Search Results

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

Page 55/67 | < Previous Page | 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62  | Next Page >

• Something very strange with network

  - by Rodnower

  Hello, I have Windows 7 and I have very strange thing with my network. Some time I was connected through wireless router and my IP was 192.168.2.103, router's IP was 192.168.2.1 and some other IP was 192.168.2.100. The last I get from page "active DHCP clients" of web interface of the router and from "wireless clients" I may to see that 192.168.2.100 not (!) belong to my MAC address. Router build by EDimax. So after that I disabled wireless function of the router and restarted it. In this time I had not ping to 192.168.2.1. Also I had not any other connection, not wireless nor cable, but (!) I still had ping to 192.168.2.100 and I not understand what this voodoo is... C:\Users\Andrey>ping 192.168.2.100 Pinging 192.168.2.100 with 32 bytes of data: Reply from 192.168.2.100: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=128 Reply from 192.168.2.100: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=128 Reply from 192.168.2.100: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=128 Reply from 192.168.2.100: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=128 Ping statistics for 192.168.2.100: Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss), Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds: Minimum = 0ms, Maximum = 0ms, Average = 0ms This is what I had: C:\Users\Andrey>ipconfig /all Windows IP Configuration Host Name . . . . . . . . . . . . : Andrey-PC Primary Dns Suffix . . . . . . . : Node Type . . . . . . . . . . . . : Hybrid IP Routing Enabled. . . . . . . . : No WINS Proxy Enabled. . . . . . . . : No Wireless LAN adapter Wireless Network Connection 3: Media State . . . . . . . . . . . : Media disconnected Connection-specific DNS Suffix . : Description . . . . . . . . . . . : Microsoft Virtual WiFi Miniport Adapter #2 Physical Address. . . . . . . . . : 06-1D-7D-40-61-EB DHCP Enabled. . . . . . . . . . . : Yes Autoconfiguration Enabled . . . . : Yes Wireless LAN adapter Wireless Network Connection: Media State . . . . . . . . . . . : Media disconnected Connection-specific DNS Suffix . : Description . . . . . . . . . . . : Gigabyte GN-WS50G (mini) PCI-E WLAN Card Physical Address. . . . . . . . . : 00-1D-7D-40-61-EB DHCP Enabled. . . . . . . . . . . : Yes Autoconfiguration Enabled . . . . : Yes Ethernet adapter Local Area Connection: Media State . . . . . . . . . . . : Media disconnected Connection-specific DNS Suffix . : Description . . . . . . . . . . . : Marvell Yukon 88E8055 PCI-E Gigabit Ethernet Controller Physical Address. . . . . . . . . : 00-1B-24-B6-09-91 DHCP Enabled. . . . . . . . . . . : Yes Autoconfiguration Enabled . . . . : Yes C:\Users\Andrey>arp -a -v Interface: 127.0.0.1 --- 0x1 Internet Address Physical Address Type 224.0.0.22 static 239.255.255.250 static Interface: 0.0.0.0 --- 0xffffffff Internet Address Physical Address Type 192.168.2.1 00-0e-2e-d2-8c-af invalid 192.168.2.255 ff-ff-ff-ff-ff-ff static 224.0.0.22 01-00-5e-00-00-16 static 224.0.0.252 01-00-5e-00-00-fc static 239.255.255.250 01-00-5e-7f-ff-fa static 255.255.255.255 ff-ff-ff-ff-ff-ff static Interface: 0.0.0.0 --- 0xffffffff Internet Address Physical Address Type 192.168.2.1 00-0e-2e-ff-f1-f6 dynamic 192.168.2.101 00-27-19-bc-8b-9c dynamic 192.168.2.102 00-16-e6-6c-ae-d4 dynamic 192.168.2.255 ff-ff-ff-ff-ff-ff static 224.0.0.22 01-00-5e-00-00-16 static 224.0.0.252 01-00-5e-00-00-fc static 239.255.255.250 01-00-5e-7f-ff-fa static 255.255.255.255 ff-ff-ff-ff-ff-ff static Interface: 0.0.0.0 --- 0xffffffff Internet Address Physical Address Type 224.0.0.22 01-00-5e-00-00-16 static 255.255.255.255 ff-ff-ff-ff-ff-ff static C:\Users\Andrey>route print =========================================================================== Interface List 14...06 1d 7d 40 61 eb ......Microsoft Virtual WiFi Miniport Adapter #2 13...00 1d 7d 40 61 eb ......Gigabyte GN-WS50G (mini) PCI-E WLAN Card 11...00 1b 24 b6 09 91 ......Marvell Yukon 88E8055 PCI-E Gigabit Ethernet Controller 1...........................Software Loopback Interface 1 =========================================================================== IPv4 Route Table =========================================================================== Active Routes: Network Destination Netmask Gateway Interface Metric 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 127.0.0.1 306 224.0.0.0 240.0.0.0 On-link 127.0.0.1 306 255.255.255.255 255.255.255.255 On-link 127.0.0.1 306 =========================================================================== Persistent Routes: None IPv6 Route Table =========================================================================== Active Routes: If Metric Network Destination Gateway 1 306 ::1/128 On-link 1 306 ff00::/8 On-link =========================================================================== Persistent Routes: None Only after reboot I lost ping to there: C:\Users\Andrey>ping 192.168.2.100 Pinging 192.168.2.100 with 32 bytes of data: PING: transmit failed. General failure. PING: transmit failed. General failure. PING: transmit failed. General failure. PING: transmit failed. General failure. Ping statistics for 192.168.2.100: Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 0, Lost = 4 (100% loss), So what this mysterious cache is? Thank you for ahead.

  Read the article

• What could cause a huge packet loss in Ubuntu 9.10, for both wired and wireless?

  - by xzenox

  I was previously using 9.04 fine (and in fact, I am posting this from my old 9.04 live cd). I tested the following install steps in a virtualbox vm prior to following the sames ones to upgrade my laptop: Download/burn ubuntu minimal cd (12mb one) Install ubuntu minimal sudo apt-get update sudo apt-get upgrade sudo apt-get ubuntu-desktop ubuntu-standard In the VM worked fine and I found myself with a working 9.10 ubuntu, network worked fine and I was able to test my backups and DropBox without a hitch (host was 9.04). When I followed the same steps on my laptop, everything worked up to after 9.10 being installed and working. As far as I can tell, everything besides eth0/wireless works. For some reason, I am unable to access the internet. Ping reports that over 99% of packets get lost (over an hour or so of pinging). This means for example that if I try hard enough, I can load a webpage but only at the cost of much patience... This happens both for a wired and wireless connection to my wrt310n (updated with latest firmware). At first I thought that it could be related to the ipv6 issues ppl have been experiencing however even after disabling ipv6 at the kernel level (through grub), I still get the issue. I do not think this is related to DNS issues or the likes since even when I ping my ISP's gateway IP, I have the same amount of packet loss. No DNS resolving should be required there. Access to my router works peachy with no packet loss there. I've tried different MTU values but to no avail. Note that this issue affects every web-enabled application: firefox, ping, synaptic, etc. The same hardware/router combo works with 9.04 but not with 9.10. In fact, when I did: sudo apt-get ubuntu-desktop ubuntu-standard after 9.10 minimal was installed, it downloaded over 400mb of packages without a hitch so my guess is that one of those packages either in ubuntu-desktop or ubuntu-standard is causing havok. Thoughts?

  Read the article

• Linux (DUP!) ping packages

  - by Darkmage

  i cant seem t figure out what is going on here. The Linux machine I am using is running as a VM on a Win7 machine using Virtual Box running as a service. If i ping the win7 Host i get ok result. root@Virtual-Box:/home/glennwiz# ping -c 100000 -s 10 -i 0.02 192.168.1.100 PING 192.168.1.100 (192.168.1.100) 10(38) bytes of data. 18 bytes from 192.168.1.100: icmp_seq=1 ttl=128 time=1.78 ms 18 bytes from 192.168.1.100: icmp_seq=2 ttl=128 time=1.68 ms if i ping localhost im ok root@Virtual-Box:/home/glennwiz# ping -c 100000 -s 10 -i 0.02 localhost PING localhost (127.0.0.1) 10(38) bytes of data. 18 bytes from localhost (127.0.0.1): icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=0.255 ms 18 bytes from localhost (127.0.0.1): icmp_seq=2 ttl=64 time=0.221 ms but if i ping gateway i get DUP packets root@Virtual-Box:/home/glennwiz# ping -c 100000 -s 10 -i 0.02 192.168.1.1 PING 192.168.1.1 (192.168.1.1) 10(38) bytes of data. 18 bytes from 192.168.1.1: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=1.27 ms 18 bytes from 192.168.1.1: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=1.46 ms (DUP!) 18 bytes from 192.168.1.1: icmp_seq=2 ttl=64 time=22.1 ms 18 bytes from 192.168.1.1: icmp_seq=2 ttl=64 time=22.4 ms (DUP!) if i ping other machine on same LAN i stil get dups. pinging remote hosts also gives (DUP!) result root@Virtual-Box:/home/glennwiz# ping -c 100000 -s 10 -i 0.02 www.vg.no PING www.vg.no (195.88.55.16) 10(38) bytes of data. 18 bytes from www.vg.no (195.88.55.16): icmp_seq=1 ttl=245 time=10.0 ms 18 bytes from www.vg.no (195.88.55.16): icmp_seq=1 ttl=245 time=10.3 ms (DUP!) 18 bytes from www.vg.no (195.88.55.16): icmp_seq=2 ttl=245 time=10.3 ms 18 bytes from www.vg.no (195.88.55.16): icmp_seq=2 ttl=245 time=10.6 ms (DUP!)

  Read the article

• VPN with client-to-client direct connectivity?

  - by Johannes Ernst

  When setting up a VPN, clients (say client1 and client2) usually authenticate to a server, and together the three constitute the VPN. When client1 wishes to send a packet to client2, this packet usually gets routed by way of server. Are there products / configuration blueprints for products where it is possible to send packets directly from client1 to client2 without going though server? (if the underlying network topology permits it, e.g. no firewalls in the way) If not, is there a way by which client1 can send a packet to client2 by way of server, without the server being able to snoop on the content of the packet? (E.g. because the packet is encrypted with the public key of client2) I just asked in the OpenVPN forum, and the answer I got was "not with OpenVPN". So my question is: are there other products with which this is possible? Open-source preferred ... One use case: client1 and client2, typically in separate offices, find themselves both at headquarters. Do they still need to talk to each other via the public internet? Links appreciated. Thank you.

  Read the article

• Debian/OVH: How to configure multiple Failover IP on the same Xen (Debian) Virtual Machine?

  - by D.S.

  I have a problem on a Xen virtual machine (running latest Debian), when I try to configure a second failover IP address. OVH reports that my IP is misconfigured and they complaint they receive a massive quantity of ARP packets from this IPs, so they are going to block my IP unless I fix this issue. I suspect there's a routing issue, but I don't know (and can't find any useful info on the provider's website, and their support doesn't provide me a valid solution, just bounce me to their online - useless - guides). My /etc/network/interfaces look like this: # The loopback network interface auto lo iface lo inet loopback # The primary network interface auto eth0 iface eth0 inet static address AAA.AAA.AAA.AAA netmask 255.255.255.255 broadcast AAA.AAA.AAA.AAA post-up route add 000.000.000.254 dev eth0 post-up route add default default gw 000.000.000.254 dev eth0 # Secondary NIC auto eth0:0 iface eth0:0 inet static address BBB.BBB.BBB.BBB netmask 255.255.255.255 broadcast BBB.BBB.BBB.BBB And the routing table is: Kernel IP routing table Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref Use Iface 000.000.000.254 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.255 UH 0 0 0 eth0 0.0.0.0 000.000.000.254 0.0.0.0 UG 0 0 0 eth0 In these examples (true IP addresses are replaced by fake ones, guess why :)), 000.000.000.000 is my main server's IP address (dom0), 000.000.000.254 is the default gateway OVH recommends, AAA.AAA.AAA.AAA is the first IP Failover and BBB.BBB.BBB.BBB is the second one. I need both AAA.AAA.AAA.AAA and BBB.BBB.BBB.BBB to be publicly reachable from Internet and point to my domU, and to be able to access Internet from inside the virtual machine (domU). I am using eth0 and eth0:0 because due to OVH support, I have to assign both IPs to the same MAC address and then create a virtual eth0:0 interface for the second IP. Any suggestion? What am I doing wrong? How can I stop OVH complaining about ARP flood? Many thanks in advance, DS

  Read the article

• OpenVPN: ifup tap0 drops all connections

  - by raspi

  I'm trying to create star shaped "virtual" LAN with OpenVPN which is not connected to physical network. ie. tap0 packets should not go to eth0. Packet should only go through OpenVPN to connected clients. This setup works with my OpenVPN testing machine which runs Virtual Box but not on my actual server which is running on top of Xen. Both servers are running Ubuntu Intrepid. /etc/network/interfaces: iface tap0 inet manual address 10.10.10.1 netmask 255.255.255.0 gateway 10.10.10.1 /etc/openvpn/server.conf mode server tls-server port 1194 proto udp dev tap client-to-client ca /etc/openvpn/easy-rsa/keys/ca.crt cert /etc/openvpn/easy-rsa/keys/servername.crt key /etc/openvpn/easy-rsa/keys/servername.key dh /etc/openvpn/easy-rsa/keys/dh384.pem ifconfig-pool-persist ipp.txt server-bridge 10.10.10.1 255.255.255.0 10.10.10.128 10.10.10.250 push .route 10.10.10.1 255.255.255.0 keepalive 5 60 comp-lzo persist-key persist-tun status /var/log/openvpn-status.log log-append /var/log/openvpn.log verb 3 user nobody group nogroup ifup tap0 on Virtual Box: everything ok, SSH keeps running. But on Xen SSH connection drops and I have to reboot whole machine. What I'm missing?

  Read the article

• Network Explorer Intermittently Fails to Display all Computers in Work Group

  - by graf_ignotiev

  I run a small computer lab of 10 computers and occasionally, when using the network explorer (a.k.a Network Browser) some or all of the remote computers will fail to appear. If I try to access a remote computer by its name I get an unspecified error (code 0x80004005), but I am still able to access it with the computer's IP address. The strangest part is that the problem will inexplicably go away after waiting awhile. Each computer is running Windows 7 x64 Enterprise and has identical hardware, software and configuration. They are all on the same subnet and in the same workgroup. I've spent days researching the problem and have tried the following solutions: Updated the BIOS, chipset and network adapter drivers Changed Power Settings in Network Adapter Properties so that the computer will not turn it off Disabled the Computer Browser service Changed the DHCP node type to broadcast Reviewed the Event Viewer logs Steps 3 and 4 have seemed to help the problem a little bit, but not completely. I'm beginning to suspect that the problem might lie with our router which is a ZyXEL ZyWALL 2WG, as the packets sent by Network Discovery may not be returning in time, but I wanted to get some perspective in the issue before I went any further.

  Read the article

• Why my 2nd ip from traceroute is not answering the ping anymore?

  - by Pedro77

  My Internet is really laggy today, I did a tracerout and I realize that I'm having no answer from an ip at the beginning of the traceroute. see: Tracing route to 12.129.202.154 over a maximum of 30 hops 1 <1 ms <1 ms <1 ms 192.168.0.1 2 * * * Request timed out. 3 8 ms 8 ms 8 ms bd044008.virtua.com.br [189.4.64.8] 4 9 ms 8 ms 8 ms bd044009.virtua.com.br [189.4.64.9] 5 26 ms 26 ms 24 ms embratel-T0-1-5-0-tacc01.cas.embratel.net.br [200.174.243.21] 6 360 ms 15 ms 12 ms ebt-T0-15-0-12-tcore01.ctamc.embratel.net.br [200.244.140.218] 7 330 ms 349 ms 261 ms ebt-Bundle-POS11942-intl04.mianap.embratel.net.br [200.230.220.10] 8 139 ms 141 ms 139 ms sl-st30-mia-.sprintlink.net [144.223.64.221] Connection diagram: PC - Router configured as access point - Router (192.168.0.1) - Cable modem (192.168.100.1). Well, I think it is odd that the 2nd ip is not returning the ping. I looked some old tracerout logs to see what was the 2nd ip. The ip was: 10.19.0.1 So, what this 2nd ip stand for? How can I find why it is not answering the ping? I don't understand it, if does not answer the ping, how can the packets continue (yeah newbie question)? edit: well, because the hope 3 have a ping of 8 ms the hop 2 request time out should really not be a problem. But it is still odd that the 2nd hop stopped to answer ping request. So my doubts are: 1. Were the ip 10.19.0.1 is from? 2. Why it stopped to answer ping requests? 3. How can hop 7 be smaller than 6 and 8 smaller than 7 and 6!?? Shouldn't the pings be higher for each hop? Like: hop 3 time should be the sum of the hops before it plus its own time (hop 3 = 1+2+3) ??

  Read the article

• Why am I seeing MailSlot Browse messages on unrouted ports of my Linux box?

  - by nmichaels

  I have a Linux box (Debian squeeze) with several NICs. The ones of interest are: eth3 - my main link to the network (dhcp on 10.20.30.0/24) eth0 - the first connection to my test network (static: 192.168.1.2) eth4 - the second connection to my test network (static: 192.168.1.1) My routing table looks like this: $ sudo route Kernel IP routing table Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref Use Iface 10.20.30.0 * 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth3 default 10.20.30.254 0.0.0.0 UG 0 0 0 eth3 I have the 2 test net ports connected to each other with a crossover cable and an instance of wireshark running on each port. Every once in a while, I'll see a packet like the following show up. Who could be doing this, and how do I convince them to stop? I do have Samba running on the machine (for a cifs mount) but don't see why it would be sending packets out to unrouted ports. I had a Windows VM running in VMWare Client and thought that might be causing it, but it still happens without it. What I want is totally silent interfaces so I can run some tests with Scapy over them.

  Read the article

• Possible to IPSec VPN Tunnel Public IP Addresses?

  - by caleban

  A customer uses an IBM SAS product over the internet. Traffic flows from the IBM hosting data center to the customer network through Juniper VPN appliances. IBM says they're not tunneling private IP addresses. IBM says they're tunneling public IP addresses. Is this possible? What does this look like in the VPN configuration and in the packets? I'd like to know what the source/destination ip/ports would look like in the encrypted tunneled IPSec Payload and in the IP packet carrying the IPSec Payload. IPSec Payload: source:1.1.1.101:1001 destination:2.2.2.101:2001 IP Packet: source:1.1.1.1:101 destination:2.2.2.1:201 Is it possible to send public IP addresses through an IPSec VPN tunnel? Is it possible for IBM to send a print job from a server on their network using the static-nat public address over a VPN to a printer at a customer network using the printer's static-nat public address? Or can a VPN not do this? Can a VPN only work with interesting traffic from and to private IP addresses?

  Read the article

• tcp connect hangs on SYN_SENT if something listens, gets CONN_REFUSED if nothing listens

  - by Amos Shapira

  I'm hitting a very strange problem - when I try to connect to one of our servers the client hangs with SYN_SENT if something listens on the port (e.g. Apache on port 80, sshd on port 22 or SMTP on port 25) but if I try to connect to a port on which nothing listens then I immediately get a "CONNECTION refused" error. Connecting to other applications (e.g. rsyncd on some arbitrary port) succeeds. I ran tcpdump on the server and see that the SYN packets arrive to it but it only sends a response if nothing listens on that port. e.g.: on the server I run: # tcpdump -nn port 81 06:49:34.641080 IP 10.x.y.z.49829 server.81: S 3966400723:3966400723(0) win 12320 06:49:34.641118 IP server.81 x.y.z.49829: R 0:0(0) ack 3966400724 win 0 But if I listen on this port, e.g. with nc -4lvvv 81 & Then the output of tcpdump is: 06:44:31.063614 IP x.y.z.45954 server.81: S 3493682313:3493682313(0) win 12320 (and repeats until I stop it) The server is CentOS 5, the client is Ubuntu 11.04, the connection is done between two LAN's over per-user TCP OpenVPN. Connection to other servers on that network do not have a problem. Connecting from the other servers on the same network to that server works fine. Connections from other clients in our office over openvpn is also not a problem. What am I missing? Thanks.

  Read the article

• Firefox is very slow when establish SSL sessions

  - by yanglei

  Using wireshark, I discovered that Firefox v3.0 gets stuck every time before "client key exchange, change cipher spec" stage when establishing a SSL session. Specifically, it takes 0.8~1.8 second before Firefox send "Client Key Exchange" request. This is unacceptable since our application is HTTPS only. I tested this on IE6 and IE8, both works well. Any clues? [Update] Finally, I found the reason of 1 ~ 2 seconds stuck by displaying all captured packets in Wireshark. After the "server hello" stage, Firefox makes a request to ocsp.verisign.com combined with an additional DNS lookup for that domain. Firefox must wait the revocation status from OCSP before entering the next stage of SSL. Depends on whether DNS cache is in effect, this process takes 1 ~ 2 seconds. A interesting observation is that the IP packet contains "client key exchange" has a high possibility to get lost and thus a TCP retransmission is necessary. When this happens, the process can take 3 seconds at worst. I'm not sure if this is a coincidence or a bug. Anyway, here is the result from Wireshark: (delta-time) 0.369296 src-ip dst-ip TCP [ACK] Seq=161 Ack=2741 Win=65340 Len=0 2.538835 src-ip dst-ip TLSv1 Client Key Exchange, Change Cipher Spec, Finished 2.987034 src-ip dst-ip TLSv1 [TCP Retransmission] Client Key Exchange, Change Cipher Spec, Finished The difference between Firefox and IE is this: Firefox 3 enables OCSP checking by default where as IE only supports it. So, there is no problem with both IE6 and IE8. This is indeed a "certificate revoke" problem. Thanks

  Read the article

• What are the attack vectors for passwords sent over http?

  - by KevinM

  I am trying to convince a customer to pay for SSL for a web site that requires login. I want to make sure I correctly understand the major scenarios in which someone can see the passwords that are being sent. My understanding is that at any of the hops along the way can use a packet analyzer to view what is being sent. This seems to require that any hacker (or their malware/botnet) be on the same subnet as any of the hops the packet takes to arrive at its destination. Is that right? Assuming some flavor of this subnet requirement holds true, do I need to worry about all the hops or just the first one? The first one I can obviously worry about if they're on a public Wifi network since anyone could be listening in. Should I be worried about what's going on in subnets that packets will travel across outside this? I don't know a ton about network traffic, but I would assume it's flowing through data centers of major carriers and there's not a lot of juicy attack vectors there, but please correct me if I am wrong. Are there other vectors to be worried about outside of someone listening with a packet analyzer? I am a networking and security noob, so please feel free to set me straight if I am using the wrong terminology in any of this.

  Read the article

• Configure Cisco Pix 515 with DMZ and no NAT

  - by Rickard

  I hope that someone could shed some light over my situation, as I am fairly new to PIX configurations. I will be getting a new net for my department, which I am going to configure. At my hands, I have a Cisco PIX 515 (not E), a Cisco 2948 switch (and if needed, I can bring up a 2621XM router, but this is my private and not owned by my dept.). The network I will be getting is the following: 10.12.33.0/26 Link net between the ISP routers and my network will be 10.12.32.0/29 where GW is .1 and HSRP roututers are .2 and .3 The ISP has asked me not to NAT the addresses on my side, as they will set it up to give 10.12.33.2 as a one-to-one nat to a public IP. The rest of the IP's will be a many-to-one NAT to another public IP. 10.12.33.2 is supposed to be my server placed on the DMZ, the rest of the IP's will be used for my clients and the AD server (which is currently also acting as a DHCP server in the old network config with another ISP). Now, the question is, how would I best configure this? I mean, am I thinking wrong here, I am expected to put the PIX first from the ISP outlet, then to the switch which will connect my clients. But with the ISP routers being on a different network, how will the firewall forward the packets to the other network, it's a firewall, not a router. I have actually never configured a pix before, and fortunately, this is more like a lab network, not a production network, so if something goes wrong it's not the end of the world, if though annoying. I am not asking for a full configuration from anyone, just some directions, or possibly some links which will give me some hints. Thank you very much!

  Read the article

• IPSec for LAN traffic: Basic considerations?

  - by chris_l

  This is a follow-up to my Encrypting absolutely everything... question. Important: This is not about the more usual IPSec setup, where you want to encrypt traffic between two LANs. My basic goal is to encrypt all traffic within a small company's LAN. One solution could be IPSec. I have just started to learn about IPSec, and before I decide on using it and dive in more deeply, I'd like to get an overview of how this could look like. Is there good cross-platform support? It must work on Linux, MacOS X and Windows clients, Linux servers, and it shouldn't require expensive network hardware. Can I enable IPSec for an entire machine (so there can be no other traffic incoming/outgoing), or for a network interface, or is it determined by firewall settings for individual ports/...? Can I easily ban non-IPSec IP packets? And also "Mallory's evil" IPSec traffic that is signed by some key, but not ours? My ideal conception is to make it impossible to have any such IP traffic on the LAN. For LAN-internal traffic: I would choose "ESP with authentication (no AH)", AES-256, in "Transport mode". Is this a reasonable decision? For LAN-Internet traffic: How would it work with the internet gateway? Would I use "Tunnel mode" to create an IPSec tunnel from each machine to the gateway? Or could I also use "Transport mode" to the gateway? The reason I ask is, that the gateway would have to be able to decrypt packages coming from the LAN, so it will need the keys to do that. Is that possible, if the destination address isn't the gateway's address? Or would I have to use a proxy in this case? Is there anything else I should consider? I really just need a quick overview of these things, not very detailed instructions.

  Read the article

• Windows XP can use a wired network port, but MacBook (OS X) fails on the same port

  - by Dean Hill

  I wired the Cat5 in my house seven years ago. The wired ports have worked fine with both my Windows XP laptop and MacBook. My wireless network also works fine, but I like to use wired occasionally. One of the Cat5 runs wasn't terminated with a jack, so I recently terminated this wire with a port/jack on the wall end and a standard Cat5 plug on the end that plugs into my router. This is the same setup as my other runs. Unfortunately, the MacBook isn't working well with the new wired port. The OS X Network System Preferences show the IP, Subnet, Router, etc., and everything looks fine. A "netstat -ibd" shows no errors or dropped packets. However, when I open a page in Safari, the status says "Contacting 'www.google.com'" and appears to hang. If I wait for a couple minutes, part of the Google page starts to display, but it is still not the full page load. When I use a Windows XP laptop on the same wired port, everything works fine. An internet speed test shows good results and all web pages load fine. A "netstat -e" under Windows shows no errors. I've used a Cat5 tester, and the cable tests fine (wires 1-8 light up in sequence). I've replaced both the port/jack and the connector twice to make sure I wired things correctly. I'd really like this Cat5 to work with the MacBook (and I'm trying to avoid running a new length of cable). Any ideas what the problem could be?

  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

• Multiple Set Peer for VPN Failover

  - by Kyle Brandt

  I will have two Cisco routers at Location A serving the same internal networks, and one router in location B. Currently, I have one router in each location with a IPSec site-to-site tunnel connecting them. It looks something like: Location A: crypto map crypto-map-1 1 ipsec-isakmp description Tunnel to Location B set peer 12.12.12.12 set transform-set ESP-3DES-SHA match address internal-ips Location B: crypto map crypto-map-1 1 ipsec-isakmp description Tunnel to Location A set peer 11.11.11.11 set transform-set ESP-3DES-SHA match address internal-ips Can I achieve fail over by simply adding another set peer at location B?: Location A (New secondary Router, configuration on previous router stays the same): crypto map crypto-map-1 1 ipsec-isakmp description Tunnel to Location B set peer 12.12.12.12 set transform-set ESP-3DES-SHA match address internal-ips Location B (Configuration Changed): crypto map crypto-map-1 1 ipsec-isakmp description Tunnel to Location A set peer 11.11.11.11 ! 11.11.11.100 is the ip of the new second router at location A set peer 11.11.11.100 set transform-set ESP-3DES-SHA match address internal-ips Cisco Says: For crypto map entries created with the crypto map map-name seq-num ipsec-isakmp command, you can specify multiple peers by repeating this command. The peer that packets are actually sent to is determined by the last peer that the router heard from (received either traffic or a negotiation request from) for a given data flow. If the attempt fails with the first peer, Internet Key Exchange (IKE) tries the next peer on the crypto map list. But I don't fully understand that in the context of a failover scenerio (One of the routers as Location A blowing up).

  Read the article

• PFSense VPN Routing

  - by SvrGuy

  We use PFSense firewalls at three installations with the following LAN networks: 1.) Datacenter #1: 10.0.0.0/16 2.) Datacenter #2: 10.1.0.0/16 3.) HQ: 10.2.0.0/16 All of these locations are linked via an IPSEC tunnel that works properly. Hosts in any of the above networks can communicate with hosts in any other of the above networks. Now, for our laptops etc. we established a road warrior network 10.3.0.0/16 and have implemented OpenVPN to link the laptops etc. to Datacenter #1. This works great too, so our laptops can connect and communicate with any host in Datacenter #1 (anything on 10.0.0.0/16) The problem is the laptops can't communicate with any hosts that Datacenter #1 can reach by its IPSEC tunnel to Datacenter #2 (and/or the HQ for that matter). Does anyone know what to do configuration wise on the PFSense box in Datacenter #1 to configure to route packets received on the OpenVPN tunnel to Datacenter #2 over the IPSEC tunnel? It could be a setting on the OpenVPN or some sort of static route or some such. Any ideas?

  Read the article

• Iptables Forwarding problem

  - by ankit

  Hi all, I had initally asked question about sertting up my linux box for natting for my home network and was given suggestions in the thread here. Did not want to clutter the old question so starting a new one here. based on the earlier suggestions, i have come up with the following rules ... :PREROUTING ACCEPT [1:48] :OUTPUT ACCEPT [12:860] :POSTROUTING ACCEPT [3:228] -A POSTROUTING -o eth0 -j MASQUERADE COMMIT *filter :INPUT DROP [3:228] :FORWARD DROP [0:0] :OUTPUT DROP [0:0] -A INPUT -i lo -j ACCEPT -A INPUT -i eth0 -p icmp -j ACCEPT -A INPUT -i eth0 -p tcp -m tcp --dport 80 -j ACCEPT -A INPUT -i eth0 -p tcp -m tcp --dport 443 -j ACCEPT -A INPUT -i eth0 -p tcp -m tcp --dport 22 -j ACCEPT -A FORWARD -i eth1 -p icmp -j ACCEPT -A FORWARD -i eth1 -p tcp -m tcp --dport 80 -j ACCEPT -A FORWARD -i eth1 -p tcp -m tcp --dport 443 -j ACCEPT -A OUTPUT -p icmp -j ACCEPT -A OUTPUT -j ACCEPT COMMIT If you notice, i do have the proper MASQURADING rule and the proper FORWARD filter rule as well. However i am facing 2 problems On the linux box itself DNS resolving is not working the lan clients connected to the linux box, are still not able to get to internet. when i ping something from them, i see the DROP count in iptables INPUT rule increasing. now my question is, when i am pinging something from the lan client, how come it is being matched by the input chain ?! should it be in the forward chain ? Chain INPUT (policy DROP 20 packets, 2314 bytes) pkts bytes target prot opt in out source destination 99 9891 ACCEPT all -- lo any anywhere anywhere 0 0 ACCEPT icmp -- eth0 any anywhere anywhere 0 0 ACCEPT tcp -- eth0 any anywhere anywhere tcp dpt:http 0 0 ACCEPT tcp -- eth0 any anywhere anywhere tcp dpt:https 122 9092 ACCEPT tcp -- eth0 any anywhere anywhere tcp dpt:ssh Thanks ankit

  Read the article

• Balancing internal services using a Cisco CSS 11501

  - by Ladadadada

  First, the background to the problem: I have a Cisco CSS11501 that I am using to load balance a few web servers. These web servers have two network interfaces, one internal and one external and we are sending the requests to the internal interface. We have the CSS configured to do NAT because our webservers need to see the client's IP address. Because the TCP packets hit the webservers with a source address on the Internet, the webserver tries to send the packet back to the client over the external interface and not through the load balancer. In order to stop these requests being sent back out to the Internet via the external interface, we added a routing rule on these boxes so that all traffic with a source address on the internet will use the load balancer as the gateway. This part works fine. What I would also like to to is use the CSS as a load balancer for internal services such as our MySQL slaves. When I do this, I run into a similar problem; the TCP connection goes from the web server to the load balancer and then from the load balancer to the MySQL slave but the CSS spoofs a source address of the original webserver. The MySQL slave then tries to send the response directly to the webserver via the internal network and not via the load balancer. The ideal solution would be to tell the CSS not to do source address spoofing on the internal network and only do it for requests originating on the Internet. Is this possible ? Failing that, is there a way of directing the load balanced traffic back through the load balancer while keeping the other traffic (say SSH) purely on the internal network ? Is there another way of using the CSS11501 to load balance internal services ?

  Read the article

• Why do I often have to refresh pages I navigate to once for them (or content in them) to load?

  - by GetOutOfBox

  I have noticed a bizarre pattern when using my PC, that when I open a link to a website, it often will often take a very long time to load, or time out. Sometimes content on the website will be drawn, but again, it seems to get "stuck" for an unusual amount of time before finishing. Most affected is Youtube; almost every time I navigate to a youtube video from another website such as Google, the video will not begin playing, but will instead just display the player controls with a black screen where the video should be and the buffering symbol, usually before displaying an error such as "The video failed to load". The unusual part of this problem is that whenever this happens, refreshing the page always causes it to load almost immediately the second time around, without any problems. Note that I'm not talking about how some browsers will dump whatever has been cached to the "pallet" briefly when the page is refreshed or loading stopped; but that the second time loading the website being faster. I have done my best to rule out some of the obvious causes: My Windows 7 desktop computer is the only device that seems to be affected. I use Firefox on it (latest version, flash updated, etc). My connection has more than enough bandwidth (30 megabits down, 4 up), and I've even tried QoSing all other devices to make sure this isn't happening due to usage spikes. Wireshark is not showing any clearly unusual network activity (i.e frequently dropped packets).

  Read the article

• How to fix massive lag on ZyXEL HomePlug AV powerline adapters?

  - by Tim Abell

  I have 3 ZyXEL Homeplug AV powerline adapters as per the one in the review below. I have two plugged in currently, one into my Be / Thompson wireless router, and one into my desktop pc (box1). every now and then the link indicator on the adapters (the mains link, not the ethernet link) goes nutty, and performance falls off a cliff (see below). http://www.gadgetspeak.com/gadget/article.rhtm/753/479266/ZyXEL_PowerLine_HomePlug_AV_PLA401.html 64 bytes from box1 (192.168.1.101): icmp_seq=1064 ttl=64 time=996 ms 64 bytes from box1 (192.168.1.101): icmp_seq=1065 ttl=64 time=549 ms 64 bytes from box1 (192.168.1.101): icmp_seq=1066 ttl=64 time=6.15 ms 64 bytes from box1 (192.168.1.101): icmp_seq=1067 ttl=64 time=1400 ms 64 bytes from box1 (192.168.1.101): icmp_seq=1068 ttl=64 time=812 ms 64 bytes from box1 (192.168.1.101): icmp_seq=1069 ttl=64 time=11.1 ms 64 bytes from box1 (192.168.1.101): icmp_seq=1070 ttl=64 time=1185 ms 64 bytes from box1 (192.168.1.101): icmp_seq=1071 ttl=64 time=501 ms 64 bytes from box1 (192.168.1.101): icmp_seq=1072 ttl=64 time=1975 ms 64 bytes from box1 (192.168.1.101): icmp_seq=1073 ttl=64 time=970 ms ^C --- box1 ping statistics --- 1074 packets transmitted, 394 received, +487 errors, 63% packet loss, time 1082497ms rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 5.945/598.452/3526.454/639.768 ms, pipe 4 Any idea how to diagnose/fix? I'm on linux so installing the windoze software that came with them is not something I'm terribly keen to do.

  Read the article

• Unable to Access Certain Websites

  - by codejoust

  Through a local network, all computers except one ubuntu machine can access 1. Adobe.com 2. Icann.org 3. Apache.org 4. Example.com. The ubuntu machine returns (in firefox): "Though the site seems valid, the browser was unable to establish a connection." Furthermore, when I traceroute those websites using the ubuntu machine, they all return ubuntu.local, and it ends there: (traceroute to icann.org (192.0.32.7), 30 hops max, 40 byte packets 1 ubuntu.local (192.168.1.105) 3000.791 ms !H 3000.808 ms !H 3000.814 ms !H I've checked the hosts file, and there isn't anything in there, and I have an apache server there so if it was redirected to localhost, I'd probably see the localhost webroot page. Thanks in advance! user@ubuntu:~$ netstat -nr Kernel IP routing table Destination Gateway Genmask Flags MSS Window irtt Iface 169.254.0.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.0.0 U 0 0 0 eth1 192.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 255.0.0.0 U 0 0 0 eth1 0.0.0.0 192.168.1.1 0.0.0.0 UG 0 0 0 eth1 The Ubuntu Machine is one of six on the network. I'm using opendns for dns, so I do think that should be a problem.

  Read the article

• How do I create a wifi network bridge with qemu on OS X?

  - by a paid nerd

  I grabbed a small FreeBSD live CD and QEMU, and I'm trying to bridge my Mac OS X 10.8 wifi connection so that the guest OS is available on my LAN. However, the guest OS never gets a DHCP lease. This works perfectly with VirtualBox in their "bridged" network mode, so I know it can be done. I need to get it working with QEMU because VirtualBox doesn't support the architecture that I need for this project. Here's what I've done so far based on hours of googling: Installed TUNTAP for OS X Told OS X to supposedly forward all packets, even ARP: (NOTE: This doesn't appear to work.) $ sudo sysctl -w net.inet.ip.forwarding=1 $ sudo sysctl -w net.link.ether.inet.proxyall=1 $ sudo sysctl -w net.inet.ip.fw.enable=1 Created a bridge: $ sudo ifconfig bridge0 create $ sudo ifconfig bridge0 addm en0 addm tap0 $ sudo ifconfig bridge0 up $ ifconfig bridge0: flags=8863<UP,BROADCAST,SMART,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST> mtu 1500 ether ac:de:xx:xx:xx:xx Configuration: priority 0 hellotime 0 fwddelay 0 maxage 0 ipfilter disabled flags 0x2 member: en0 flags=3<LEARNING,DISCOVER> port 4 priority 0 path cost 0 member: tap0 flags=3<LEARNING,DISCOVER> port 8 priority 0 path cost 0 tap0: flags=8943<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,PROMISC,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST> mtu 1500 ether ca:3d:xx:xx:xx:xx open (pid 88244) Started tcpdump with -I in the hopes that it enables promiscuous mode on the wifi device: $ sudo tcpdump -In -i en0 Run QEMU using the bridged network instructions: $ qemu-system-x86_64 -cdrom mfsbsd-9.2-RELEASE-amd64.iso -m 1024 \ -boot d -net nic -net tap,ifname=tap0,script=no,downscript=no But the guest system never gets a DHCP lease: If I tcpdump -ni tap0, I see lots of traffic from the wireless network. But if I tcpdump -ni en0, I don't see any DHCP traffic from the QEMU guest OS. Any ideas? Update 1: I tried sudo defaults write "/Library/Preferences/SystemConfiguration/com.apple.Boot" "Kernel Flags" "net.inet.ip.scopedroute=0" and rebooting per this mailing list suggestion, but this didn't help. In fact, it made VirtualBox bridged mode stop working.

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62  | Next Page >