Search Results

Search found 5123 results on 205 pages for 'gateway timeout'.

Page 53/205 | < Previous Page | 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60  | Next Page >

• Why from a virtualized Ubuntu system I can't discover the ip address of my router?

  - by AndreaNobili

  I am not into computer network and I have the following problem finding my router IP address. I have a Windows 8 PC on on which it is installed VmWare Workstation that virtualizes Linux Ubuntu. The network adapter settings of this Virtual Machine is setted as NAT. Now my problem is that if in the Windows 8 DOS shell I perform the ifconfig statment I obtain C:\Users\Andrea>ipconfig Configurazione IP di Windows Scheda Ethernet tap0: Stato supporto. . . . . . . . . . . . : Supporto disconnesso Suffisso DNS specifico per connessione: techub.lan Scheda Ethernet Connessione di rete Bluetooth: Stato supporto. . . . . . . . . . . . : Supporto disconnesso Suffisso DNS specifico per connessione: Scheda LAN wireless Connessione alla rete locale (LAN)* 11: Stato supporto. . . . . . . . . . . . : Supporto disconnesso Suffisso DNS specifico per connessione: Scheda LAN wireless Wi-Fi: Suffisso DNS specifico per connessione: DSL2750B Indirizzo IPv6 locale rispetto al collegamento . : fe80::89ff:6d12:49cf:4354%13 Indirizzo IPv4. . . . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.1.3 Subnet mask . . . . . . . . . . . . . : 255.255.255.0 Gateway predefinito . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.1.1 Scheda Ethernet Ethernet: Stato supporto. . . . . . . . . . . . : Supporto disconnesso Suffisso DNS specifico per connessione: Scheda Ethernet VMware Network Adapter VMnet1: Suffisso DNS specifico per connessione: Indirizzo IPv6 locale rispetto al collegamento . : fe80::edb3:8352:f954:2b0c%23 Indirizzo IPv4. . . . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.129.1 Subnet mask . . . . . . . . . . . . . : 255.255.255.0 Gateway predefinito . . . . . . . . . : Scheda Ethernet VMware Network Adapter VMnet8: Suffisso DNS specifico per connessione: Indirizzo IPv6 locale rispetto al collegamento . : fe80::d00b:8c6e:98b:f1ec%24 Indirizzo IPv4. . . . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.15.1 Subnet mask . . . . . . . . . . . . . : 255.255.255.0 Gateway predefinito . . . . . . . . . : Scheda Tunnel Teredo Tunneling Pseudo-Interface: Stato supporto. . . . . . . . . . . . : Supporto disconnesso Suffisso DNS specifico per connessione: Scheda Tunnel isatap.techub.lan: Stato supporto. . . . . . . . . . . . : Supporto disconnesso Suffisso DNS specifico per connessione: techub.lan Scheda Tunnel isatap.{5B95051D-79AB-4147-92CF-3A2E16698432}: Stato supporto. . . . . . . . . . . . : Supporto disconnesso Suffisso DNS specifico per connessione: Scheda Tunnel isatap.{340A5FAD-1597-402E-B658-29C37E8F7BC2}: Stato supporto. . . . . . . . . . . . : Supporto disconnesso Suffisso DNS specifico per connessione: Scheda Tunnel isatap.DSL2750B: Suffisso DNS specifico per connessione: DSL2750B Indirizzo IPv6 locale rispetto al collegamento . : fe80::5efe:192.168.1.3%26 Gateway predefinito . . . . . . . . . : So, looking at the previous output it appear clear that the default gateway (my router) is: 192.168.1.1, infact if I open it into a browser it apear to me the login mask to enter in the router settings.... Ok, if now I open the virtualized Ubuntu shell and perform the route command I obtain this output: andrea@andrea-virtual-machine:~$ route Tabella di routing IP del kernel Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref Use Iface default 192.168.15.2 0.0.0.0 UG 0 0 0 eth0 link-local * 255.255.0.0 U 1000 0 0 eth0 192.168.15.0 * 255.255.255.0 U 1 0 0 eth0 So, here it say to me that the default gateway is 192.168.15.2 (that is not my router ip address), why? My idea is that it could depend by the NAT. Because my Windows system is connected using the wireless but in the virtualized Ubuntu I see that I am connected to a "wired network". So I think that the NAT virtualize a network adapter (or something like this) and that 192.168.15.2 could be the ip address of this network adapter... But it seems strange to me because, as you can see in the previous ipconfig output the VmWare network adapter addresses are: 192.168.129.1 and 192.168.15.1. So I have also 2 others doubts: 1) What device represents the 192.168.15.2 ip address that the virtualized Ubuntu see as Default gateway but that is not my router? 2) What exactly do the two VmWare network adapter that I have configured into my Windows 8 system? There is a way to discover my router ip from the virtualized Ubuntu system ? Tnx Andrea

  Read the article

• apache2: ssl_error_rx_record_too_long when visiting port 80? help!

  - by John

  Hi, I have an Ubuntu 10 x64 server edition machine. I got a second IP and configured /etc/network/interfaces like so (actual IPs and gateways removed): [code] auto lo iface lo inet loopback iface eth0 inet dhcp auto eth0 auto eth0:0 iface eth0 inet static address [ my first IP ] netmask 255.255.255.0 gateway [ my first gateway ] iface eth0:0 inet static address [ my second IP ] netmask 255.255.255.0 gateway [ my second gateway ] [/code] /etc/apache2/ports.conf: [code] Listen 80 NameVirtualHost [ my first IP ]:80 NameVirtualHost [ my second IP ]:80 # If you add NameVirtualHost *:443 here, you will also have to change # the VirtualHost statement in /etc/apache2/sites-available/default-ssl # to # Server Name Indication for SSL named virtual hosts is currently not # supported by MSIE on Windows XP. Listen 443 NameVirtualHost [ my first IP - some site is running SSL successfully using it ]:443 Listen 443 [/code] /etc/apache2/sites-enabled/mysite.conf: [code] ServerName mysite.com Include /var/www/mysite.com/djangoproject/apache/django.conf [/conf] [/code] Then when visiting http[mysite].com:80 or http[mysite].com (:// removed because serverfault doesn't allow me to post hyperlinks), I get: [code] An error occurred during a connection to [mysite].com. SSL received a record that exceeded the maximum permissible length. (Error code: ssl_error_rx_record_too_long) [/code] My guess is that the configuration file is not being picked up, and apache is therefore looking for the default-ssl file, which is not in conf-enabled. If I were to configure that file properly, it seems I would successfully connect to whatever default directory is specified in the default-ssl file. But I want to connect to my website. Any ideas? Thanks in advance!

  Read the article

• NAT ports - how do they work?

  - by Davidoper

  I have the following network schema: Computer A: three nics: NIC 1 (eth0): dhcp, public internet NIC 2 (eth1): static 192.168.1.1, gateway for Computer B NIC 3 (eth2): static 192.168.2.1, gateway for Computer C Computer B: static 192.168.1.2, using gateway 192.168.1.1 (NIC 2). Computer C: static 192.168.2.2, using gateway 192.168.2.1 (NIC 3). So I applied this to get NAT working: iptables -t nat -A POSTROUTING -o eth0 -j MASQUERADE Every computer can connect to the internet now. I have been applying rules to the main computer (Computer A), like dropping connections to some ports, e.g ssh: iptables -A INPUT -p tcp --dport 22 -j DROP But for instance, now I would like only allow connections for ports 20,21,22,53 and 80 in Computer C, and ignore the outside traffic if it's not related to those ports. The allowed connections should be FROM Computer C to outside, but not from outside to Computer C (I mean - Computer C is not hosting any HTTP or SSH, but it is going to use them as a client). I guess this sould be done like this: iptables -A OUTPUT -i eth2 -o eth0 -p tcp --dport 21 -m state --state NEW,ESTABLISHED -j ACCEPT iptables -A INPUT -i eth2 -o eth0 -p tcp --sport 21 -m state --state ESTABLISHED -j ACCEPT The last rule (dropping any other traffic different from those) is at the end of the configuration, so -A should be working correctly. The thing is... it is not working. If I put the last rule like this: iptables -A FORWARD -i eth2 -o eth0 -j DROP It just drops everything and, for instance, port 21 (previously opened as you can see above) is not either working. Can you tell me what could I have done wrong? I have been struggling with this problem for some time and I am unable to solve it. Thanks!

  Read the article

• How do I apply multiple subnets to a server with one NIC?

  - by Cosban

  I am trying to route multiple IPs through one physical NIC on my dedicated server for use with Proxmox KVM VMs. I have a dedicated server which is currently running Debian 4.4.5-8 with 3 available ip addresses for use, which will be displayed as 176.xxx.xxx.196 (main), 176.xxx.xxx.198 (on same subnet as main) and 5.xxx.xxx.166 (different subnet). I am currently trying to route the third IP address with the dedi for use with a vps that I have set up using proxmox v2.x but am having a really, really hard time doing so. Virtual interfaces binding the additional IP addresses work as expected, ruling out external routing problems. The provider has given the following information for the IP addresses on the main subnet: gateway: 176.xxx.xxx.193 netmask: 255.255.255.224 broadcast: 176.xxx.xxx.223 As well as the following information for the IP address on the second subnet: gateway: 5.xxx.xxx.161 netmask: 255.255.255.248 broadcast: 5.xxx.xxx.167 Everything I've tried with /etc/network/interfaces has either not worked, or has rendered the network completely useless. This is the current state of the file, which has the secondary IP address working on the same subnet as well as IPv6 working, but not the second subnet. # Nativen IPv6 Schnittstelle iface eth0 inet6 manual # Bridge IPv4 Schnittstelle (176.xxx.xxx.193/27) auto vmbr0 iface vmbr0 inet static address 176.xxx.xxx.196 netmask 255.255.255.224 gateway 176.xxx.xxx.193 broadcast 176.xxx.xxx.223 bridge_ports eth0 bridge_stp off bridge_fd 0 bridge_maxwait 0 post-up ip addr add 176.xxx.xxx.198/27 dev vmbr0 auto vmbr1 iface vmbr1 inet static address 5.xxx.xxx.166 netmask 255.255.255.248 gateway 5.xxx.xxx.161 broadcast 5.xxx.xxx.167 bridge_ports eth0 bridge_stp off bridge_fd 0 bridge_maxwait 0 post-up ip addr add 5.xxx.xxx.166/27 dev vmbr1 # Bridge IPv6 Schnittstelle (Reichweite: xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx::/64) iface vmbr0 inet6 static address xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx netmask 64 up ip -6 route add xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx dev vmbr0 down ip -6 route del xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx dev vmbr0 up ip -6 route add default via xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx dev vmbr0 down ip -6 route del default via xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx dev vmbr0

  Read the article

• Windows 7 Multi-NIC woes

  - by Eric

  I have Comcast business Internet here. It gives me 5 static IPs. Most of the machines in my house connect to a router like every other household. It has a 192.168.117.x subnet, DHCP Server, etc. and all is well. However, I have a second machine on MY desk that has a life Internet IP. Up until yesterday, this machine was running XP Pro. The primary NIC was manually set to 192.168.117.241 with no gateway, and the secondary NIC was manually set to 173.x.x.171 with a gateway of 173.x.x.174. This worked just fine for years. Yesterday I replaced that XP machine with a brand new Windows 7 x64 box. Again, I configured it the same way. The onboard NIC was given a static 192.168.117.x address with no gateway, and the secondary NIC was given a live Internet IP address with the proper router, etc. 2 Problems. First is that the internal network (192.168.117.x) is listed as a public network because there's no gateway, so that means no homegroup, no file sharing, none of that. And I can't change it from what I'm reading... The second is that the machine reports the "router" ip address as it's address, and not the address that it's supposed to. I'm ready to tear my hair out over this. Any ideas?

  Read the article

• apache2: ssl_error_rx_record_too_long when visiting port 80?

  - by John

  Hi, I have an Ubuntu 10 x64 server edition machine. I got a second IP and configured /etc/network/interfaces like so (actual IPs and gateways removed): auto lo iface lo inet loopback #iface eth0 inet dhcp auto eth0 auto eth0:0 iface eth0 inet static address [ my first IP ] netmask 255.255.255.0 gateway [ my first gateway ] iface eth0:0 inet static address [ my second IP ] netmask 255.255.255.0 gateway [ my second gateway ] /etc/apache2/ports.conf: Listen 80 NameVirtualHost [ my first IP ]:80 NameVirtualHost [ my second IP ]:80 <IfModule mod_ssl.c> # If you add NameVirtualHost *:443 here, you will also have to change # the VirtualHost statement in /etc/apache2/sites-available/default-ssl # to <VirtualHost *:443> # Server Name Indication for SSL named virtual hosts is currently not # supported by MSIE on Windows XP. Listen 443 NameVirtualHost [ my first IP - some site is running SSL successfully using it ]:443 </IfModule> <IfModule mod_gnutls.c> Listen 443 </IfModule> /etc/apache2/sites-enabled/mysite.conf: <VirtualHost [my second IP ]:80> ServerName mysite.com Include /var/www/mysite.com/djangoproject/apache/django.conf </VirtualHost> Then when visiting http[mysite].com:80 or http[mysite].com (:// removed because serverfault doesn't allow me to post hyperlinks), I get: An error occurred during a connection to [mysite].com. SSL received a record that exceeded the maximum permissible length. (Error code: ssl_error_rx_record_too_long) My guess is that the configuration file is not being picked up, and apache is therefore looking for the default-ssl file, which is not in conf-enabled. If I were to configure that file properly, it seems I would successfully connect to whatever default directory is specified in the default-ssl file. But I want to connect to my website. Any ideas? Thanks in advance!

  Read the article

• What Wireless Router/ADSL Modem to get? N-band a must!!

  - by JJarava

  I'm looking for a Dual-N band Router OR ADSL Gateway and I'd like some recommendations. Situation: I have a 802.11b/g ADSL gateway provided by my telco, but the WIFI signal won't cover all the house (especially the living-room, so my tv-connected Mac Mini has poor to no internet access). So I'm looking to either replace the DSL modem with a N-enabled one, or to add a Router to the mix. I've had a modem+router setup for many years, and I know the advantatges (double NAT, double FW = more security) and issues (more complex to troubleshoot, two possible points of failure), so I'd rather live with a single (ADSL Gateway) device, if possible. Requirements: Dual-N Band (300 Mbs WIFI) 1 GB Ethernet ports ADSL2+ support (if it's a ADSL gateway, which would be desirable) "Best" range and speed possible Nice to have: USB port to share disks/printers on the network Media streaming I've been a long time user of Linksys, so googling around I found the WRT610N (http://www.linksysbycisco.com/US/en/products/WRT610N) for a "Pure Router" perspective, and it's one of those that Linksys styles "N++" (http://www.linksysbycisco.com/US/en/promo/Promotion-Go-Wireless?stepname=Promotion-Step-Go-Wireless-High-Performance) But I haven't been able to find similar "ADSL" gateways. I've found the WAG320N, but there is little to no info in the Linksys site (i.e., i don't know if it's Dual Band, or if it has GB ethernet) Any opinions/recommendations of other products/suggestions are more than welcome.

  Read the article

• Multiple Internet connections, multiple networks and split access in Linux

  - by Swapneel Patnekar

  I am having trouble setting up multiple internet connections for split access in Linux. We have 3 internet connections from 3 different ISP's. We want to configure our Linux gateway machine such that our three internal networks 10.2.1.0/24, 192.168.20.0/24 & 192.168.2.0/24 use ISP1, ISP2 and ISP3 respectively in a split access manner. Outlined below is the layout/settings, Interfaces of the Linux Gateway connected to Routers: eth0: 10.1.1.2<---------->10.1.1.1(Internal Interface of ADSL Router)[ISP1] eth1: 192.168.15.2<------>192.168.15.1(Internal Interface of 3G Router)[ISP2] eth3: 192.168.1.2<------->192.168.1.1(Internal Interface of ADSL Router)[ISP3] Kindly note that none of the interfaces in the Linux gateway has a public static IP address. Routers of ISP1 and ISP2 get assigned a dynamic public IP address when connected to the Internet, router of ISP3 has been assigned a public static IP address. Interface of Linux gateway connected to a switch, eth4: 10.2.1.1(LAN Interface for ISP1) eth4:0 192.168.20.1(LAN interface for ISP2) eth4:1 192.168.2.1(LAN Interface for ISP3) eth4:0 & eth4:1 are virtual interfaces with eth4 being the interface connected physically. Based on http://linux-ip.net/html/adv-multi-internet.html I've set the following routes, ip route flush table 4 ip route show table main | grep -Ev ^default | while read ROUTE ; do ip route add table 4 $ROUTE done ip route add table 4 default via 192.168.15.1 ip rule add fwmark 4 table 4 ip route flush cache Additionally, using the following iptables rules to mark & route packets as per the guide mentioned above : http://pastebin.com/KzWHFGJA At this point, computers from 192.168.2.0/24 network are successfully able to reach the Internet through ISP3. 192.168.20.0/24 and 10.2.1.0/24 are unable to access the Internet through ISP1 and ISP2 respectively. Any inputs will be much appreciated !

  Read the article

• Fresh Proxmox VE 2.1 installation with defaults can't be reached or pinged

  - by Damainman

  I am using the lastest Proxmox VE 2.1. My server has two NICS with a uplink only connected into eth0. My Server is a co-located server utilizing public IPv4 IPs. It is not behind a firewall or any system which monitors traffic. Via IPKVM I did a fresh install of Proxmox, I put in the correct IP, Mask, Gateway, and DNS information. The install went perfectly fine with no errors. Upon completion and rebooting the system: I am unable to reach the web GUI via the browser, it just times out. I am unable to ping the server. I am unable to ping outside to the Internet from within the server. Tried pinging out to 4.2.2.2 and yahoo.com I tried rebooting the server and restarting the network service. IFCONFIG shows my IP information under vmbro0 which also has the same MAC address as the eth0 device. eth0 only displays a IPv6 Scope:Link address, which I did not setup myself. This is my first time installing proxmox, but after searching for a few hours it doesn't seem like anyone else is having the same issue as me from a fresh install with just the defaults. So far the only thing I did was install it. Also, I know the network cable is good and the IP is good because I was running a Xen XCP server with the same network settings prior to wiping it to install proxmox. Some additional information: for pveversion -v (Installed proxmox-ve_2.1-f9b0f63a-26.iso) pve-manager: 2.1-1 (pve-manager/2.1/f9b0f63a) running kernel: 2.6.32-11-pve proxmox-ve-2.6.32: 2.0-66 netstat -nr (note: .136 is my network, and .137 is my gateway) Destination - Gateway - Genmask xxx.xxx.xxx.136 - 0.0.0.0 - 255.255.255.248 0.0.0.0 - xxx.xxx.xxx.137 - 0.0.0.0 /etc/network/interfaces auto lo iface lo inet loopback auto vmbr0 iface vmbr0 inet static address xxx.xxx.xxx.138 netmask 255.255.255.248 gateway xxx.xxx.xxx.137 bridge_ports eth0 bridge_stp off bridge_fd 0

  Read the article

• Getting 502 instead of 503 when all backend servers are down running HAProxy behind Apache

  - by scarba05

  I'm testing running HAProxy as a dedicated load balancer behind Apache 2.2, replacing our current configuration where we use Apache's load balancer. In our current, Apache only, set-up if all the backend (origin) servers are down Apache will serve a 503 service unavailable message. With HAProxy I get a 502 bad gateway response. I'm using a simple reverse proxy rewrite rule in Apache RewriteRule ^/(.*) http://127.0.0.1:8000/$1 [last,proxy] In HAProxy I have the following (running in default tcp mode) defaults log global option tcp-smart-accept timeout connect 7s timeout client 60s timeout queue 120s timeout server 60s listen my_server 127.0.0.1:8000 balance leastconn server backend1 127.0.0.1:8001 check observe layer4 maxconn 2 server backend1 127.0.0.1:8001 check observe layer4 maxconn 2 Testing connecting directly to the load balancer when the backend servers are down: [root@dev ~]# wget http://127.0.0.1:8000/ test.html --2012-05-28 11:45:28-- http://127.0.0.1:8000/ Connecting to 127.0.0.1:8000... connected. HTTP request sent, awaiting response... No data received. So presumably this is down to the fact that HAProxy accepts the connection and then closes it.

  Read the article

• Appears to be "randomly" switching between the acl matched backend and the default backend

  - by Xoor

  I have HAProxy acting as a proxy in front of: An NGinx instance An in-house load balancer in front of multiple dynamic services exposed with socket.io (websockets) My problem is that from time to time my connections are proxied correctly to my socket.io cluster, and then randomly it fallsback to routing to NGinx which obviously is annoying and meaningless since NGinx isn't mean't to handle the request. This happens when requesting for URLs of the format : http://mydomain.com/backends/* There's an ACL in the HAProxy config to match the '/backends/*' path. Here's a simplified version of my HAProxy config (removed extra unrelated entries and changed names): global daemon maxconn 4096 user haproxy group haproxy nbproc 4 defaults mode http timeout server 86400000 timeout connect 5000 log global #this frontend interface receives the incoming http requests frontend http-in mode http #process all requests made on port 80 bind *:80 #set a large timeout for websockets timeout client 86400000 # Default Backend default_backend www_backend # Loadfire (socket cluster) acl is_loadfire_backends path_beg /backends use_backend loadfire_backend if is_loadfire_backends # NGinx backend backend www_backend server www_nginx localhost:12346 maxconn 1024 # Loadfire backend backend loadfire_backend option forwardfor # This sets X-Forwarded-For option httpclose server loadfire localhost:7101 maxconn 2048 It's really quite confusing for me why the behaviour appears to be "random", since being hard to reproduce it's hard to debug. I appreciate any insight on this.

  Read the article

• DNS stops working occasionally

  - by Andrey

  I have tried using Google DNS and the one provided with DHCP. At some point my PC (Windows 7) stops resolving domain names, but DNS server is perfectly pingable. What can be the reason? Thanks! Edit: It is really weird. It can stop and start working in few seconds. The problem is that DNA requests are timing out, and the problem is that the DNS server is pingable at the same time. I can't understand how this could be possible and what might be an issue. C:\Windows\System32\drivers\etc>nslookup google.com DNS request timed out. timeout was 2 seconds. Server: UnKnown Address: 8.8.8.8 Non-authoritative answer: Name: google.com Addresses: 173.194.78.102 173.194.78.101 173.194.78.139 173.194.78.113 173.194.78.100 173.194.78.138 C:\Windows\System32\drivers\etc>nslookup google.com DNS request timed out. timeout was 2 seconds. Server: UnKnown Address: 8.8.8.8 DNS request timed out. timeout was 2 seconds. DNS request timed out. timeout was 2 seconds. *** Request to UnKnown timed-out

  Read the article

• rc scripts dependencies

  - by chris

  On a Ubuntu 10.04.1 LTS server install certain services fail to start properly after a reboot. I have a couple of virtual interfaces defined on eth0: /etc/network/interfaces # This file describes the network interfaces available on your system # and how to activate them. For more information, see interfaces(5). # The loopback network interface auto lo iface lo inet loopback # The primary network interface auto eth0 iface eth0 inet static address 172.16.5.240 netmask 255.255.255.0 gateway 172.16.5.1 auto eth0:1 iface eth0:1 inet static address 172.16.5.241 netmask 255.255.255.0 gateway 172.16.5.1 auto eth0:2 iface eth0:2 inet static address 172.16.5.242 netmask 255.255.255.0 gateway 172.16.5.1 auto eth0:3 iface eth0:3 inet static address 172.16.5.243 netmask 255.255.255.0 gateway 172.16.5.1 and so on... The services that try to bind to for example 172.16.5.243 fail during boot, complaining that there is no such IP address. My questions: 1) Are the services started parallel by default? Can I disable that so they run sequentially? 2) Is there a way to define dependencies between rc scripts? I'm only familiar with the defining the order of seqentially started scripts using the numbers in /etc/rc[0-6].d/) Any other fix or workaround appreciated.

  Read the article

• Not getting IP from ISP on Multicast Network

  - by Johan Nielsen

  Im having an odd issue with my ISP (COMX.dk) I have a managed access gateway box (Telsay) with three 8P8C ports for use with Internet and Ip-Tv (respectively on different VLANS (so does my ISP tell me)) To utilize a port you will need to register your device's mac address through an online interface. You will then get your device paired with a static ip. I am using one port actively and I have registered another device (router). The router is configured to listen for an active dhcpd on the network. When my router get a lease I get a private ip 192.168.2.2 (not the one bound to my mac) which is odd! I unconnected my router from the gateway and connected my laptop directly. Same thing happened - I was given a private address. I did a port scan on the gateway and found port 80 to be open and browsed to the ip. I was then presented with a management interface of a Belkin wireless router (HMMM!!!!) <--by the way, not my gear At this point I called the ISP to let them know of my issue/findings - Only to be replied "Well, we cant see any rogue dhcp servers" (thinking to myself, well I can) I then decided that it could be fun to try the other port of my gateway, only to experience the same. So I reconnected my router and used the remaining port to make an observer(wireshark promic etc.) I am able to see my router trying to discover a dhcp server but I can also see my ISP's IGMP and PIMv2 packages just repeating the same pattern. Hello...Hello...Hello :) So I called them again, only to get the same response, "we dont see any rogue dhcp's...we cant see the host you are talking to (mac address of the Belkin router)...you are definitively connected through wireless?!?(no im not, no such thing as a wireless wire - i thought to myself)" My questions is, What is going on? (besides from what im reporting here) What am I seeing that the don't? What can I tell them in order for them to resolve mine/their issue?

  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

• Moving Microsoft Exchange server to the private network.

  - by Alexey Shatygin

  In one of the offices, we have a 50-computers network, which had only one server machine: Windows 2003 Server Microsoft ISA Server Microsoft Exchange 2003 This server worked as a gateway (proxy server), mail server, file server, firewall and domain controller. It had two network interfaces, one for WAN (let's say 222.222.222.222) and one for LAN (192.168.1.1). I set up a Linux box to be the gateway (without a proxy), so the Linux box now has the following interfaces: 222.222.222.222 (our external IP, we removed it from the Windows machine) and 192.168.1.100 (internal IP), but we need to keep the old Windows server as a mail server and a proxy for some of our users, until we prepare another Linux machine for that, so I need the mail server on that machine to be available from the Internet. I set up iptables rules to redirect all the incoming connections on the 25th and 110th ports of our external IP to 192.168.1.1:25 and 192.168.1.1:110 and when I try to telnet our SMTP service telnet 222.222.222.222 25 I get the greetings from our windows server's (192.168.1.1) SMTP service, and that's works fine. But when I telnet POP3 service telnet 222.222.222.222 110 I only get the blank black screen and the connection seem to disappear if I press any button. I've checked the ISA rules - everything seems to be the same for 110th and 25th ports. When I telnet on 110th ports of our Windows server from our new gateway machine like this: telnet 192.168.1.1 110 I get the acces to it's POP3 service: +OK Microsoft Exchange Server 2003 POP3 server version 6.5.7638.1 (...) ready. What sould I do, to make the POP3 service available through our new gateway?

  Read the article

• Linux port-based routing using iptables/ip route

  - by user42055

  I have the following setup: 192.168.0.4 192.168.0.6 192.168.0.1 +-----------+ +---------+ +----------+ |WORKSTATION|------| LINUX |------| GATEWAY | +-----------+ +---------+ +----------+ 192.168.150.10 | 192.168.150.9 +---------+ | VPN | +---------+ 192.168.150.1 WORKSTATION has a default route of 192.168.0.6 LINUX has a default route of 192.168.0.1 I am trying to use the gateway as the default route, but route port 80 traffic via the VPN. Based on what I read at http://www.linuxhorizon.ro/iproute2.html I have tried this: echo "1 VPN" >> /etc/iproute2/rt_tables sysctl net.ipv4.conf.eth0.rp_filter = 0 sysctl net.ipv4.conf.tun0.rp_filter = 0 sysctl net.ipv4.conf.all.rp_filter = 0 iptables -A PREROUTING -t mangle -i eth0 -p tcp --dport 80 -j MARK --set-mark 0x1 ip route add default via 192.168.150.9 dev tun0 table VPN ip rule add from all fwmark 0x1 table VPN When I run "tcpdump -i eth0 port 80" on LINUX, and open a webpage on WORKSTATION, I don't see the traffic go through LINUX at all. When I run a ping from WORKSTATION, I get this back from some packets: 92 bytes from 192.168.0.6: Redirect Host(New addr: 192.168.0.1) Vr HL TOS Len ID Flg off TTL Pro cks Src Dst 4 5 00 0054 de91 0 0000 3f 01 4ed3 192.168.0.4 139.134.2.18 Is this why my routing is not working ? Do I need to put GATEWAY and LINUX on different subnets to prevent WORKSTATION being redirected to GATEWAY ? Do I need to use NAT at all, or can I do this with routing alone (which is what I want) ?

  Read the article

• How can I setup OpenVPN with IPv4 and IPv6 using a tap device?

  - by Lekensteyn

  I've managed to setup OpenVPN for full IPv4 connectivity using tap0. Now I want to do the same for IPv6. Addresses and network setup (note that my real prefix is replaced by 2001:db8): 2001:db8::100:0:0/96 my assigned IPv6 range 2001:db8::100:abc:0/112 OpenVPN IPv6 range 2001:db8::100:abc:1 tap0 (on server) (set as gateway on client) 2001:db8::100:abc:2 tap0 (on client) 2001:db8::1:2:3:4 gateway for server Home laptop (tap0: 2001:db8::100:abc:2/112 gateway 2001:db8::100:abc:1/112) | | | (running Kubuntu 10.10; OpenVPN 2.1.0-3ubuntu1) | wifi | | router | | OpenVPN INTERNET | eth0 | /tap0 VPS (eth0:2001:db8::1:2:3:4/64 gateway 2001:db8::1) (tap0: 2001:db8::100:abc:1/112) (running Debian 6; OpenVPN 2.1.3-2) The server has both native IPv4 and IPv6 connectivity, the client has only IPv4. I can ping6 to and from my server over OpenVPN, but not to other machines (for example, ipv6.google.com). net.ipv6.conf.all.forwarding is set to 1, I've tried disabling net.ipv6.conf.all.accept_ra as well, without luck. Using tcpdump on both the server and client, I can see that packets are actually transferred over tap0 to eth0. The router (2001:db8::1) send a neighbor solicitation for the client (2001:db8::100:abc:2) to eth0 after it receives the ICMP6 echo-request. The server does not respond to that solicitation, which causes the ICMP6 echo-request not be routed to the destination. How can I make this IPv6 connection work?

  Read the article

• How can I make IPv6 on OpenVPN work using a tap device?

  - by Lekensteyn

  I've managed to setup OpenVPN for full IPv4 connectivity using tap0. Now I want to do the same for IPv6. Addresses and network setup (note that my real prefix is replaced by 2001:db8): 2001:db8::100:0:0/96 my assigned IPv6 range 2001:db8::100:abc:0/112 OpenVPN IPv6 range 2001:db8::100:abc:1 tap0 server side (set as gateway on client) 2001:db8::100:abc:2 tap0 client side 2001:db8::1:2:3:4 gateway for server Home laptop (tap0: 2001:db8::100:abc:2/112 gateway 2001:db8::100:abc:1/112) | | | (running Kubuntu 10.10; OpenVPN 2.1.0-3ubuntu1) | wifi | | router | | OpenVPN INTERNET | eth0 | /tap0 VPS (eth0:2001:db8::1:2:3:4/64 gateway 2001:db8::1) (tap0: 2001:db8::100:abc:1/112) (running Debian 6; OpenVPN 2.1.3-2) The server has both native IPv4 and IPv6 connectivity, the client has only IPv4. I can ping6 to and from my server over OpenVPN, but not to other machines (for example, ipv6.google.com). Using tcpdump on both the server and client, I can see that packets are actually transferred over tap0 to eth0. The router (2001:db8::1) send a neighbor solicitation for the client (2001:db8::100:abc:2) to eth0 after it receives the ICMP6 echo-request. The server does not respond to that solicitation, which causes the ICMP6 echo-request not be routed to the destination. How can I make this IPv6 connection work?

  Read the article

• openVPN as a way to connect to a LAN by another client, different from server

  - by Einar

  Setup: one LAN handled by a router without a publicly available IP address but without any outbound connection restrictions ("target LAN"); a separate server publicly reachable from the Internet ("gateway"). I am trying to set up openVPN so that a third client can connect to the "gateway" and access the "target LAN". As the router of "target LAN" is not reachable from the Internet directly, it connects to the gateway itself via openVPN as well. The problem is how to handle routing. The LAN router has two network interfaces (for the outside network and the LAN itself). In openVPN (the server on the gateway) I set client-to-client and push "route 192.168.10.0 255.255.255.0" but I assume this would be horribly wrong (it actually messed up the routing on the LAN router until I killed openVPN). openVPN is not using bridging, is configured via tun. Other config details from the server server 10.8.0.0 255.255.255.0 client-config-dir ccd route 192.168.10.0 255.255.255.0 And the client file in ccd is iroute 192.168.10.0 255.255.255.0 What can be adjusted to ensure that a third client can connect through openVPN and access the LAN mentioned earlier?

  Read the article

• Prevent Linux from processing incoming ICMP Host unreachable packets

  - by bbc

  I have a test setup with one host on a network (10.1.0.0/16) talking via TCP to another one on another network (10.2.0.0/16) and a gateway in the middle. Sometimes, the TCP connection is lost and while scanning the trace (pcap), I looks like it's because of just one ICMP Host unreachable message sent by the gateway to 10.1.0.1 at some point. 10.1.0.1 then sends a TCP RST to 10.2.0.1. In my opinion, the gateway (pfSense) is broken or not configured correctly but anyway, for testing purposes, I'd like to block this kind of ICMP on the host (10.1.0.1) before it has an influence on my TCP connection (or does it? I'm not even sure). I've tried iptables: iptables -I INPUT -i eth0 -p icmp --icmp-type host-unreachable -j DROP but while it does a good job at preventing userpace applications like ping from receiving these ICMP messages, my TCP connection still comes to an end when the alleged "killer ICMP packet" is sent by the gateway. Am I right about how it is processed? If yes, then what can I do to achieve my goal?

  Read the article

• Use both OpenVPN & eth0 together

  - by shadyabhi

  I connect to a VPN using openVPN. Now, after the connection is established, all my traffic goes through tun0. My LAN gateway is 10.100.98.4... So, for apps to use my direct internet connnection I did sudo route add default gw 10.100.98.4 But, I cant use tun0 now. I know this because curl --interface tun0 google.com doesnt give me anything.. How do I go about using both connections simultaneously. How can I achieve that? ROUTING TABLES:- Without VPN running:- Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref Use Iface 10.100.98.0 * 255.255.255.0 U 1 0 0 eth0 default 10.100.98.4 0.0.0.0 UG 0 0 0 eth0 With VPN:- Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref Use Iface 10.10.0.1 10.10.54.230 255.255.255.255 UGH 0 0 0 tun0 10.10.54.230 * 255.255.255.255 UH 0 0 0 tun0 free-vpn.torvpn 10.100.98.4 255.255.255.255 UGH 0 0 0 eth0 10.100.98.0 * 255.255.255.0 U 1 0 0 eth0 default 10.10.54.230 0.0.0.0 UG 0 0 0 tun0 After the route command- Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref Use Iface 10.10.0.1 10.10.54.230 255.255.255.255 UGH 0 0 0 tun0 10.10.54.230 * 255.255.255.255 UH 0 0 0 tun0 free-vpn.torvpn 10.100.98.4 255.255.255.255 UGH 0 0 0 eth0 10.100.98.0 * 255.255.255.0 U 1 0 0 eth0 default 10.100.98.4 0.0.0.0 UG 0 0 0 eth0 default 10.10.54.230 0.0.0.0 UG 0 0 0 tun0

  Read the article

• Ubuntu 12.04 as router with 2 nic

  - by Blue Gene

  I have been trying this setup for weeks and still can not make this to work... ubuntu 12.04 64 bit with 2 nic nic1: eth0:192.168.2.33 -static ip with internet access (connected to modem) nic2: eth1:192.168.1.2 -static ip connected to LAN. enabled ip_forward on ubuntu box net_ip_forward = 1 on the LAN with ip address 192.168.1.5 specified gateway as 192.168.1.2 and able to ping gateway.But can not ping public address.What am i missing? on router box: route -n Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref Use Iface 0.0.0.0 192.168.2.1 0.0.0.0 UG 100 0 0 eth0 192.168.1.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth1 192.168.2.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth0 tried ip route add 192.168.2.0/24 via 192.168.1.2 dev eth0 route -n on LAN 192.168.1.5 Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref Use Iface 0.0.0.0 192.168.1.2 0.0.0.0 UG 100 0 0 eth0 192.168.1.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth0 192.168.2.0 192.168.1.2 255.255.255.0 UG 0 0 0 eth0 iptables default policy is to accept all. tracepath 8.8.8.8 from LAN 1: 192.168.1.5 0.060ms pmtu 1500 1: 192.168.1.2 3.367ms 1: 192.168.1.2 3.764ms 2: no reply Is there a way to make this work,other than NAT ing.

  Read the article

• Long running php script hangs/terminates on IIS 7.5

  - by Rich

  I'm a bit of nube when it comes to configuring IIS 7.5 and Php so apologies if this is a silly question but I've been wrestling with this for over half the day and need some fresh input. I have a php application running on IIS 7.5 , php 5.4 running as fastcgi. The application works absolutley fine with the exception that long running php scripts seem to hang; no 500 error they simply seem never complete and return the results to the browser. I've written a simple test script below to eliminate the possibility of programming error in the main app : <?php /* test timeout */ /*set_time_limit(110);*/ echo "Testing time out in seconds\n"; for ($i = 0; $i < 175; $i++) { echo $i." -- "; if(sleep(1)!=0) { echo "sleep failed script terminating"; break; } } ?> If I run the script beyond 175 seconds it hangs. Below that it will return the results to the browser. Here are the time out parameters that I've set for php and fastcgi. I've also played around setting these really low in order to get various time out errors and have succeeded which brings me to the conclusion that there's another setting that I'm missing .. perhaps. fastcgi activity timeout=800 Idle Timeout = 900 request Timeout 800 Php max_execution_time=700 Any solutions or pointers in the right direction would be very ... very welcome. Thanks

  Read the article

• Route outbound connections from local network through VPN

  - by Sharkos

  I have a server A running OpenVPN, an OpenVPN client B (a rooted Android phone as it happens) and a third party C (a laptop, tablet etc.) tethered to B. B can use the VPN to access the internet via A; C can use the tethered connection WITHOUT the VPN to access the internet via B. However, with the VPN on B active, I cannot load information from the internet on C. A appears to log similar traffic inbound and outbound when B or C attempt to load a webpage, say, but the VPN on device B reports no inbound traffic when the connection originated from C. Where should I look for packets being dropped, and what ip rules should I use to make sure they are passed back through the VPN and into the local network B <- C? (I'll obviously post whatever further information is needed.) Further info Without VPN: root@android:/ # ip route default via [B's External Gateway] dev rmnet0 [B's External Subnet] dev rmnet0 proto kernel scope link src [B's External IP] [B's External Gateway] dev rmnet0 scope link 192.168.43.0/24 dev wlan0 proto kernel scope link src 192.168.43.1 With VPN: root@android:/ # ip route 0.0.0.0/1 dev tun0 scope link default via [B's External Gateway] dev rmnet0 [B's External Subnet] dev rmnet0 proto kernel scope link src [B's External IP] [B's External Gateway] dev rmnet0 scope link [External address of A] dev tun0 scope link 128.0.0.0/1 dev tun0 scope link 172.16.0.0/24 dev tun0 scope link 172.16.0.8/30 dev tun0 proto kernel scope link src 172.16.0.10 192.168.43.0/24 dev wlan0 proto kernel scope link src 192.168.43.1 192.168.168.0/24 dev tun0 scope link

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60  | Next Page >