Search Results

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

Page 5/58 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

  • Refactoring routes - serving different layouts

    - by dmclark
    As a Rails NOOB, I started with a routes.rb of: ActionController::Routing::Routes.draw do |map| map.resources :events map.connect 'affiliates/list', :controller => "affiliates", :action => "list" map.connect 'affiliates/regenerate_thumb/:id', :controller => "affiliates", :action => "regenerate_thumb" map.connect 'affiliates/state/:id.:format', :controller => "affiliates", :action => "find_by_state" map.connect 'affiliates/getfeed', :controller => "affiliates", :action => "feed" map.resources :affiliates, :has_many => :events map.connect ":controller/:action" map.connect '', :controller => "affiliates" map.connect ":controller/:action/:id" map.connect ":controller/:action/:id/:format" end and i'm trying to tighten it up. and I've gotten as far as: ActionController::Routing::Routes.draw do |map| map.resources :events, :only => "index" map.resources :affiliates do |affiliates| affiliates.resources :has_many => :events affiliates.resources :collection => { :list => :get, :regenerate_thumb => "regenerate_thumb" } end # map.connect 'affiliates/regenerate_thumb/:id', :controller => "affiliates", :action => "regenerate_thumb" map.connect 'affiliates/state/:id.:format', :controller => "affiliates", :action => "find_by_state" map.connect 'affiliates/getfeed', :controller => "affiliates", :action => "feed" map.root :affiliates end what is confusing to me is routes vs parameters.. For example, I realized that the only difference between list and index is HOW it is rendered, rather than WHAT is rendered. Having a different action (as I do now) feels wrong but I can't figure out he right way. Thanks

    Read the article

  • Zend_Controller_Router_Route_Chain more routes - more problems

    - by epmspec
    When i use only langRoute and moduleRoute i have not any problems. But when i add pageRoute it is not work properly. I have tried many another ways do it (Regex etc) but none gives the desired result. Can anybody help me? $front = Zend_Controller_Front::getInstance(); $router = $front->getRouter(); //Route_page needs dispatcher and request $dispatcher = $front->getDispatcher(); $request = $front->getRequest(); // Add languag routes $langRoute = new Zend_Controller_Router_Route_Hostname( ':language.domain.com', array( 'language' => 'ru', ), array( 'language' => '^(ru|en)$', ) ); // Add module routes $moduleRoute = new Zend_Controller_Router_Route_Module(array(),$dispatcher,$request); // Add page routes $pageRoute = new Zend_Controller_Router_Route( ':uri\.html', array( 'controller' => 'index', 'module' => 'default', 'action' => 'index', 'uri' => 'index', ), array ('uri' => '[0-9a-z\-]+') ); // Add chain routes $chainedRoute = new Zend_Controller_Router_Route_Chain(); $chainedRoute->chain($pageRoute); $chainedRoute->chain($langRoute)->chain($moduleRoute); $router->addRoute('default', $chainedRoute);

    Read the article

  • Why is Windows 7 not following all routes?

    - by GigabyteProductions
    My computer is connected to my secondary router that's running the 192.168.42.0/24 network and my computer also has a route that directs anything on that network to the router, but for anything on that network other than the router itself, it get's the ICMP response of Reply from 192.168.42.194: Destination host unreachable. (with 192.168.42.194 being my computer). Every other network works, like all of the internet, or addresses on my primary router like 192.168.1.*, just not on the 192.168.42.0/24 network... route print returns: IPv4 Route Table =========================================================================== Active Routes: Network Destination Netmask Gateway Interface Metric 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 192.168.42.1 192.168.42.194 276 127.0.0.0 255.0.0.0 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 127.0.0.1 306 192.168.42.0 255.255.255.0 On-link 192.168.42.194 276 192.168.42.194 255.255.255.255 On-link 192.168.42.194 276 192.168.42.255 255.255.255.255 On-link 192.168.42.194 276 224.0.0.0 240.0.0.0 On-link 127.0.0.1 306 224.0.0.0 240.0.0.0 On-link 192.168.42.194 276 255.255.255.255 255.255.255.255 On-link 127.0.0.1 306 255.255.255.255 255.255.255.255 On-link 192.168.42.194 276 =========================================================================== Persistent Routes: Network Address Netmask Gateway Address Metric 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 192.168.42.1 Default =========================================================================== The only time anything is supposed to send an ICMP Host Unreachable response is when there's no route to it, right? So, why is my own computer sending that to ping or tracert when I have the route of 192.168.42.0 with the mask of 255.255.255.0? An IP address of 192.168.42.2 surely fits into that route. If I explicitly add a route for the IP address i am trying to access, it works, like: route add 192.168.42.2 mask 255.255.255.255 192.168.42.1 (the 192.168.42.1 right after mask is gateway, or the device to send the packet to so it can route it further), but why wont it work for the implicit route that's automatically on the table? I disabled my firewall, too (I use Comodo if anyone thinks this still serves as a problem). I'v even tried explicitly adding the gateway of 192.168.42.1 to the 192.168.42.0/24 route instead of it routing through 0.0.0.0's gateway, which is what On-link does. but that didn't work either, so it's not a gateway specification problem. If the host was really unreachable, it would be the router's IP address (192.168.42.1) sending that to me... This network is all of my creation, so there's no problem such as an administrator locking me out, because i am the administrator.

    Read the article

  • ASP.NET MVC Routes Login/Logout Problem

    - by Tom
    Hi Guys, Relatively new to ASP.NET MVC and little confused about how to do routing. My problem basically relates to "logged in" and "logged out routes" and having both as "/". i.e. I have home/index for logged out user which appears as "/" but this has got me confused as to how I can have home/home for logged in user and still have "/". I keep getting 127.0.0.1/home/home I could modify like 127.0.0.1/home - but I want it like "/". My confusion relates to the fact that the "/" [127.0.0.1/] is bound in the routes collection to home/index. Does anyone know how I can modify the routes dictionary (which will be binded ONCE at the start) so that the "/" can be shared for logged and non-logged users ? Thanks?

    Read the article

  • ASP.NET Routing - load routes from database?

    - by ropstah
    Is it possible to load routes from the database with ASP.NET ? For each r as SomeRouteObject in RouteDataTable routes.MapRoute( _ r.Name, _ r.RouteUri, _ r.RouteValues, _ //?? r.Constraints _ //?? ) Next How should I store the routevalues / constraints? I understand that there are several 'default' routevalues like .Controller and .Action, however I also need entirely custom ones like .Id or .Page...

    Read the article

  • IPv6 static routes

    - by user98651
    I am looking to configure a few hosts with IPv6 on my network. The router (running CentOS 5) is configured with an Hurricane Electric (HE) tunnel which works fine on that host. However, I would like to statically add a few additional hosts on the same LAN to have IPv6 through this tunnel. No, I don't want radvd or dhcpv6 to do the work for me in this case. I already have IPv6 forwarding enabled in sysctl.conf. I am looking for help with the next steps (statically adding the routes). Lets say the IP addresses are as follows: Router: 2001:470:1b07:1:: Host1: 2001:470:1b07:2:: How would I go about making them see each other? Thanks in advance for the help.

    Read the article

  • How Do I get City State Zip in MVC 3 URL Route without writing a controller for every state and actions for each city

    - by OpTech Marketing
    I have the need to have the urls in my bosses application look like: http://domain.com/Texas/Dallas/72701 However, I don't want to write a controller for every state and an action for every city. routes.MapRoute( "DrillDown", // Route name "{controller}/{action}/{ZipId}", new { controller = "State", action = "City", ZipId = UrlParameter.Optional} // Parameter defaults Can someone help me write a pattern for the routes that will accept State/City/Zip without destroying the ability for me to have regular routes with controller/Action/Param ? Looking all over and can't find any direction.

    Read the article

  • Rack URL Mapping

    - by Puru puru rin..
    Hi, I am trying to write two kind of Rack routes. Rack allow us to write such routes like so: app = Rack::URLMap.new('/test' => SimpleAdapter.new, '/files' => Rack::File.new('.')) In my case, I would like to handle those routes: "/" or "index" "/*" in order to match any other routes So I had trying this: app = Rack::URLMap.new('/index' => SimpleAdapter.new, '/' => Rack::File.new('./public')) This works well, but... I don't know how to add '/' path (as alternative of '/index' path). The path '/*' is not interpreted as a wildcard, according to my tests. Do you know how I could do? Thanks

    Read the article

  • Regarding Authlogic and page redirection.

    - by Paddy
    I am using authlogic for authentication in my Rails app. Have named routes for the frequent actions, viz: map.login "login", :controller = "user_sessions", :action = "new" map.logout "logout", :controller = "user_sessions", :action = "destroy" map.register "register", :controller = "users", :action = "new" map.edit 'user/edit/:id', :controller = "users", :action = "edit" But also in my routes.rb i have these automatically created REST routes too: map.resources :user_sessions map.resources :users The problem now is that a user can login from two different routes. Ex: From, http://localhost/login and also from http ://localhost/user_sessions/new. How do i restrict access only from the named route i have defined and not allow from user_sessions/new?

    Read the article

  • Wrong route generation using namespace

    - by Plume
    Hi people! I am building an administration space in my web application. To do this, I am using namespaces but even if the rake generated routes are ok, when i follow the root of my admin space I get an error: Routing Error No route matches "/guru" My routes.rb : Baies::Application.routes.draw do |map| resources :fights resources :actions resources :users namespace :guru do root :to => "guru#index" resources :users end root :to => "public#index" end My arbo: . `-- app `-- controllers |-- actions_controller.rb |-- application_controller.rb |-- fights_controller.rb |-- guru | |-- guru_controller.rb | `-- users_controller.rb |-- public_controller.rb `-- users_controller.rb For information, the routes /guru/users works :) Thanks for help! @tchaOo°

    Read the article

  • Overriding routes on Openvpn client, iproute, iptables2

    - by sarvavijJana
    I am looking for some way to route packets based on its destination ports switching regular internet connection and established openvpn tunnel. This is my configuration OpenVPN server ( I have no control over it ) OpenVPN client running ubuntu wlan0 192.168.1.111 - internet connected if Several routes applied on connection to openvpn from server: /sbin/route add -net 207.126.92.3 netmask 255.255.255.255 gw 192.168.1.1 /sbin/route add -net 0.0.0.0 netmask 128.0.0.0 gw 5.5.0.1 /sbin/route add -net 128.0.0.0 netmask 128.0.0.0 gw 5.5.0.1 And I need to route packets regarding it's destination ports for ex: 80,443 into vpn everything else directly to isp connection 192.168.1.1 What i have used during my attempts: iptables -A OUTPUT -t mangle -p tcp -m multiport ! --dports 80,443 -j MARK --set-xmark 0x1/0xffffffff ip rule add fwmark 0x1 table 100 ip route add default via 192.168.1.1 table 100 I was trying to apply this settings using up/down options of openvpn client configuration All my attempts reduced to successful packet delivery and response only via vpn tunnel. Packets routed bypassing vpn i have used some SNAT to gain proper src address iptables -A POSTROUTING -t nat -o $IF -p tcp -m multiport --dports 80,443 -j SNAT --to $IF_IP failed in SYN-ACK like 0 0,1 0,1: "70","192.168.1.111","X.X.X.X","TCP","34314 > 81 [SYN] Seq=0 Win=5840 Len=0 MSS=1460 TSV=18664016 TSER=0 WS=7" "71","X.X.X.X","192.168.1.111","TCP","81 > 34314 [SYN, ACK] Seq=0 Ack=1 Win=5792 Len=0 MSS=1428 TSV=531584430 TSER=18654692 WS=5" "72","X.X.X.X","192.168.1.111","TCP","81 > 34314 [SYN, ACK] Seq=0 Ack=1 Win=5792 Len=0 MSS=1428 TSV=531584779 TSER=18654692 WS=5" "73","192.168.1.111","X.X.X.X","TCP","34343 > 81 [SYN] Seq=0 Win=5840 Len=0 MSS=1460 TSV=18673732 TSER=0 WS=7" I hope someone has already overcome such a situation or probably knows better approach to fulfill requirements. Please kindly give me a good advice or working solution.

    Read the article

  • Having two IP Routes/Gateways of last Resort on an HP Switch

    - by SteadH
    We have an HP Layer 3 Switch that is doing IP routing between vlans. The general set up is that the switch has an IP address on each VLAN and IP routing is enabled. On our servers VLAN, we have a firewall that has a connection to the outside world. To set a IP route on the HP router, we use IOS command ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 192.168.2.1 where 192.168.2.1 is the address of our firewall, and the zeros essentially mean to route all traffic that the switch doesn't know what to do with out the firewall as a gateway. We're in the middle of an ISP and firewall change. I set up the new firewall and ran the IOS command ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 192.168.2.254 (the address of the new firewall). Things started working nicely. When I reviewed the configuration of the switch though, I noticed that it did not replace the previous ip route command, but just added another route. Now, I know how to remove the old firewall route (no ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 192.168.2.1), but what is the effect of having these two 0.0.0.0 routes? Is it switch implosion? Will a server just respond back over the route it receives the request from? I've read elsewhere that having two default gateways is an impossibility by definition, but I'm curious about this situation that our switch allowed. Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Devise routes to only use custom sign in page

    - by eblume
    I am trying to learn Devise and seem to have hit a problem that is nearly the same as many, many questions here on SO but just slightly different enough that I am not getting much traction following those questions' threads. I have a very simple application. Users can sign in and sign out (and also the devise 'forgot password' stuff is enabled - I am not concerned about it at this time) and that is it. They can't register, they can't edit their profile other than to change their password, they can't do anything except sign in and sign out. (Account creation will, for now, be handled manually at the command line.) I would vastly prefer that the only page that users can log in from was "/" (root_path). I already have it working where you can log in from "/", and that is great. The problem I am having is that if you type in your user/password combination incorrectly from the root_path login page, it automatically sends you to the Devise sign-in page to continue trying to sign in. How can I make Devise redirect to root_path on sign-in failure? Here are my routes - they are probably not optimal or correctly configured and I would appreciate pointers on fixing them: root to: "core_pages#splash" devise_for :users, skip: [:sessions] as :user do # get 'signin' => 'devise/sessions#new', as: :new_user_session post 'signin' => 'devise/sessions#create', as: :user_session delete 'signout' => 'devise/sessions#destroy', as: :destroy_user_session, via: Devise.mappings[:user].sign_out_via end match '/home' => 'core_pages#home' Note the commented-out 'get signin' line. The system works without this line but, surprisingly (to me), "GET /signin" results in a HTTP 400 (OK) response and renders the Devise login template. I would prefer it return some sort of 'invalid request' or just silently redirect the user to root_path. Running rake routes on these routes gives: root / core_pages#splash user_password POST /users/password(.:format) devise/passwords#create new_user_password GET /users/password/new(.:format) devise/passwords#new edit_user_password GET /users/password/edit(.:format) devise/passwords#edit PUT /users/password(.:format) devise/passwords#update user_session POST /signin(.:format) devise/sessions#create destroy_user_session DELETE /signout(.:format) devise/sessions#destroy home /home(.:format) core_pages#home Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Zend hostname route doesn't match when it has child routes

    - by talisker
    I am implementing an Admin module, which contains the following routes: 'router' => array( 'routes' => array( 'admin' => array( 'type' => 'Zend\Mvc\Router\Http\Hostname', 'options' => array( 'route' => ':subdomain.mydomain.local', 'constraints' => array( 'subdomain' => 'admin', ), 'defaults' => array( 'module' => '__NAMESPACE__', 'controller' => 'Admin\Controller\Index', 'action' => 'index', ), ), 'priority' => 9000, 'may_terminate' => true, 'child_routes' => array( 'users' => array( 'type' => 'Zend\Mvc\Router\Http\Literal', 'options' => array( 'route' => '/users', 'defaults' => array( 'module' => '__NAMESPACE__', 'controller' => 'Admin\Controller\Users', 'action' => 'index', ), ), ), ) ), ), ), And this is the home route configuration: 'home' => array( 'type' => 'Zend\Mvc\Router\Http\Literal', 'options' => array( 'route' => '/', 'defaults' => array( 'controller' => 'Application\Controller\Index', 'action' => 'index', ), ), ), When I try to access to http://admin.mydomain.com, the route match always with the homeroute, but if I remove all the child routes from the admin route, the behavior is correct and a http://admin.mydomain.com matches with the adminroute. Any idea?

    Read the article

  • REST Rails 2 nested routes without resource names?

    - by mrbrdo
    I'm using Rails 2. I have resources nested like this: - university_categories - universities - studies - professors - comments I wish to use RESTful routes, but I don't want all that clutter in my URL. For example instead of: /universities/:university_id/studies/:study_id/professors/:professor_id I want: /professors/:university_id/:study_id/:professor_id (I don't map professors seperately so there shouldn't be a confusion between this and /professors/:professor_id since that route shouldn't exist). Again, I want to use RESTful resources/routes... Also note, I am using slugs instead of IDs. Slugs for studies are NOT unique, while other are. Also, there are no many-to-many relationships (so if I know the slug of a professor, which is unique, I also know which study and university and category it belongs to, however I still wish this information to be in the URI if possible for SEO, and also it is necessary when adding a new professor). I do however want to use shallow nesting for "administrator" URIs like edit, destroy (note the problem here with Study since it's slug is not unique, though)... I would also like some tips on how to use the url helpers so that I don't have too much to fix if I change the routes in the future... Thank you.

    Read the article

  • Configuring Windows 2003 As A Router

    - by Sean M
    I am trying to configure a Windows 2003 server to act as a router, so that the two subnetworks that I'm dealing with can communicate with one another without NAT. I am mostly sure that I have configured Windows 2003 incorrectly, and I'm finding it very difficult to drill down through Google results to something helpful. I have a 192.168.1.0/24 network that is my "production" network (in the sense that I'm in trouble if I screw it up) and a 10.0.0.0/8 network that is my test network. The 192.168.1.0 network is ruled by a gateway whose routing table looks like this (my address redacted): The Windows 2003 server, "prime," is multihomed. Its network adapters are at 192.168.1.122, (as seen above), 10.0.0.1, and 10.0.0.2. I added the Routing and Remote Access role to it, and enabled LAN routing. I do not have it using RIP or other routing protocols. Its current routing table is shown below. To me, it looks like all of the right routes are there for traffic to pass between the 192.168.1.0 network and the 10.0.0.0 network. However, traffic does not pass. The 10.0.0.11 and .12 clients cannot be contacted from the 192.168.1.0 network. When I use traceroute to try to get to them, the trace gets to the Windows 2003 server's 192.168.1.122 address, then produces nothing but "* * *" timeouts. When I try to traceroute to 192.168.1.1 from a 10.0.0.0-network client, I get "destination host unreachable." However, I know that the routing is working at least a little, because from the 192.168.1.0 network, I can connect to the Windows server just fine by referring to it as 10.0.0.1. What static routes would allow me to contact 10.0.0.11 and .12 from the 192.168.1.0 network? Is it possible to tell the Windows server "since you are a DHCP/DNS server, you already know routes to get to machines that are getting IP addresses from you, please add those to your routing table" ? Will using RIP or OSPF on the Windows server actually be helpful in this situation?

    Read the article

  • will paginate, nested routes, ruby, rails

    - by Sam
    I'm trying to get will paginate to link to my nested route instead of the regular posts variable. I know I'm supposed to pass some params to paginate but I don't know how to pass them. Basically there is an array stored in @posts and the other param paginate has access to is category_id. The nested route is /category/1/posts but hitting next and previous on will paginate returns a url like this posts?page=1&category_id=7. <%= will_paginate @most_recent_posts "What do I do here?" %> This is the result of Yannis's answer: In your controller you can do: @posts = @category.posts.paginate And in your view: <%= will_paginate(@post) %> Doing this comes up with the following URL posts?page=2&post_category_id=athlete_management routes.rb #there are more routes but these are the relevant ones map.resources :posts map.resources :post_categories, :has_many => :posts solution map.resources :post_categories do |post_category| post_category.resources :posts end map.resources :posts Had to declare the resource after the block Thanks stephen!

    Read the article

  • Rails i18n and routes in javascript

    - by StefanS
    Sometimes it would be really handy to have the Rails localization files available in JavaScript. Same is true for for the routes helpers. I found these two plugins which are exactly doing this: Exposing i18n to JavaScript: http://github.com/fnando/i18n-js Rails Routes in JavaScript: http://tore.darell.no/pages/javascript_routes My questions: Are there any other plugins / gems doing similar things like the two above? What's the right approach in Rails? Meta tag? Additional data- attributes? Thanks for any input!

    Read the article

  • in asp.net mvc is it possible to register routes somewhere other than application.Start()

    - by joe q.
    Hi, is it possible to create and register routes after Application.Start() is called? let's say have a controller, PersonController. With default routing, URLs could look something like www.site.com/Person/Edit/4, with 'Person' matching the controller. now imagine I have several users, some may prefer we use the term 'Friends'. I would like to use the same controller, and have /Friends/Edit/4 map to the same controller/action/id. Maybe someone else prefers /Comrades/Edit/4. with the naming preferences stored in a database, is there a way that I can dynamically create these routes at some point mid-application, after the user has logged in? thanks!

    Read the article

  • Query to work out possible destinations on a set of routes using SQL Server 2008

    - by RobW
    I'm writing an application that models train routes, which are stored in the database table [TrainStop] as follows: RouteId StationCode StopIndex IsEnabled So a given route consists of several rows with the StopIndex indicating the order. The problem I am trying to solve is to say which stations a user can get to from a given starting station. This would be relatively straightforward BUT it is also possible to disable stops which means that a user cannot get to any destinations after that stop. It is also possible that multiple routes can share stations e.g.: Route 1: A, B, C, D, E Route2: P, Q, B, C, D, R So if a user is at B they can go to C, D, E and R but if station D is disabled they can get to C only. Solving this problem is fairly straightforward within C# but I am wondering whether it can be solved elegantly and efficiently within SQL? I'm struggling to find a way, for each route, to rule out stations past a row that is not enabled.

    Read the article

  • C++ function call routes resolver

    - by Poni
    Hi! I'm looking for a tool that will tell/resolve for every function all the call paths (call it "routes") to it. For example: void deeper(int *pNumber) { *pNumber++; } void gateA(int *pNumber) { deeper(pNumber); } void gateB(int *pNumber) { gateA(pNumber); } void main() { int x = 123; gateA(&x); gateB(&x); } See? I need a tool that will tell me all the routes to deeper(), and more if possible. By saying "more" I mean that it will tell me if the pointer is the same as been provided to the calling function. This will greatly save me time. Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Ruby on Rails - Static page as start page

    - by meetraghu28
    Hello! I am developing an app in RoR which has static and dynamic parts. The static portion is placed in the public/ folder of the app. Now if i have an index.html in my public folder then i will not be able to use the routes configured in my routes.rb The default configurations like map.connect /:controller/:action will not be usable if i have an index.html. So i removed the index html. Now i have a static page startpage.html in my public/ folder which has to be the starting page of the app. And the i have links in it for other static/dynamic pages. The RoR app is hosted in apache and i tried to configure the Virtual Host configuration by adding the DirectoryIndex param so that when ever a request comes for the site it will direct it to the startpage.html but still it takes me to the default controller that i have specified in routes.rb with map.root I dont want to add a dummy controller and action and create a view which has the startpage and configure routes.rb to use it as the root. What i am looking to do here is Basically startpage.html should be my first page in the app served as a static page from the public/ folder. This will then have links to other pages and controllers/actions Here i am not able to apache to redirect to the html page instead of passing on the control to rails application. Directory listing is also enabled by using Options Indexes but still no change. Any pointers anyone?

    Read the article

  • How to make a static route when using two internet connections?

    - by webmasters
    I have asked a question here on how to choose which applications will use a 3G internet connection and which applications will use the LAN. User harrymc gave a very complete and interesting answer, pointing that this is possible using static routes for certain websites. Now, lets say I want to access google.com only through my 3G internet connection. How would that static root look like? google has the IP: 173.194.39.180 here is a print of my route table, the 3G Modem has the IP: 10.81.132.96 +-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+ ¦ 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

  • Why is this static routing not working ?

    - by geeko
    Greeting gurus, I'm trying to develop a DHCP enforcement extension like Microsoft NAP. My trick to block dynamic-IP requesting machines (that don't meet certain policy) is to strip the default gateway (no default gateway) stated in the IP lease and set the lease subnet mask to 255.255.255.255. Now I need the blocked machines to be able to reach some specific locations (IPs) on the network. To allow for this, I'm including some static routes in the lease. For example, I'm including 10.10.10.11 via router 10.10.10.254 (the one to which the blocked machine that needs to access 10.10.10.11 is connected). Unfortunately, as soon as I set the default gateway to nothing, blocked machines cannot reach any of the added static routes. I also tried classless static routes. Any ideas ? any one knows how MS NAP actually do it ? Geeko

    Read the article

  • Problem with url_for in ActionMailer template

    - by macek
    I'm attempting to provide a confirmation link in my user welcome email and I'm getting the following Rails error: Need controller and action! It makes a fuss about this line: <p>Please take a moment to activate your account by going to: <%= link_to confirm_user_url(:id => @user.confirmation_code) %>.</p> In my development.rb environment, I have the following line: config.action_mailer.default_url_options = { :host => "localhost", :port => 3000 } There's no problem with the @user variable. I've tested the email with things like @user.username and @user.confirmation_code. I'm only getting trouble with url_for and named routes like confirm_user_url. When I check my routes with rake routes, confirm_user shows up, so it's not an issue with the named route not existing. I can't seem to figure it out. What gives?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >