A INPUT -p icmp -m icmp --icmp-type 8 -j ACCEPT # log iptables denied calls -A INPUT -m limit --limit 5/min -j LOG --log-prefix "iptables denied: " --log-level 7 # Reject all other inbound - default deny unless explicitly allowed policy -A INPUT -j REJECT -A FORWARD -j REJECT COMMIT After editing when I try to apply the rules by iptables-restore < /etc/iptables.test.rules I get the following error iptables-restore: line 42 failed Line 42 is COMMIT and I comment that out I get iptables-restore: COMMIT expected at line 43 I'm not sure what is the problem, it is expecting COMMIT but if COMMIT is there it's giving error. Could it be due to the fact i'm usin a VPS?My provider using OpenVZ for virtualizaton.

    Read the article

  • How can I get my routers to forward ports correctly?

    - by Giffyguy
    My network currently looks like this (simplified): Note that Router #2 is connected to the LAN interface of Router #1. This should be familiar to anyone who has seen a standard static-IP setup with an additional firewall for a residence or other small building. Router #1 is actually my cable gateway, but since it is a fully functional router/firewall, I am going to refer to it as a router. Now, I need to open various ports in both firewalls for incoming communication to my server - port 80 is a good example. So I've opened up port 80 in Router #2, and so far all incoming traffic at the public IP X.X.X.129 is being routed correctly. The problem is that I also need my server to respond to incoming traffic at the public IP X.X.X.130 on the WAN interface of Router #1. Naturally, I can't just tell Router #1 to forward port 80 to another public IP. Port forwarding is only supported when the traffic is being directed to the LAN subnet. I am willing to restructure my network topology if required, with the following conditions: Router #1 cannot have its WAN IP reassigned - X.X.X.130 is mandatory. Router #1 cannot be moved or disconnected from the cloud. The server cannot be given a second IP address. I would prefer the server to have a private IP address - e.g. 10.0.0.10 I'd like to keep Router #2, but it can have a private IP - e.g. 10.0.1.10 Following these rules, I need to get my server to receive incoming traffic on port 80 from both public IP addresses. Does anyone on SU know if this is possible? So far my only theories have been to set up a static route on either router, or to somehow combine my two subnets into a single subnet.

    Read the article

  • Request bursting from web application Load Tests

    - by MaseBase
    I'm migrating our web and database hosting to a new environment on all new machines. I've recently performed a Load Test using WAPT to generate load from multiple distributed clients. The server has plenty of room to handle the traffic load, but I'm seeing an odd pattern of incoming traffic during the load tests. Here is the gist of our setup: Firewall server running MS Forefront TMG 2010 on Win 2k8 server Request routing done by IIS Application Request Routing on firewall machine Web server is a Hyper-V VM on the Database server (which is the host OS) These machines are hefty with dual-CPU's with six cores (12 total procs) Web server running IIS 7.5 Web applications built in ASP.NET 2.0, with 1 ISAPI filter (Url Rewrite) in front What I'm seeing during the load tests is that the requests all come through in bursts. Even though I have 7 different distributed clients sending traffic loads, the requests come through about 300-500 requests at a time. The performance monitor shows nearly all of the counters moving through this pattern, where a burst of requests comes in the req/sec jumps to 70, the queued requests jumps to 500, the current requests jumps up, the CPU jumps up, everything. Then once it's handled that group of requests, it has a lull for nearly 10 seconds where nearly nothing is happening. 0-5 req/sec, 0 queued requests, minimal CPU usage. Then after 10 seconds of inactivity, another burst comes through, spiking all of the counters once again. What I can't figure out is why the requests are coming through in bursts when I know that the load being generated is not sent that way, especially considering the various load-generating clients sending traffic all in different intervals with random think time's between each request. Is there something in the layers between Hyper-V or perhaps in the hardware which might cause this coalesce of requests together? Here is what i'm looking at, the highlighted metric is Requests/sec, but the others critical counter go with it: Requests Queued (which I'd obviously like to keep as close to 0 as possible). Any ideas on this?

    Read the article

  • How to handle server failure in an n-tier architecture?

    - by andy
    Imagine I have an n-tier architecture in an auto-scaled cloud environment with say: a load balancer in a failover pair reverse proxy tier web app tier db tier Each tier needs to connect to the instances in the tier below. What are the standard ways of connecting tiers to make them resilient to failure of nodes in each tier? i.e. how does each tier get the IP addresses of each node in the tier below? For example if all reverse proxies should route traffic to all web app nodes, how could they be set up so that they don't send traffic to dead web app nodes, and so that when new web app nodes are brought online they can send traffic to it? I could run an agent that would update all the configs to all the nodes, but it seems inefficient. I could put an LB pair between each tier, so the tier above only needs to connect to the load balancers, but how do I handle the problem of the LBs dying? This just seems to shunt the problem of tier A needing to know the IPs of all nodes in tier B, to all nodes in tier A needing to know the IPs of all LBs between tiers A and B. For some applications, they can implement retry logic if they contact a node in the tier below that doesn't respond, but is there any way that some middleware could direct traffic to only live nodes in the following tier? If I was hosting on AWS I could use an ELB between tiers, but I want to know how I could achieve the same functionality myself. I've read (briefly) about heartbeat and keepalived - are these relevant here? What are the virtual IPs they talk about and how are they managed? Are there still single points of failure using them?

    Read the article

  • Inter-VLAN Malicious Code Scanning

    - by Jackthedog
    I am trying to find an inbuilt solution on a Cisco Catayst 3750X Switch to scan all traffic routed from one VLAN to another for malicious code. The situation is that we currently have a development environment which is currently being redesigned to upgrade the network infrastructure to use the 3750X switches to manage server and workstation connectivity as well as inter-VLAN routing. We also have another system that is responsible for taking the builds created on the development environment and imaging various HDDs. Because these are two separate systems, we have a requirement in the workplace to anti-virus scan any data transferred between these systems. This is done by copying the data from the originating system to external USB HDD, scanning in a standalone workstation and then copying the data on to the receiving system. As you can imagine this is extremely tedious and impractical most of the time... (I don't make the rules). Anyway, with this redesign going on, we would like to join the imaging system to the network infrastructure of the development system, keeping separation by the use of VLANs and restricting traffic by using ACLs. As we still have the requirement to scan all traffic I would like to configure some sort of malicious code scanning when ever traffic is routed between these VLANs. I am aware I could install a separate in-line IPS/IDS device, however both systems will be using multiple ports on the switch (obviously), and we won't be able to put a device on each port. I would would prefer not to add additional hardware if the 3750x switch is capable of doing the job. Is anyone aware of any Cisco solution that I could use here, that ideally can be incorporated into the 3750x switch? Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • Connect to Postgres remotely, open port 5432 for Postgres in iptables

    - by Victor
    I am trying to connect to Postgres remotely but I need to open port 5432 in iptables. My current iptables configuration is as follows: *filter # Allows all loopback (lo0) traffic and drop all traffic to 127/8 that doesn't use lo0 -A INPUT -i lo -j ACCEPT -A INPUT ! -i lo -d 127.0.0.0/8 -j REJECT # Accepts all established inbound connections -A INPUT -m state --state ESTABLISHED,RELATED -j ACCEPT # Allows all outbound traffic # You can modify this to only allow certain traffic -A OUTPUT -j ACCEPT # Allows HTTP and HTTPS connections from anywhere (the normal ports for websites) -A INPUT -p tcp --dport 80 -j ACCEPT -A INPUT -p tcp --dport 443 -j ACCEPT # Allows SSH connections # # THE -dport NUMBER IS THE SAME ONE YOU SET UP IN THE SSHD_CONFIG FILE # -A INPUT -p tcp -m state --state NEW --dport 30000 -j ACCEPT # Allow ping -A INPUT -p icmp -m icmp --icmp-type 8 -j ACCEPT # log iptables denied calls -A INPUT -m limit --limit 5/min -j LOG --log-prefix "iptables denied: " --log-level 7 # Reject all other inbound - default deny unless explicitly allowed policy -A INPUT -j REJECT -A FORWARD -j REJECT COMMIT What would I have to add in iptables to open the port? I'm trying to install phppgadmin on a different server to access the postgres database. Thank you.

    Read the article

  • Hyper-V Virtual Machine Networking issues related to Max Ethernet Frame Size

    - by Goatmale
    I fixed an issue today earlier today but i'm interested in learning WHY it worked. We set up a new Hyper-V virtual machine only to discover that HTTP traffic wasn't working. HTTPS, pings, everything else was working fine. After months of prodding around I took a shot in the dark. On the Hyper-V host server, the physical NIC card had an advanced setting of "Max Ethernet Frame Size" set to 1500. After setting this setting to 1514 the issue was fixed. Alternatively, setting this to 1512 did not solve the issue; 1514 is the magic number. My best guess it that when this setting was set to 1500 it was allowing incoming pings because the data payload was a lot smaller of say, HTTP traffic. As far as HTTPS traffic, I read about something called "Path MTU discovery" which i'm going to assume why is HTTPs traffic was getting through fine, albeit slower. Looking at this post, people agree that 1518 is the max total frame size. Why didn't I need to change this to 1518 instead of 1514 bytes? Why is the default frame size 1500 if that's the max size of the Ethernet payload and not the max size.

    Read the article

  • How to populate RRD database with CPU and MEM usage data?

    - by Tomaszs
    I have a Lighttpd server (on Centos) and would like to display 4 graphs: lighttpd traffic, lighttpd requests per second, CPU usage and MEM usage. I've set place for rrd database for lighttpd config like this: rrdtool.binary = "/usr/bin/rrdtool" rrdtool.db-name = "/var/www/lighttpd.rrd" And put into my WWW cgi-bin sh file that gets data from lighttpd RRD file and creates graphs of traffic and requests per second like this: #!/bin/sh RRDTOOL=/usr/bin/rrdtool OUTDIR=//var/www/graphs INFILE=/var/www/lighttpd.rrd OUTPRE=lighttpd-traffic WIDTH=400 HEIGHT=100 DISP="-v bytes --title TrafficWebserver \ DEF:binraw=$INFILE:InOctets:AVERAGE \ DEF:binmaxraw=$INFILE:InOctets:MAX \ DEF:binminraw=$INFILE:InOctets:MIN \ DEF:bout=$INFILE:OutOctets:AVERAGE \ DEF:boutmax=$INFILE:OutOctets:MAX \ DEF:boutmin=$INFILE:OutOctets:MIN \ CDEF:bin=binraw,-1,* \ CDEF:binmax=binmaxraw,-1,* \ CDEF:binmin=binminraw,-1,* \ CDEF:binminmax=binmaxraw,binminraw,- \ CDEF:boutminmax=boutmax,boutmin,- \ AREA:binmin#ffffff: \ STACK:binmax#f00000: \ LINE1:binmin#a0a0a0: \ LINE1:binmax#a0a0a0: \ LINE2:bin#efb71d:incoming \ GPRINT:bin:MIN:%.2lf \ GPRINT:bin:AVERAGE:%.2lf \ GPRINT:bin:MAX:%.2lf \ AREA:boutmin#ffffff: \ STACK:boutminmax#00f000: \ LINE1:boutmin#a0a0a0: \ LINE1:boutmax#a0a0a0: \ LINE2:bout#a0a735:outgoing \ GPRINT:bout:MIN:%.2lf \ GPRINT:bout:AVERAGE:%.2lf \ GPRINT:bout:MAX:%.2lf \ " $RRDTOOL graph $OUTDIR/$OUTPRE-hour.png -a PNG --start -14400 $DISP -w $WIDTH -h $HEIGHT $RRDTOOL graph $OUTDIR/$OUTPRE-day.png -a PNG --start -86400 $DISP -w $WIDTH -h $HEIGHT $RRDTOOL graph $OUTDIR/$OUTPRE-month.png -a PNG --start -2592000 $DISP -w $WIDTH -h $HEIGHT OUTPRE=lighttpd-requests DISP="-v req --title RequestsperSecond -u 1 \ DEF:req=$INFILE:Requests:AVERAGE \ DEF:reqmax=$INFILE:Requests:MAX \ DEF:reqmin=$INFILE:Requests:MIN \ CDEF:reqminmax=reqmax,reqmin,- \ AREA:reqmin#ffffff: \ STACK:reqminmax#00f000: \ LINE1:reqmin#a0a0a0: \ LINE1:reqmax#a0a0a0: \ LINE2:req#00a735:requests" $RRDTOOL graph $OUTDIR/$OUTPRE-hour.png -a PNG --start -14400 $DISP -w $WIDTH -h $HEIGHT $RRDTOOL graph $OUTDIR/$OUTPRE-day.png -a PNG --start -86400 $DISP -w $WIDTH -h $HEIGHT $RRDTOOL graph $OUTDIR/$OUTPRE-month.png -a PNG --start -2592000 $DISP -w $WIDTH -h $HEIGHT Basically it's not my script, i get it from somewhere from the internet. Now i would like to do the same for CPU usage and MEM usage. I don't like to use any additional packages! As you can see lighttpd populates lighttpd.rrd file with traffic data and requests per second. Now i would like to the system to populate second rrd file with CPU and MEM usage, so i can add to sh file code to generate graphs for this data. How can I populate RRD file with CPU and MEM usage data? Please, NO THIRD-PARTY tools !

    Read the article

  • iptables-restore: line 1 failed

    - by Doug
    Hello, I am new to servers, and I was following this guide and it failed on the first command instructed. Could anyone give me a hand? http://wiki.debian.org/iptables ~ZORO~:/etc# iptables-restore < /etc/iptables.test.rules iptables-restore: line 1 failed Edit: iptables.test.rules ~ZORO~:/etc# cat /etc/iptables.test.rules *filter # Allows all loopback (lo0) traffic and drop all traffic to 127/8 that doesn't use lo0 -A INPUT -i lo -j ACCEPT -A INPUT -i ! lo -d 127.0.0.0/8 -j REJECT # Accepts all established inbound connections -A INPUT -m state --state ESTABLISHED,RELATED -j ACCEPT # Allows all outbound traffic # You could modify this to only allow certain traffic -A OUTPUT -j ACCEPT # Allows HTTP and HTTPS connections from anywhere (the normal ports for websites) -A INPUT -p tcp --dport 80 -j ACCEPT -A INPUT -p tcp --dport 443 -j ACCEPT # Allows SSH connections for script kiddies # THE -dport NUMBER IS THE SAME ONE YOU SET UP IN THE SSHD_CONFIG FILE -A INPUT -p tcp -m state --state NEW --dport 30000 -j ACCEPT # Now you should read up on iptables rules and consider whether ssh access # for everyone is really desired. Most likely you will only allow access from certain IPs. # Allow ping -A INPUT -p icmp -m icmp --icmp-type 8 -j ACCEPT # log iptables denied calls (access via 'dmesg' command) -A INPUT -m limit --limit 5/min -j LOG --log-prefix "iptables denied: " --log-level 7 # Reject all other inbound - default deny unless explicitly allowed policy: -A INPUT -j REJECT -A FORWARD -j REJECT COMMIT

    Read the article

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