Search Results

Search found 4157 results on 167 pages for 'zero subnet'.

Page 6/167 | < Previous Page | 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13  | Next Page >

• Connectivity issues with dual NIC machine in EC2

  - by Matt Sieker

  I'm trying to get some servers set up in EC2 in a Virtual Private Cloud. To do this, I have two subnets: 10.0.42.0/24 - Public subnet 10.0.83.0/24 - Private subnet To bridge these two, I have a Funtoo instance with a pair of NICs: eth0 10.0.42.10 eth1 10.0.83.10 Which has the following routing table: Kernel IP routing table Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref Use Iface 10.0.83.0 * 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth1 10.0.83.0 * 255.255.255.0 U 203 0 0 eth1 10.0.42.0 * 255.255.255.0 U 202 0 0 eth0 loopback * 255.0.0.0 U 0 0 0 lo default 10.0.42.1 0.0.0.0 UG 0 0 0 eth0 default 10.0.42.1 0.0.0.0 UG 202 0 0 eth0 An elastic IP is attached to the eth0 interface, and I can connect to it fine remotely. However, I cannot ping anything in the 10.0.83.0 subnet. For now iptables is not set up on the box, so there's no rules that would get in the way (Eventually this will be managed by Shorewall, but I should get basic connectivity done first) Subnet details from the VPC interface: CIDR: 10.0.83.0/24 Destination Target 10.0.0.0/16 local 0.0.0.0/0 [ID of eth1 on NAT box] Network ACL: Default Inbound: Rule # Port (Service) Protocol Source Allow/Deny 100 ALL ALL 0.0.0.0/0 ALLOW * ALL ALL 0.0.0.0/0 DENY Outbound: Rule # Port (Service) Protocol Destination Allow/Deny 100 ALL ALL 0.0.0.0/0 ALLOW * ALL ALL 0.0.0.0/0 DENY   CIDR: 10.0.83.0/24 VPC: Destination Target 10.0.0.0/16 local 0.0.0.0/0 [Internet Gateway ID] Network ACL: Default (replace) Inbound: Rule # Port (Service) Protocol Source Allow/Deny 100 ALL ALL 0.0.0.0/0 ALLOW * ALL ALL 0.0.0.0/0 DENY Outbound: Rule # Port (Service) Protocol Destination Allow/Deny 100 ALL ALL 0.0.0.0/0 ALLOW * ALL ALL 0.0.0.0/0 DENY I've been trying to work this out most of the evening, but I'm just stuck. I'm either missing something obvious, or am doing something very wrong. I would think I'd be able to ping from either interface on this box without issue. Hopefully some more pairs of eyes on this configuration will help. EDIT: I am an idiot. After I bothered to install nmap to run some more tests, I discover I can see the ports, and connect to them, pings are just being blocked.

  Read the article

• Windows Server 2008 - one MAC Address, assign multiple external IP's to VirtualBoxes running as guests on host

  - by Sise

  Couldn't find any help @ google or here. The scenario: Windows Server 2008 Std x64 on i7-975, 12 GB RAM. The server is running in a data centre. One hardware NIC - RealTek PCIe GBE - one MAC Address. The data centre provides us 4 static external IP's. The first is assigned to the host by default of course. I have ordered all 4 IP's, the data centre can assign the available IP's to the physical MAC address of the given NIC only. This means one NIC, one MAC Address, 4 IP's. Everything works fine so far. Now, what I would like to have: Installed VirtualBox with 1-3 guests running, each gets it's own external IP assigned. Each of it should be an standalone Win Server 2008. It looks like the easiest way would be to put the guests into an virtual subnet and routing all data coming to the 2nd till 4th external IP through to this guests using there subnet IP's. I have been through the VirtualBox User Manuel regarding networking. What's not working: I can't use bridged networking without anything else, because the IP's are assigned to the one MAC address only. I can't use NAT networking because it does not allow access from outside or the host to the guest. I do not wanna use port forwarding. Host-only networking itself would not allow internet access, by sharing the default internet connection of the host, internet is granted from the guest to the outside but not from outside or the host to the guest. InternalNetworking is not really an option here. What I have tried is to create an additional MS Loopback adapter for a routed subnet, where the Vbox guests are in, now the idea was to NAT the internet connection to the loopback 'subnet'. But I can't ping the gateway from the guests. By using route command in the command shell or RRAS (static route, NAT) I didn't get there as well. Solutions like the following do work for the one way, but not for the way back: For your situation, it might be best to use the Host-Only adapter for ICS. Go to the preferences of VB itself and select network. There you can change the configuration for the interface. Set the IP address to 192.168.0.1, netmask 255.255.255.0. Disable the DHCP server if it isn't already and that's it. Now the Guest should get an IP from Windows itself and be able to get onto the internet, while you can also access the Host. Slowly I'm pretty stucked with this topic. There is a possibility I've just overlooked something or just didn't getting it by trying, especially using RRAS, but it's kinda hard to find useful howto's or something in the web. Thanks in advance! Best regards, Simon

  Read the article

• How to setup a host as a sendmail relay for particular IP subnet

  - by Abhinav

  Hi, By default, sendmail (I have version 8.13 on an RHEL4) allows only local mails. I wanted to allow mails from a particular network to be relayed via the system, so I did the following based on suggestions from various places : /etc/mail/access : Added the subnet and the domain 8.37 RELAY mydomain.com RELAY (I assume this is the originating email's domain) This alone did not work, so I added the following to sendmail.mc FEATURE(access_db)dbl Now, the problem is that it is allowing access from other domains as well. To test it out, I removed 8.37 RELAY from the access, and changed the email from field to [email protected] However, I still receive the mail. What is the correct way to configure this, so that only mails from a particular subnet are relayed ?

  Read the article

• Windows 2008 Server Firewall blocks from printing in other subnet

  - by xenolf

  Greetings, i have a windows 2008 server with activated firewall in the 192.168.0.xx subnet. From there i want to print on an printer which is located in the 192.168.10.xx subnet. Now when i try to print with the firewall on, nothing happens... when i turn the firewall off it prints flawlessly. Now i messed around with the windows firewall for about 4 hours straight and i cant seem to find a rule which lets me print. Even when i set the firewall to let everything through im unable to print. Has anyone encountered the same or a similar problem and has a solution for this issue? Thanks in advance xenolf

  Read the article

• Windows Server 2008 - one MAC Address, assign multiple external IP's to VirtualBoxes running as guests on host

  - by Sise

  Couldn't find any help @ google or here. The scenario: Windows Server 2008 Std x64 on i7-975, 12 GB RAM. The server is running in a data centre. One hardware NIC - RealTek PCIe GBE - one MAC Address. The data centre provides us 4 static external IP's. The first is assigned to the host by default of course. I have ordered all 4 IP's, the data centre can assign the available IP's to the physical MAC address of the given NIC only. This means one NIC, one MAC Address, 4 IP's. Everything works fine so far. Now, what I would like to have: Installed VirtualBox with 1-3 guests running, each gets it's own external IP assigned. Each of it should be an standalone Win Server 2008. It looks like the easiest way would be to put the guests into an virtual subnet and routing all data coming to the 2nd till 4th external IP through to this guests using there subnet IP's. I have been through the VirtualBox User Manuel regarding networking. What's not working: I can't use bridged networking without anything else, because the IP's are assigned to the one MAC address only. I can't use NAT networking because it does not allow access from outside or the host to the guest. I do not wanna use port forwarding. Host-only networking itself would not allow internet access, by sharing the default internet connection of the host, internet is granted from the guest to the outside but not from outside or the host to the guest. InternalNetworking is not really an option here. What I have tried is to create an additional MS Loopback adapter for a routed subnet, where the Vbox guests are in, now the idea was to NAT the internet connection to the loopback 'subnet'. But I can't ping the gateway from the guests. By using route command in the command shell or RRAS (static route, NAT) I didn't get there as well. Solutions like the following do work for the one way, but not for the way back: For your situation, it might be best to use the Host-Only adapter for ICS. Go to the preferences of VB itself and select network. There you can change the configuration for the interface. Set the IP address to 192.168.0.1, netmask 255.255.255.0. Disable the DHCP server if it isn't already and that's it. Now the Guest should get an IP from Windows itself and be able to get onto the internet, while you can also access the Host. Slowly I'm pretty stucked with this topic. There is a possibility I've just overlooked something or just didn't getting it by trying, especially using RRAS, but it's kinda hard to find useful howto's or something in the web. Thanks in advance! Best regards, Simon

  Read the article

• Reverse DNS for two ADs in the same subnet

  - by SpacemanSpiff

  I currently have two separate AD forests that exist within the same subnet. The two forests have independent copies of the reverse lookup zone for that subnet. Example: Domain A DC1: 10.1.1.1/24 Domain A DC2: 10.1.1.2/24 Domain A AppServer1:10.1.1.3/24 Domain B DC1: 10.1.1.11/24 Domain B DC2: 10.1.1.12/24 Domain B Appserver1:10.1.1.13/24 What I'm after, is a configuration that allows this reverse zone to be shared between them so that both sets of DNS servers can make updates to the zone. This kind of thing is a little far from my everday work, so a kick in the right direction is a welcome suggestion as well. Decoupling one AD into new segments is a possibility I'm open to but would like to avoid if possible. If there is a DNS related solution I'd prefer that.

  Read the article

• How to connect two subnet with Windows Server?

  - by 9dan

  Hello, I have some work to do in a small office. This office has two separate Internet connections. One is a kind of DSL line and connected through the Internet sharing router (DHCP). One is a leased line with public IP adresses (No DHCP). This leased line provide only 30 IP addresses and the gateway is provided by the ISP. Some workers use private IP provided by the router, some workers use manually setup public IP. There is a Windows 2008 R2 server with two NICs, connected to each lines. I want to connect/merge(?)/bridge(?) two subnet with this server so that users from the different subnet can access each other. How can I accomplish this? Something like, add gateway function to this server and public IP users change the gateway to point this server.. It it possible ? Sorry for my rambling. Thanks in advance.

  Read the article

• VPC SSH port forward into private subnet

  - by CP510

  Ok, so I've been racking my brain for DAYS on this dilema. I have a VPC setup with a public subnet, and a private subnet. The NAT is in place of course. I can connect from SSH into a instance in the public subnet, as well as the NAT. I can even ssh connect to the private instance from the public instance. I changed the SSHD configuration on the private instance to accept both port 22 and an arbitrary port number 1300. That works fine. But I need to set it up so that I can connect to the private instance directly using the 1300 port number, ie. ssh -i keyfile.pem [email protected] -p 1300 and 1.2.3.4 should route it to the internal server 10.10.10.10. Now I heard iptables is the job for this, so I went ahead and researched and played around with some routing with that. These are the rules I have setup on the public instance (not the NAT). I didn't want to use the NAT for this since AWS apperantly pre-configures the NAT instances when you set them up and I heard using iptables can mess that up. *filter :INPUT ACCEPT [129:12186] :FORWARD ACCEPT [0:0] :OUTPUT ACCEPT [84:10472] -A INPUT -i lo -j ACCEPT -A INPUT -i eth0 -p tcp -m state --state NEW -m tcp --dport 1300 -j ACCEPT -A INPUT -d 10.10.10.10/32 -p tcp -m limit --limit 5/min -j LOG --log-prefix "SSH Dropped: " -A FORWARD -d 10.10.10.10/32 -p tcp -m tcp --dport 1300 -j ACCEPT -A OUTPUT -o lo -j ACCEPT COMMIT # Completed on Wed Apr 17 04:19:29 2013 # Generated by iptables-save v1.4.12 on Wed Apr 17 04:19:29 2013 *nat :PREROUTING ACCEPT [2:104] :INPUT ACCEPT [2:104] :OUTPUT ACCEPT [6:681] :POSTROUTING ACCEPT [7:745] -A PREROUTING -i eth0 -p tcp -m tcp --dport 1300 -j DNAT --to-destination 10.10.10.10:1300 -A POSTROUTING -p tcp -m tcp --dport 1300 -j MASQUERADE COMMIT So when I try this from home. It just times out. No connection refused messages or anything. And I can't seem to find any log messages about dropped packets. My security groups and ACL settings allow communications on these ports in both directions in both subnets and on the NAT. I'm at a loss. What am I doing wrong?

  Read the article

• Identify malicious subnet

  - by Macros

  I have been experiencing performance issues on a website for a while, and it always seems to hit around the same time. Having analysed the logs I've found a big spike in requests which corresponds with this slowdown, with all requests coming from the same subnet. It feels to me like an attempt to scrape the site (it is a car hire site and the requests are sequential for each IP and with incremental search criteria) and I would like to identify the source. The Subnet in question is 209.67.89.x which I can see is owned by Savvis however I can't reverse DNS any of the IPs - is there any other way I can gain more info on this (other than contacting them direct - I am also doing this)?

  Read the article

• Zero-channel RAID for High Performance MySQL Server (IBM ServeRAID 8k) : Any Experience/Recommendati

  - by prs563

  We are getting this IBM rack mount server and it has this IBM ServeRAID8k storage controller with Zero-Channel RAID and 256MB battery backed cache. It can support RAID 10 which we need for our high performance MySQL server which will have 4 x 15000K RPM 300GB SAS HDD. This is mission-critical and we want as much bandwidth and performance. Is this a good card or should we replace with another IBM RAID card? IBM ServeRAID 8k SAS Controller option provides 256 MB of battery backed 533 MHz DDR2 standard power memory in a fixed mounting arrangement. The device attaches directly to IBM planar which can provide full RAID capability. Manufacturer IBM Manufacturer Part # 25R8064 Cost Central Item # 10025907 Product Description IBM ServeRAID 8k SAS - Storage controller (zero-channel RAID) - RAID 0, 1, 5, 6, 10, 1E Device Type Storage controller (zero-channel RAID) - plug-in module Buffer Size 256 MB Supported Devices Disk array (RAID) Max Storage Devices Qty 8 RAID Level RAID 0, RAID 1, RAID 5, RAID 6, RAID 10, RAID 1E Manufacturer Warranty 1 year warranty

  Read the article

• Why does an EXE file that does *nothing* contain so many dummy zero bytes?

  - by Lambert

  Hi, I've compiled a C file that does absolutely nothing (just a main that returns... not even a "Hello, world" gets printed), and I've compiled it with various compilers (MinGW GCC, Visual C++, Windows DDK, etc.). All of them link with the C runtime, which is standard. But what I don't get is: When I open up the file in a hex editor (or a disassembler), why do I see that almost half of the 16 KB is just huge sections of either 0x00 bytes or 0xCC bytes? It seems rather ridiculous to me... is there any way to prevent these from occurring? And why are they there in the first place? Thank you!

  Read the article

• Pressing zero key brings up lock/switch user screen in W7

  - by qinghua

  This issue started after my cat walked all over the keyboard... Whenever I press the "zero" key, the screen goes black and I'm taken to the lock/switch user screen. The other functions of the key work fine - it can produce ) and / like usual. Numlock is off, and as far as I know, my computer doesn't have Function Lock. If I log out of my user account and sign in as a guest, the "zero" works again, but if I create a new user profile, it doesn't work. I get the same issue when I hit "zero" using the on-screen keyboard. My keyboard layout is set to US English. I've uninstalled and reinstalled the ATK package, and updated my keyboard drivers. I have an ASUS U43JC-X1 laptop running Windows 7, and I haven't installed any new programs lately.

  Read the article

• How does IPv6 subnetting work and how does it differ from IPv4 subnetting?

  - by Michael Hampton

  This is a Canonical Question about IPv6 Subnetting. Related: How does IPv4 Subnetting Work? I know a lot about IPv4 Subnetting, and as I prepare to (deploy|work on) an IPv6 network I need to know how much of this knowledge is transferable and what I still need to learn. IPv6 seems at first glance to be much more complex than IPv4. So I would like to know: IPv6 is 128 bits, so why is /64 the smallest recommended subnet for hosts? Related to this: Why is it recommended to use /127 for point to point links between routers, and why was it recommended against in the past? Should I change existing router links to use /127? Why would virtual machines be provisioned with subnets smaller than /64? Are there other situations in which I would use a subnet smaller than /64? Can I map directly from IPv4 subnets to IPv6 subnets? My interfaces have several IPv6 addresses. Must the subnet be the same for all of them? Why do I sometimes see a % rather than a / in an IPv6 address and what does it mean? Am I wasting too many subnets? Aren't we just going to run out again? In what other major ways is IPv6 subnetting different from IPv4 subnetting?

  Read the article

• PowerConnect 3548p SNTP and web interface not working

  - by Force Flow

  I have been unable to get SNTP and access to the web interface working properly on a Dell PowerConnect 3548p. In the logs, this message appears over and over again: 04-Jan-2000 20:19:29 :%MNGINF-W-ACL: Management ACL drop packet received on interface Vlan 172 from 172.17.0.3 to 172.18.0.10 protocol 17 service Snmp 172 is the management vlan. 172.17.0.3 is the DNS server 172.18.0.10 is the switch's IP address. The DNS server and the switch are located on different subnets and separated by routers. I am unable to access the web interface of the switch from the 172.17.x.x subnet. I can only access the web interface of the switch if I am accessing it from the 172.18.x.x subnet. There is also a managed linksys switch on the 172.18.x.x subnet on the 172 vlan, which has no problem with SNTP. I can also access it from the 172.17.x.x network. So, it stands to reason that this is not a firewall or routing issue, but with the 3548p switch. I suspect the issue is with management permissions/ACLs on the 3348p switch, but that's about as much as I've been able to determine so far. Any ideas?

  Read the article

• VPN into multiple LAN Subnets

  - by Rain

  I need to figure out a way to allow access to two LAN subnets on a SonicWall NSA 220 through the built-in SonicWall GlobalVPN server. I've Googled and tried everything I can think of, but nothing has worked. The SonicWall NSA management web interface is also very unorganized; I'm probably missing something simple/obvious. There are two networks, called Network A and Network B for simplicity, with two different subnets. A SonicWall NSA 220 is the router/firewall/DHCP Server for Network A, which is plugged into the X2 port. Some other router is the router/firewall/DHCP server for Network B. Both of these networks need to be managed through a VPN connection. I setup the X3 interface on the SonicWall to have a static IP in the Network B subnet and plugged it in. Network A and Network B should not be able to access each other, which appears the be the default configuration. I then configured and enabled VPN. The SonicWall currently has the X1 interface setup with a subnet of 192.168.1.0/24 with a DHCP Server enabled, although it is not plugged in. When I VPN into the SonicWall, I get an IP address supplied by the DHCP Server on the X1 interface and I can access Network A remotely although I do not have access to Network B. How can I allow access to both Network A and Network B to VPN clients although keep devices on Network B from accessing Network A and vice-versa. Is there some way to create a VPN-only subnet (something like 10.100.0.0/24) on the SonicWall that can access Network A and Network B without changing the current network configuration or allowing devices on both netorks "see" each other? How would I go about setting this up? Diagram of the network: (Hopefully this kind of helps) WAN1 WAN2 | | [ SonicWall NSA 220 ]-(X3)-----------------[ Router 2 ] | | (X2) 192.168.2.0/24 10.1.1.0/24 Any help would be greatly appriciated!

  Read the article

• Customer site is out of IP addresses, they want to go from /24 to /12 netmask... Bad idea?

  - by ewwhite

  One of my client sites called to ask me to change the subnet masks of the Linux servers I manage there while they re-IP/change the netmask of their network based on a 10.0.0.x scheme. "Can you change the server netmasks from 255.255.255.0 to 255.240.0.0?" You mean, 255.255.240.0? "No, 255.240.0.0." Are you sure you need that many IP addresses? "Yeah, we never want to run out of IP addresses." A quick check against the Subnet Cheat Sheet shows: a 255.255.255.0 netmask, a /24 provides 256 hosts. It's clear to see that an organization can exhaust that number of IP addresses. a 255.240.0.0 netmask, a /12 provides 1,048,576 hosts. This is a small < 200-user site. I doubt that they'd allocate more than 400 IP addresses. I suggested something that provides fewer hosts, like a /22 or /21 (1024 and 2048 hosts, respectively), but was unable to give a specific reason against using the /12 subnet. Is there anything this customer should be concerned about? Are there any specific reasons they shouldn't use such an incredibly large mask in their environment?

  Read the article

• Lock down Wiki access to password only but remain open to a subnet via .htaccess

  - by Treffynnon

  Basically we have a Wiki that has some sensitive information stored in it - not the best I know but my predecessor set it up. I want to be able to request password access from any one who is not on the local network subnet. Those on the local subnet should be able to proceed without entering a password. The following .htaccess does not seem to work any more as it is letting non-local access without requiring the password: AuthName "Our Wiki" AuthType Basic AuthUserFile /path/to/passwd/file AuthGroupFile /dev/null Require valid-user Allow from 192.168 Satisfy Any order deny,allow And I cannot work out why. The WikkaWiki it is supposed to be protecting was recently upgraded, which clobbered the .htaccess file so I restored the above from memory/googling. Maybe I am missing an important directive? The full .htaccess is as follows: AuthName "Our Wiki" AuthType Basic AuthUserFile /path/to/passwd/file AuthGroupFile /dev/null Require valid-user Allow from 192.168 Satisfy Any SetEnvIfNoCase Referer ".*($LIST_OF_ADULT_WORDS).*" BadReferrer order deny,allow deny from env=BadReferrer <IfModule mod_rewrite.c> # turn on rewrite engine RewriteEngine on RewriteBase / # if request is a directory, make sure it ends with a slash RewriteCond %{REQUEST_FILENAME} -d RewriteRule ^(.*/[^/]+)$ $1/ # if not rewritten before, AND requested file is wikka.php # turn request into a query for a default (unspecified) page RewriteCond %{QUERY_STRING} !wakka= RewriteCond %{REQUEST_FILENAME} wikka.php RewriteRule ^(.*)$ wikka.php?wakka= [QSA,L] # if not rewritten before, AND requested file is a page name # turn request into a query for that page name for wikka.php RewriteCond %{QUERY_STRING} !wakka= RewriteRule ^(.*)$ wikka.php?wakka=$1 [QSA,L] </IfModule>

  Read the article

• Windows 2008 R2 Servers Sending Arp Requests for IPs outside Subnet

  - by Kyle Brandt

  By running a packet capture on my my routers I see some of my servers sending ARP requests for IPs that exist outside of its network. For example if my network is: Network: 8.8.8.0/24 Gateway: 8.8.8.1 (MAC: 00:21:9b:aa:aa:aa) Example Server: 8.8.8.20 (MAC: 00:21:9b:bb:bb:bb) By running a capture on the interface that has 8.8.8.1 I see requests like: Sender Mac: 00:21:9b:bb:bb:bb Sender IP: 8.8.8.20 Target MAC: 00:21:9b:aa:aa:aa Target IP: 69.63.181.58 Anyone seen this behavior before? My understanding of ARP is that requests should only go out for IPs within the subnet... Am I confused in my understanding of ARP? If I am not confused, anyone seen this behavior? Also, these seem to happen in bursts and it doesn't happen when I do something like ping an IP outside of the network. Update: In response to Ian's questions. I am not running anything like Hyper-V. I have multiple interfaces but only one is active (Using BACS failover teaming). The subnet mask is 255.255.255.0 (Even if it were something different it wouldn't explain an IP like 69.63.181.58). When I run MS Network Monitor or wireshark I do not see these ARP requests. What happens is that on the router capturing I see a burst of about 10 requests for IPs outside of the network from the host machine. On the machine itself using wireshark or NetMon I see a flood of ARP responses for all the machines on the network. However, I don't see any requests in the capture asking for those responses. So it seems like maybe it is maybe refreshing the arp cache but including IPs that outside of the network. Also when it does this NetMon doesn't show the ARP requests?

  Read the article

• Routing subnet over GRE tunnel

  - by eMgz

  Hi, Im trying to configure a GRE over IPSec connection between two subnets. The IPSec tunnel is opened and now I want to add a GRE tunnel over it: ip tunnel add GRE01 mode gre remote 10.244.0.1 local 10.244.245.32 ttl 255 ip link set GRE01 up ip addr add 10.244.248.126 dev GRE01 ip route add 10.244.248.125 dev GRE01 Now I have an interface GRE01 (ifconfig): GRE10 Link encap:UNSPEC HWaddr <h_addr> inet addr:10.244.248.126 P-t-P:10.244.248.126 Mask:255.255.255.255 UP POINTOPOINT RUNNING NOARP MTU:1476 Metric:1 RX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:0 RX bytes:0 (0.0 B) TX bytes:0 (0.0 B) And the following routes (ip route list): 10.244.248.125 dev GRE10 scope link <pub_subnet> dev eth0 proto kernel scope link src <pub_ip> default via <pub_gw> dev eth0 metric 100 As a last step, I need now to route my subnet over the tunnel: ip route add 10.245.1.224/28 10.244.248.125 However, I am getting the error Error: either "to" is duplicate, or "10.244.248.125" is a garbage. So, what I didn't understand is why I can't route my subnet over the tunnel, once the only route I have there says that it should route the tunnel IP over the GRE01 interface. Any hint? Thanks.

  Read the article

• Isolate clients on same subnet?

  - by stefan.at.wpf

  Given n (e.g. 200) clients in a /24 subnet and the following network structure: client 1 \ . \ . switch -- firewall . / client n / (in words: all clients connected to one switch and the switch connected to the firewall) Now by default, e.g. client 1 and client n can communicate directly using the switch, without any packets ever arriving the firewall. Therefore none of those packets could be filtered. However I would like to filter the packets between the clients, therefore I want to disallow any direct communication between the clients. I know this is possible using vlans, but then - according to my understanding - I would have to put all clients in their own network. However I don't even have that much IP addresses: I have about 200 clients, only a /24 subnet and all clients shall have public ip addresses, therefore I can't just create a private network for each of them (well, maybe using some NAT, but I'd like to avoid that). So, is there any way to tell the switch: Forward all packets to the firewall, don't allow direct communication between clients? Thanks for any hint!

  Read the article

• Can't route specific subnet thru VPN in ubuntu

  - by Disco

  I'm having issues routing traffic thru VPN. Here's my setup I have 3 hosts, let's call them A, B and Z B and Z have a VPN connection in the 10.10.10.x SUBNET A and B have a direct connection in the 10.10.12.x SUBNET I want to be able to route traffic from A to Z, like : A <= 10.10.12.254 [LAN] 10.10.12.111 => B <= 10.10.10.152 [VPN] 10.10.10.10 => Z On host B, i have set up ip_forwarding : net.ipv4.ip_forward = 1 and routing on host B: [root@hostA: ~]# ip route 10.10.10.10 dev ppp0 proto kernel scope link src 10.10.10.152 10.10.12.0/24 dev eth1 proto kernel scope link src 10.10.12.111 10.10.10.0/24 dev ppp0 scope link 169.254.0.0/16 dev eth1 scope link routing on host A: [root@hostA: ~]# ip route 10.10.10.0 via 10.10.12.111 dev eth1 10.10.12.0/24 dev eth1 proto kernel scope link src 10.10.12.254 169.254.0.0/16 dev eth1 scope link default via 192.168.1.1 dev eth0 But still not able to ping 10.10.10.10 from host A. Any idea ? I'm pulling my hairs out.

  Read the article

• Advertise a subnet route with radvd

  - by Thomas Berger

  we have set up a small IPv6 Testing network. The setup looks like this: ::/0 +----------+ | Firewall | Router to the public net +----------+ | 2001:...::/106 | +----------+ +-------| SIT GW | sit Tunnel gatway to the some test users | +----------+ | +----------+ | Test Sys | Testsystem +----------+ The idea is to advertise the default route from the firewall and the route for the SIT subnets from the sit gateway. The configurations for radvd are: # Firewall interface eth0 { AdvSendAdvert on; route ::/0 { }; }; # SIT Gatway interface eth0 { AdvSendAdvert on; route 2001:...::/106 { }; }; We have captured the adv. packages with tcpdump and the packages looks good. We see a default route from the fw, and the subnet route from the SIT gatway. But if we look on the testsystem there are two default routes over both gateways. There is no subnet route. The routing does not work of course. Here the routes we get: 2001:.....::/64 dev eth0 proto kernel metric 256 mtu 1500 advmss 1440 hoplimit 4294967295 fe80::/64 dev eth0 proto kernel metric 256 mtu 1500 advmss 1440 hoplimit 4294967295 default via fe80::baac:6fff:fe8e:XXXX dev eth0 proto kernel metric 1024 expires 0sec mtu 1500 advmss 1440 hoplimit 64 default via fe80::e415:aeff:fe12:XXXX dev eth0 proto kernel metric 1024 expires 0sec mtu 1500 advmss 1440 hoplimit 64 Any Idea?

  Read the article

• Sending eMails in a external subnet in vmware ESXi

  - by user80658

  This might be a bit hard for me to explain - and it is a pretty individual situation. I got a native server at Hetzner (www.hetzner.de). The public IP is 88.[...].12. I got ESXi running on this server. I can access the esxi console by the public ip, but none of the virtual machines. That's why I bought a public subnet with 8 (6 usable) IPs (46.[...]) and an additional public ip (88.[...].26). This additional public ip belongs to the first virtual maschine - a firewall appliance - which is connected to the WAN. This need to be done this way - since it is the official way by hetzner. My 46. subnet is behind the firewall. I got a virtualmin server with dovecot imap/pop3 server. When sending a email, most provider (gmail) will accept those mails, but a lot will put it into spam (aol). My theory is: The MX line of my domain says of course the ip of the virtual machine (46.[...]), but in the raw email it says that email is sent by the ip of the firewall (88.[...].26), which doesnt sound trustworthy. A solution would be if the firewall could handle mail, but it simply cant. How can I prevent this problem? Thanks.

  Read the article

• Private subnet for VM server host-only network

  - by Derek Pressnall

  At my current job, we distribute a product based on a Linux server with multiple VMs defined (using KVM / libvirt). We are planning to expose limited ports to the customer's network, and use iptables to direct inbound traffic to the appropriate internal VM. My question: is there a class of private subnets that I can use for the internal host-only network that is least likely to conflict with a client IP subnet? Specifically, if I choose a /24 out of any of the RFC-1918 defined private subnets (such as 192.168.x.x), there is a chance of conflicting with a customer-used range. I noticed that several current VM implementations default to 192.168.122.x -- is this due to an RFC that I'm not familiar with, and therefore this is a safe range to use (that most network admins would avoid)? Or did the various VM vendors just pick that range randomly? I guess I'm looking for an IP range that is more private than the existing private (RFC1918) addresses. The only other thought I had was to use one of the "Test Net" IP ranges reserved for documentation purposes (RFC 5737). Note, that I'm not worried about a customer's network blocking these IPs, as this is only internal to our server (packets get NATted before leaving the box). However this does seem more unorthodox than just sticking with the default 192.168.122.x/24 subnet.

  Read the article

• Researcher Releases Exploit for IE Zero-Day Hole

  A modest security warning about a vulnerability in Microsoft's Internet Explorer browser has quickly grown into something much larger thanks to the work of a hacker.

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13  | Next Page >