Search Results

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

Page 55/189 | < Previous Page | 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62  | Next Page >

• GRE Tunnel over IPsec with Loopback

  - by Alek

  I'm having a really hard time trying to estabilish a VPN connection using a GRE over IPsec tunnel. The problem is that it involves some sort of "loopback" connection which I don't understand -- let alone be able to configure --, and the only help I could find is related to configuring Cisco routers. My network is composed of a router and a single host running Debian Linux. My task is to create a GRE tunnel over an IPsec infrastructure, which is particularly intended to route multicast traffic between my network, which I am allowed to configure, and a remote network, for which I only bear a form containing some setup information (IP addresses and phase information for IPsec). For now it suffices to estabilish a communication between this single host and the remote network, but in the future it will be desirable for the traffic to be routed to other machines on my network. As I said this GRE tunnel involves a "loopback" connection which I have no idea of how to configure. From my previous understanding, a loopback connection is simply a local pseudo-device used mostly for testing purposes, but in this context it might be something more specific that I do not have the knowledge of. I have managed to properly estabilish the IPsec communication using racoon and ipsec-tools, and I believe I'm familiar with the creation of tunnels and addition of addresses to interfaces using ip, so the focus is on the GRE step. The worst part is that the remote peers do not respond to ping requests and the debugging of the general setup is very difficult due to the encrypted nature of the traffic. There are two pairs of IP addresses involved: one pair for the GRE tunnel peer-to-peer connection and one pair for the "loopback" part. There is also an IP range involved, which is supposed to be the final IP addresses for the hosts inside the VPN. My question is: how (or if) can this setup be done? Do I need some special software or another daemon, or does the Linux kernel handle every aspect of the GRE/IPsec tunneling? Please inform me if any extra information could be useful. Any help is greatly appreciated.

  Read the article

• suggestions for firewall/router project using *BSD or Linux

  - by Adeodatus

  Hi All, I have a project in mind and I'd love to hear some ideas on some open source solutions with COTS hardware. I have a few 24 and/or 48 port managed layer2 switches with customers potentially on each port (though its usually about 20-30). Right now the switch has a bridged network and backhaul the traffic to our core to a centralized DHCP server. I need to move them to a NAT solution and, while doing this, I'd like to protect the customers on each port from the customer traffic on the other ports. I also need to be able to port forward from the public side of the firewall/nat box to specific hardware on the inside of the nat machine (easy enough, I know). My first thoughts are to build an appliance-like box (the fewer moving parts the better) that can do filtering and NAT with rfc1918 an address range being handed out via a DHCP server on the appliance. A caching DNS server on the appliance would be a plus since we backhaul everything to the core. I'd like to run FreeBSD but I'm open. Now, to try to limit the broadcast traffic thats visible I was thinking of doing each port on the switch as a different vlan and have the switch do trunking to the private NIC on the FreeBSD/appliance. I'd probably need to do some magic on the freebsd NIC to get this working but it should. We have the parts to build these systems. So, does this make sense? Are there any other solutions out there that we don't have to spend money on but can use our parts to create something? Are there any good distros that could do this already (monowall)?? I may or may not admin this solution so a secure web configuration and management tool would be a plus in the other admins' minds. Thoughts?

  Read the article

• Two NIC's 2 Internet Connections, 1 Windows Server 2008 RC2, Routing help required

  - by PJZ

  Hello, I have a Windows 2008 server and 4 other client machines on my home network. I have two internet connections. The main connection is setup with a home router and DHCP on that for all the clients on the network. The secondary connection is just a cable modem which is plugged directly into the server. Local Area Connection: This NIC has an external IP and is connected to the Cable Modem. Local Area Connection 2: This NIC has an internal IP (192.168.0.102) and allows access to all the internal computers. It also has internet access via the local router. So here lies the problem, I want to use the Cable connection on the server for the internet traffic (so that the traffic for server/clients are seperated) but I also need to maintain local access. I am wondering how to make it so that all the internet traffic goes via that NIC because at the moment it goes through the local NIC. As a secondary problem I would also like to forward the connection of one application used by the clients via the server and the cable/server internet because of poor routing for it on the main connection. This perhaps is something for another question though. Thanks for any help you can offer me. Regards PJ

  Read the article

• Azure load-balancing strategy

  - by growse

  I'm currently building out a small web deployment using VM instances on MS Azure. The main problem I'm facing at the moment is trying to figure out how to get the load-balancing to detect if a particular VM has failed and not route traffic to that VM. As far as I can tell, there are only only two load-balancing options: Have multiple VMs (web01, web02, web03 etc.) within the same 'cloud service' behind a single VIP, and configure the endpoints to be load balanced. Create multiple 'cloud services', put a single web VM in each and create a traffic manager service across all these services. It appears that (1) is extremely simplistic and doesn't attempt to do any host failure detection. (2) appears to be much more varied, but requires me to put all my webservers in their own individual cloud service. Traffic manager appears to be much more directed at a geographic failover scenario, where you have multiple cloud services across different regions. This approach also has the disadvantage in that my web servers won't be able to communicate with my databases on internal IP addresses, unlike scenario (1). What's the best approach here?

  Read the article

• How to set up QoS on ADSL router (terracom) for prioritizing browsing

  - by DBZ_A

  I want to configure the ADSL router which connects 10+ machines to the internet. I want to give maximum priority to browsing (ports 80,443) and set low priority for bittorrent etc.(port 42180) I have been experimenting with settings , but with no luck. There are three settings which confuse me, along with my understanding. 802.1 Priority - Related to LAN level, possible values 0-7 , higher numbers means higher priority. 'Mark traffic priority' - clueless about this. IPP/DS - IP Precedence - possible values 0-7 ; 6 & 7 are reserved, so set 5 for highest priority. Or when using DSCP - set 46 for highest priority. Please help me in getting this done... Similer question for another model of router here , but with less number of confusing options :) How to configure QoS on home router Update: from discussion on another thread, QoS can control only upstream traffic (from router to the internet) , while this may in turn affect downstream traffic rate, there is no direct control over data coming into the router.

  Read the article

• Load Testing a Security/Gateway Appliance

  - by Joel Coel

  In a couple weeks I will load testing a security/gateway appliance. We're a small residential college, and that "residential" means the traffic moving through the appliance is a bit like the Wild West. We have everything from Facebook to World of Warcraft, BitTorrent to Netflix, or Halo to YouTube... basically anything you might find in the home of a high-school or college aged person. Somewhere in there some real academic work gets done as well. We rely on our current appliance for traffic shaping, antivirus, malware filtering, intrusion detection on our servers, logging and abuse reporting, and even some content filtering. All this puts a decent load when we have students around, and I'm concerned about the ability of the new candidate to keep up. On paper it should handle things, but I'm worried. Prior experience is that vendors greatly over-report what an appliance can handle. The product also includes a licensed session limit, and I'm also worried that just a few misbehaving students could unwittingly bring us to that limit and cause service disruptions. I need to know this will work for our campus in order to commit to it. Going a performance level higher in that product takes the pricing way out of line with what we expect and have done in the past. What I need is a good way to load test this guy. My problem is that our current level of summer traffic is less than one percent of what it will be when students come back just six weeks from now. Any ideas on how to really stress this thing and see what it can do, in a way that will give me some clear ideas o. How that will scale for our campus? For the curious, I'm looking at a Watchguard 515, but it could be anything. If I were evaluating a competitor, I'd ask the same question.

  Read the article

• nginx reverse ssl proxy with multiple subdomains

  - by BrianM

  I'm trying to locate a high level configuration example for my current situation. We have a wildcard SSL certificate for multiple subdomains which are on several internal IIS servers. site1.example.com (X.X.X.194) -> IISServer01:8081 site2.example.com (X.X.X.194) -> IISServer01:8082 site3.example.com (X.X.X.194) -> IISServer02:8083 I am looking to handle the incoming SSL traffic through one server entry and then pass on the specific domain to the internal IIS application. It seems I have 2 options: Code a location section for each subdomain (seems messy from the examples I have found) Forward the unencrypted traffic back to the same nginx server configured with different server entries for each subdomain hostname. (At least this appears to be an option). My ultimate goal is to consolidate much of our SSL traffic to go through nginx so we can use HAProxy to load balance servers. Will approach #2 work within nginx if I properly setup the proxy_set_header entries? I envision something along the lines of this within my final config file (using approach #2): server { listen Y.Y.Y.174:443; #Internally routed IP address server_name *.example.com; proxy_pass http://Y.Y.Y.174:8081; } server { listen Y.Y.Y.174:8081; server_name site1.example.com; -- NORMAL CONFIG ENTRIES -- proxy_pass http://IISServer01:8081; } server { listen Y.Y.Y.174:8081; server_name site2.example.com; -- NORMAL CONFIG ENTRIES -- proxy_pass http://IISServer01:8082; } server { listen Y.Y.Y.174:8081; server_name site3.example.com; -- NORMAL CONFIG ENTRIES -- proxy_pass http://IISServer02:8083; } This seems like a way, but I'm not sure if it's the best way. Am I missing a simpler approach to this?

  Read the article

• KVM network bridge with two NICs

  - by Eil

  Greetings, I'm trying to set up bridged networking with KVM and am getting nowhere. There are docs and tutorials on the subject, but they all seem to conflict or don't provide enough info. I was wondering if someone can give me a high-level overview of how to get this working. I can probably work out the details myself (configuring the interfaces, adding routes, etc), I just need help on the big picture: how everything is interconnected. I have a RHEL5 server with KVM installed and running. It has two physical NICs, eth0 and eth1 in the same VLAN. I would like to use eth1 for all traffic between the guests and the rest of the network and reserve eth0 for host management, guest migrations, etc if possible. I'm not picky about which one gets the default route, although it would be nice if we could make it eth0. All of the guests will have static IPs. I would prefer that when a new guest is added, the networking configuration only needs to be set from within the guest itself. Basically, I want this: eth0: all host traffic eth1: all guest traffic Open to any other suggestions if this isn't possible or will be kludgy/difficult. Pointers to existing documentation might not be helpful since I've already been though just about everything out there. Thanks for any help.

  Read the article

• VPN Trunk Between Cisco ASA 5520 and DrayTek Vigor 2930

  - by David Heggie

  I'm a bit of a VPN newbie, so please go easy on me ... I'm trying to use the VPN trunking capabilities of the DrayTek Vigor 2930 firewall to bond two IPSec VPN connections to a Cisco ASA 5520 device and I'm getting myself tied in knots and hope someone here with more knowledge / experience can help. I have a remote site with two ADSL connections and the DrayTek box. The main office site has the Cisco ASA device. I am able to setup a single IPSec connection between the two sites on either of the ADSL connections' public IP addresses, but as soon as I try to use the VPN bonding, nothing works. The VPN tunnels are both still up, but the traffic is getting lost somewhere. I suspect it's due to the ASA not knowing how to route the traffic back over the VPN - one minute, traffic from my remote office's network is coming from public ip address #1, the next it's coming from public address #2 and it doesn't know what to do. Well, that's my newbie impression of what's going wrong, but I don't really know: If this is really what's happening If what I'm trying to do (bond two VPN connections from a single remote network to improve the bandwidth / resiliency) is possible with the kit I've got Could anyone help?

  Read the article

• Virtualization and best hardware sharing scenario for me

  - by azera

  Hello, Following this thread on super user, I now want to start installing all my vm on the hardware. As a remainder, i have a (powerful enough) server on which i want to install 3 OS: there is a debian (general dev testbed purposes), an ipcop (network control/firewall) and a freenas (local network file sharing). I'm wondering which scenario would be the best for me and if I will be able to share the hardware to do what i want; either a - install an hypervisor like the free vmware esx and all three vms in it, or b - install debian, and the other two running inside it with virtual box My need being that: the ipcop should handle all network traffic to the internet, meaning all traffic from my main computer but also all traffic from the other two vm the freenas shares should be accessible from the other two vm and my main computer too i don't really care about the debian access, i only need to access it from my main computer, not the other vms Will I need to install additionnal network cards for each vm or can they all share the same one happily ? (right now I have two, one linking the server to my router [which only ipcop is gonna use] and one linking it to my switch [which i would like all three to use]) As for harddrives, I was going to use 1 harddrive cut in 3 partitions to install all three OSes, then add to that the freenas drives, will it be correct ? Thanks a lot for anyone who can help me, this is kind of a vast area and I'm not sure which way to go at all

  Read the article

• Windows 8 - no internet connetction to some hosts while VPN is active

  - by HTD

  I use VPN to access the servers at work. When VPN is used, all network traffic to the Internet passes through my company network. It worked without any problems on Windows 7, now on Windows 8 some sites suddenly became inaccessible. Please note - I don't try to connect them over RDP, they are public Internet addresses, outside company network. They are inaccessible using any protocol. Ping returns "General failure.". I know it could be a misconfiguration on my company's server side, but it's very strange, since the same VPN connection used on Windows 7 works properly. What's wrong? Is it a Windows 8 bug, or is there something I could do on my company servers to make VPN work as expected with Windows 8? My company network works on Windows Server 2008 R2 and uses Microsoft TMG firewall. I couldn't find any rules blocking the traffic to mentioned sites, all network traffic for VPN users are passed through for all IPs and protocols. Any clues? UDPATE: Important - one whole day it worked. I hibernated and restarted the computer, connected and disconnected VPN - nothing could break my connection. Today it broke again, and restarting Windows didn't help. And now the solution: route add -p 0.0.0.0 MASK 255.255.255.255 192.168.1.1 Oh, OK, I know what it did, added my default gateway to routing table. But it still didn't work sometimes. So I removed my main network gateway route with: route delete -p 0.0.0.0 MASK 0.0.0.0 192.168.0.1 And added modified with: route add -p 0.0.0.0 MASK 255.255.255.255 192.168.0.1 And it works. Now. But I don't trust this. I don't know what really happened.

  Read the article

• Finding cause of TCP retransmission within a LAN

  - by Surreal

  Hello denizens of Server Fault I have an irritating problem with a LAN of about 100 computers, 2 Windows domain servers, and 12 VoIP phones. Since their installation around a year ago, every week or so, we notice a VoIP phone resetting itself - occasionally in the middle of a call. Simultaneously there are often signs of temporary loss of connection on computers: freezes in explorer while accessing network shares, errors in our administration software due to loss of connection to the database server. I have been doing some Wireshark monitoring on the connection between the VoIP PBX and the rest of the network. Wireshark picks up a clump of retransmitted TCP packets at the times when we record phone restarts. The Wireshark log shows about 2 clusters of retransmissions a day ranging from 5 packets to hundreds. Those in each cluster are mainly between the PBX and some set of the VoIP phones, but not always the same set. Often retransmissions at the same time are to phones connected to the same switch, but sometimes retransmissions occur together to phones at opposite ends of the network. There are usually some coincident retransmissions in passing TCP traffic, for example between client machines and the file servers. The spikes in retransmissions and phone resets do not correlate well with when the network is heavily loaded. They seem to occur slightly more during the day, but most in the evening, when traffic should be decreasing. They occur reasonably often late at night when most computers are turned off and traffic should be lowest. Do you have any ideas that might help diagnose the cause of problems like this? One thing I have not yet tried, but should have, is updating the firmware of all the switches.

  Read the article

• What would cause an IIS6 website to be unavailable remotely randomly for a few minutes at a time?

  - by jskunkle

  Website is served by iis6 on windows server 2003. Never saw this problem once for months in beta. We made the new site live yesterday - its getting more traffic than in beta but not that much - resource utilization on the server and speed are fine. Today the site has been unavailable remotely a few (4?) times for a few minutes at a time. If you visit any page on the site - nothing is ever returned and eventually the request times out. While this is happening - I can connect to the server via remote desktop and the site loads fine from the live url when running a browser on the server locally. Other websites on the server continiue to function fine the entire time (using the same instance of iis, different app pools). Other computers on the same network can't access the website either. Other than not serving content - the server seems to behave normally - scheduled jobs in our custom job system continue to run, etc. We've looked at the iis logs quickly and we don't see any traffic out of the ordinary - no traffic spikes, etc. Any ideas? Thanks, Shane

  Read the article

• how to design pound -> varnish -> jboss for ha + loadbalancing

  - by andreash

  Hello, I'm planning a new infrastructure for our web application. We have two JBossAS5 servers, running in a cluster. Session state will be replicated via JBoss Cache. In front of that, there should be some cache, to speed up delivery of static elements. However, most of the traffic to our app will be via HTTPS. So far, I had been thinking of two Varnish caches in front of the JBossASs, each being configured for loadbalancing to the two JBossASs via round-robin. Since Varnish doesn't handle HTTPS, then there would need to be two pound proxies in front of the Varnishs, dealing with the HTTPS. The two pounds would be made high-available with Heartbeat/LinuxHA. The traffic to www.example.com would then be going through our firewall, from there to the virtual IP of the pounds, from there to the Varnishs, and from there to the JBossASs. Question 1: Does this make sense? Or is it overly complicated, and the same goal can be reached with simpler methods? Question 2: If my layout is fine, how do I configure the pound - Varnish step? Should I a) make the Varnish service high-available through Heartbeat/LinuxHA as well and direct traffic from pound to the virtual IP of the Varnishs, or should I rather b) Configure two independent Varnishs and use load-balancing in pound to address the different Varnishs? Thanks a lot for your insight! Andreas.

  Read the article

• HTB.init / tc behind NAT

  - by Ben K.

  I have an Ubuntu 10 box that I'm trying to set up as a bandwidth-shaping router. The machine has one WAN interface, eth0 and two LAN interfaces, eth1 and eth2. NAT is configured using MASQUERADE as described at InternetConnectionSharing. I'm mostly concerned with shaping outbound traffic from the LAN interfaces -- in the end, I'd like to end up with a hard 768Kbps limit per-LAN-interface (rather than a limit on eth0 pooled across all interfaces). I installed HTB.init, and riffing on the examples, tried to set this up on eth1 by putting three files into /etc/sysconfig/htb: /etc/sysconfig/htb/eth1 DEFAULT=30 R2Q=100 /etc/sysconfig/htb/eth1-2.root RATE=768Kbps BURST=15k /etc/sysconfig/htb/eth1-2:30.dfl RATE=768Kbps CEIL=788Kbps BURST=15k LEAF=sfq I can /etc/init.d/htb start and /etc/init.d/htb stats and see information that /seems/ to suggest it's working...but when I try pulling a large file via the WAN interface the shaping clearly isn't in effect. Any suggestions? My guess is it has something to do with where the shaping falls in the NAT chain, but I really have no idea where to begin troubleshooting this. ---- Update: Here's my /etc/init.d/htb list output, it seems to make sense -- the default rate for eth1 is 768Kbps? ### eth0: queueing disciplines qdisc htb 1: root refcnt 2 r2q 100 default 30 direct_packets_stat 0 qdisc sfq 30: parent 1:30 limit 127p quantum 1514b perturb 10sec ### eth0: traffic classes class htb 1:2 root rate 768000bit ceil 768000bit burst 1599b cburst 1599b class htb 1:30 parent 1:2 leaf 30: prio 0 rate 6144Kbit ceil 6144Kbit burst 15Kb cburst 1598b ### eth0: filtering rules filter parent 1: protocol ip pref 100 u32 filter parent 1: protocol ip pref 100 u32 fh 800: ht divisor 1 filter parent 1: protocol ip pref 100 u32 fh 800::800 order 2048 key ht 800 bkt 0 flowid 1:30 match 00000000/00000000 at 12 match 00000000/00000000 at 16 ### eth1: queueing disciplines qdisc htb 1: root refcnt 2 r2q 100 default 30 direct_packets_stat 0 qdisc sfq 30: parent 1:30 limit 127p quantum 1514b perturb 10sec ### eth1: traffic classes class htb 1:2 root rate 768000bit ceil 768000bit burst 1599b cburst 1599b class htb 1:30 parent 1:2 leaf 30: prio 0 rate 6144Kbit ceil 6144Kbit burst 15Kb cburst 1598b

  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

• GRE Tunnel over IPsec with Loopback

  - by Alek

  Hello, I'm having a really hard time trying to estabilish a VPN connection using a GRE over IPsec tunnel. The problem is that it involves some sort of "loopback" connection which I don't understand -- let alone be able to configure --, and the only help I could find is related to configuring Cisco routers. My network is composed of a router and a single host running Debian Linux. My task is to create a GRE tunnel over an IPsec infrastructure, which is particularly intended to route multicast traffic between my network, which I am allowed to configure, and a remote network, for which I only bear a form containing some setup information (IP addresses and phase information for IPsec). For now it suffices to estabilish a communication between this single host and the remote network, but in the future it will be desirable for the traffic to be routed to other machines on my network. As I said this GRE tunnel involves a "loopback" connection which I have no idea of how to configure. From my previous understanding, a loopback connection is simply a local pseudo-device used mostly for testing purposes, but in this context it might be something more specific that I do not have the knowledge of. I have managed to properly estabilish the IPsec communication using racoon and ipsec-tools, and I believe I'm familiar with the creation of tunnels and addition of addresses to interfaces using ip, so the focus is on the GRE step. The worst part is that the remote peers do not respond to ping requests and the debugging of the general setup is very difficult due to the encrypted nature of the traffic. There are two pairs of IP addresses involved: one pair for the GRE tunnel peer-to-peer connection and one pair for the "loopback" part. There is also an IP range involved, which is supposed to be the final IP addresses for the hosts inside the VPN. My question is: how (or if) can this setup be done? Do I need some special software or another daemon, or does the Linux kernel handle every aspect of the GRE/IPsec tunneling? Please inform me if any extra information could be useful. Any help is greatly appreciated.

  Read the article

• Firewall for internal networks

  - by Cylindric

  I have a virtualised infrastructure here, with separated networks (some physically, some just by VLAN) for iSCSI traffic, VMware management traffic, production traffic, etc. The recommendations are of course to not allow access from the LAN to the iSCSI network for example, for obvious security and performance reasons, and same between DMZ/LAN, etc. The problem I have is that in reality, some services do need access across the networks from time to time: System monitoring server needs to see the ESX hosts and the SAN for SNMP VSphere guest console access needs direct access to the ESX host the VM is running on VMware Converter wants access to the ESX host the VM will be created on The SAN email notification system wants access to our mail server Rather than wildly opening up the entire network, I'd like to place a firewall spanning these networks, so I can allow just the access required For example: SAN SMTP Server for email Management SAN for monitoring via SNMP Management ESX for monitoring via SNMP Target Server ESX for VMConverter Can someone recommend a free firewall that will allow this kind of thing without too much low-level tinkering of config files? I've used products such as IPcop before, and it seems to be possible to achieve this using that product if I re-purpose their ideas of "WAN", "WLAN" (the red/green/orange/blue interfaces), but was wondering if there were any other accepted products for this sort of thing. Thanks.

  Read the article

• How can I write automated tests for iptables?

  - by Phil Frost

  I am configuring a Linux router with iptables. I want to write acceptance tests for the configuration that assert things like: traffic from some guy on the internet is not forwarded, and TCP to port 80 on the webserver in the DMZ from hosts on the corporate LAN is forwarded. An ancient FAQ alludes to a iptables -C option which allows one to ask something like, "given a packet from X, to Y, on port Z, would it be accepted or dropped?" Although the FAQ suggests it works like this, for iptables (but maybe not ipchains as it uses in the examples) the -C option seems to not simulate a test packet running through all the rules, but rather checks for the existence for an exactly matching rule. This has little value as a test. I want to assert that the rules have the desired effect, not just that they exist. I've considered creating yet more test VMs and a virtual network, then probing with tools like nmap for effects. However, I'm avoiding this solution due to the complexity of creating all those additional virtual machines, which is really quite a heavy way to generate some test traffic. It would also be nice to have an automated testing methodology which can also work on a real server in production. How else might I solve this problem? Is there some mechanism I might use to generate or simulate arbitrary traffic, then know if it was (or would be) dropped or accepted by iptables?

  Read the article

• Ruckus wireless AP and Dell PowerConnect configuration problems

  - by DanielJay

  We are working on trying to get some Ruckus Access Points to work correctly on our network. Currently our network is as follows: VLAN 10 - Servers VLAN 11 – Computers/DHCP VLAN 12 – Voice VLAN 13 – Guest We use Dell PowerConnect 6248P switches for our switches. Port settings are as follows: ZoneDirector 1100 is plugged into this port. Should be accessing the server VLAN and then allowing all other traffic. interface ethernet 1/g2 classofservice trust ip-dscp description 'Ruckus ZoneDirector 1100' switchport mode general switchport general pvid 10 switchport general allowed vlan add 10 switchport general allowed vlan add 11-13 tagged exit Access point is plugged into this port. The port has to be on VLAN 11 in order to get DHCP. interface ethernet 1/g16 classofservice trust ip-dscp description 'Ruckus - IT' switchport mode general switchport general pvid 11 switchport general allowed vlan add 10-12 switchport general allowed vlan add 13 tagged exit If we tag the traffic from the SSID as VLAN 11 data fails. If we leave the SSID tagged as 1 the data flows correctly. Are there problems with passing tagged traffic to untagged ports? We are looking to see what we can do to get the SSID tagged as 11 instead of 1. Any suggestions?

  Read the article

• Ubuntu Postfix email account with forward

  - by Mika

  I have an Ubuntu 12.04 server with Postfix installed. In Postfix installation I used this guide https://help.ubuntu.com/community/Postfix. I didn't go through all of that, just the sudo dpkg-reconfigure postfix part. I have created user accounts to my server and the users home directories contain a .forward file which have only one row the email address to forward to. I have defined dns A records for the names www.mydomain.com and mydomain.com But if I send an email to [email protected] it doesn't get forwarded. Actually I can't see any sign about any email ever visiting my server. My firewall is defined to allow incoming traffic for ports 80, 443 and 22. For outgoing traffic it allows ports 587 and 22. The exact definitions are below. Should I allow also outgoing http (port 80)? or maybe port 25? # Allow ssh in iptables -A INPUT -i eth0 -p tcp --dport 22 -m state --state NEW,ESTABLISHED -j ACCEPT iptables -A OUTPUT -o eth0 -p tcp --sport 22 -m state --state ESTABLISHED -j ACCEPT # Allow incoming HTTP iptables -A INPUT -i eth0 -p tcp --dport 80 -m state --state NEW,ESTABLISHED -j ACCEPT iptables -A OUTPUT -o eth0 -p tcp --sport 80 -m state --state ESTABLISHED -j ACCEPT # Allow incoming HTTPS iptables -A INPUT -i eth0 -p tcp --dport 443 -m state --state NEW,ESTABLISHED -j ACCEPT iptables -A OUTPUT -o eth0 -p tcp --sport 443 -m state --state ESTABLISHED -j ACCEPT # Allow outgoing SSH iptables -A OUTPUT -o eth0 -p tcp --dport 22 -m state --state NEW,ESTABLISHED -j ACCEPT iptables -A INPUT -i eth0 -p tcp --sport 22 -m state --state ESTABLISHED -j ACCEPT # Allow outgoing emails iptables -A OUTPUT -o eth0 -p tcp --dport 587 -m state --state NEW,ESTABLISHED -j ACCEPT iptables -A INPUT -i eth0 -p tcp --sport 587 -m state --state ESTABLISHED -j ACCEPT Edits: I found lines from my syslog telling me that there were incoming traffic for port 25 which was blocked. The sender ip's for those packages were trustworthy, so I opened also port 25. Now I can see some Postfix logging in my syslog. It looks like it is at least trying to forward emails. I haven't yet received any forwarder emails into my gmail mail box.

  Read the article

• Testing realistic loads for new versions of existing web app

  - by David Cournapeau

  Assuming I have a relatively complex web application, I am interested in testing performances of a new version using a traffic as realistic as possible. Traffic is relatively complex (session-based, lots of internal logic which depends on incoming requests). The webapp depends on many servers (databases, frontends, etc...). I can think of two basic directions: Recording every incoming request with its timestamp in production in a centralized manner and replaying it from N clients to reproduce a load as close as possible as the original. Issue: because we have many servers, getting the centralized log is not trivial. having a system duplicating requests to a staging area so that I could "plug" a dev version of my webapp to it at anytime without affecting the production. Issue: I have not found much information about it expect this, which suggests to me that may not be the best solution. OTOH, it is realistic by definition. What is the standard way of doing this kind of testing ? I did not find much information about load testing with complex, realistic traffic.

  Read the article

• Configure tomcat behind loadbalancer to respond on HTTP and HTTPS

  - by user253530

  I have 2 tomcat machines behind a load balancer on Amazon EC2. Until now The load balancer was configured to respond only on https. So in order to access our services you would go to https://url. Tomcat was configured to listen on 8080 but the connector had additional params that would tell tomcat that it is behind a proxy and that it should respond on HTTPS 443. The connector looks like this: <Connector scheme="https" secure="true" proxyPort="443" proxyHost="my.domain.name" port="8080" protocol="HTTP/1.1" connectionTimeout="20000" redirectPort="8443" useBodyEncodingForURI="true" URIEncoding="UTF-8" /> What i would like to do is to open port 80 on the load balancer and basically allow traffic on HTTP and HTTPS. I've configured the load balancer to redirect all HTTP traffic to the tomcat machines on port 8088. I was thinking that i could define a new connector so that all HTTPS traffic goes to 8080 and HTTP to 8088. Unfortunately i did not succeed. Here is my connector <Connector port="8088" protocol="HTTP/1.1" connectionTimeout="20000" redirectPort="8443" useBodyEncodingForURI="true" URIEncoding="UTF-8" /> Am I missing something? Thanks

  Read the article

• Virtual Machine Network Architecture, Isolating Public and Private Networks

  - by Mark

  I'm looking for some insight into best practices for network traffic isolation within a virtual environment, specifically under VMWARE ESXi. Currently I have (in testing) 1 hardware server running ESXi but i expect to expand this to multiple pieces of hardware. The current setup is as follows: 1 pfsense VM, this VM accepts all outside (WAN/internet) traffic and performs firewall/port forwarding/NAT functionality. I have multiple public IP addresses sent to the this VM that are used for access to individual servers (via per incoming IP port forwarding rules). This VM is attached to the private (virtual) network that all other VMs are on. It also manages a VPN link into the private network with some access restrictions. This isn't the perimeter firewall but rather the firewall for this virtual pool only. I have 3 VMs that communicate with each other, as well as have some public access requirements: 1 LAMP server running an eCommerce site, public internet accessible 1 accounting server, access via windows server 2008 RDS services for remote access by users 1 inventory/warehouse management server, VPN to client terminals in warehouses These servers constantly talk with each other for data synchronization. Currently all the servers are on the same subnet/virtual network and connected to the internet through the pfsense VM. The pfsense firewall uses port forwarding and NAT to allow outside access to the servers for services and for server access to the internet. My main question is this: Is there a security benefit to adding a second virtual network adapter to each server and controlling traffic such that all server to server communication is on one separate virtual network, while any access to the outside world is routed through the other network adapter, through the firewall, and on the the internet. This is the type of architecture i would use if these were all physical servers, but i'm unsure if the networks being virtual changes the way i should approach locking down this system. Thank you for any thoughts or direction to any appropriate literature.

  Read the article

• pfSense Load Balancer and Virtual IP

  - by jshin47

  I have two identical web servers on 10.2.1.13 and 10.2.1.113. I would like to set up pfSense load balancer to balance requests to both of these. I set up pools that included HTTP and HTTPS for both of these hosts, then set up virtual servers that responded on HTTP and HTTPS and referred traffic to its respective pool. However, I set up the virtual server to listen on 10.2.1.213, a LAN IP rather than a WAN IP, because I want LAN traffic to be able use the load balancer virtual server as well. So, I set up a Virtual IP for 10.2.1.213 on LAN IP, and a NAT port forwarding rule for HTTP and HTTPS traffic on a WAN IP to forward to 10.2.1.213. It seems like this should work, but it fails. What eventually happens is that when I try to access the page from WAN, I am directed to the login page for my pfSense device rather than the page I am expecting. When I try to access 10.2.1.213 from LAN, the request times out. What is going wrong here? I have tried it with and without NAT reflection to no avail. Please advise

  Read the article

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