Search Results

Search found 2018 results on 81 pages for 'bayesian networks'.

Page 64/81 | < Previous Page | 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71  | Next Page >

  • Cable management techniques

    - by cornjuliox
    How do you manage the giant jungle of cables behind your PC? When you have 2 or more PCs next to each other, you wind up with this giant mess cables that's a pain in the neck to clean especially when both computers are running 24/7 and any fidgeting with the cables is likely to cause data loss and/or angry users. So far I've tried masking tape, cable ties and plain old string but none have been very effective. The masking tape kept the cables in place, but over time they ended up leaving this awful sticky residue on the sides of the cables that just won't come off gets all over your fingers and is horrible horrible horrible. I have nightmares about that stuff. We used cable ties and 'folded' up some of the longer cables so that they weren't any longer than they needed to be, but this meant that the position of some of our devices like the keyboard and the mouse were essentially 'fixed' until we removed the ties. The string didn't work much differently and required that we tie them properly or risk it coming loose. I would switch to a wireless keyboard and mouse, but I don't want to have to deal with the added expense of batteries, even the rechargable ones. Plus I don't want them to die on me at a crucial moment (happened to me once while playing Firearms _<). I know that there are people out there with home/office networks a thousand times more convoluted than mine, so

    Read the article

  • How to choose which network connection provides the default gateway in Windows XP

    - by Cathy
    I have a laptop with an integrated NIC and a WiFi connection. Both the wired and wireless networks I am using can access the Internet. Win XP is routing all traffic through the wireless network. I want to force it to route everything through the wired network when it is available (i.e. when I am sitting at my desk with the laptop docked) and through the wireless when that is the only option (i.e. when I have undocked my laptop and carried it to a conference room, or if I am out of the office working on a different WiFi network). The wireless connection cannot be established until after I am logged into Windows, so it's always the second network to become available to the OS. I have manually overridden the metric values in the TCP/IP configurations so that the NIC has metric 10 and the WiFi has metric 20. However, Windows is still picking the WiFi adapter's address as the Default Gateway, so this isn't helping. If I manually disable and re-enable the WiFi adapter, then it will switch the default gateway to the wired network and stay that way until I shutdown Windows. How can I tell Windows XP not to replace the default gateway when the WiFi connection is first enabled?

    Read the article

  • Very long (>300s) request processing time on Apache Server serving static content from particular IP

    - by Ron Bieber
    We are running an Apache 2.2 server for a very large web site. Over the past few months we have been having some users reporting slow response times, while others (including our resources, both on the internal network and our home networks) do not see any degradation in performance. After a ton of investigation, we finally found a "Deny from none" statement in our configuration that was causing reverse DNS lookups (which were timing out) that solved the bulk of our issues, but we still have some customers that we are seeing in the Apache logs (using %D in the log format) with request processing times of 300s for images, css, javascript and other static content. We've checked all Deny / Allow statements for reoccurrence of "none", as well as all other things we know of that would cause reverse DNS lookups (such as using "REMOTE_HOST" in rewrite rules, using %a instead of %h in our log format configuration) as well as verified that HostnameLookups is set to "Off". As an aside, we've also validated that reverse DNS lookups for folks having this problem do not time out - so I'm fairly certain DNS is not an issue in this case. I've run out of ideas. Are there any Apache configuration scenarios that someone can point me to that I might be missing that would cause request times for static content to take so long only for certain users? Thank you in advance.

    Read the article

  • Test server on a local network with XAMPP

    - by hopscotch1978
    Hi, I'm not very proficient with networks and could use some help. I've got a Win 7 desktop with XAMPP which acts as my local dev machine. I've configured a virtual host on the desktop which I'm able to access fine. If I'm understanding things correctly, the virtual host uses port 80 (<VirtualHost 127.0.0.1:80>). I've just tried to configure a separate Win XP laptop on the local wireless network to connect to the main desktop for testing purposes. I've added the IP address and virtual host name to my Hosts file on the laptop. My virtual host is imaginatively named "virtualhost1". When I type this into my laptop browser, it connects correctly to the main desktop and I get the XAMPP welcome screen. But I can't seem to get to the actual site, just the XAMPP welcome screen. It kind of jumps the browser to http://virtualhost1/xampp/. I think it's a port issue of some sort but I have no idea how to resolve it. I would get the same XAMPP welcome screen on my desktop if I omitted ":80" from the virtual host declaration. On my main desktop, typing "virtualhost1" to the browser address bar gives me the site correctly, not the XAMPP welcome screen. Help would be appreciated. Thank you.

    Read the article

  • Wireless to Wireless Transfer Slow on a Linksys WRT54GL

    - by Kyle Brandt
    The Situation: When I try to transfer a file from one computer to another that are both connected via wireless on a WRT54GL (in a office) with dd-wrt firmware I often get bad speeds. In generally they average around 100 kilobytes a second. Either computer can download via wireless from the Internet at at about 2 megabytes a second. The speed is slow with the transfer of one large file. There are about 20 other wireless networks that the computers can see, so there is a lot of noise, but I don't have the equipment to really monitor the frequencies well. But that still seems pretty slow. I thought maybe it was the transmit on each card, but even when they are 5 feet away with a line of sight I still get these speeds. According to Linux both cards are operating at 54g. My Questions: Is this normal for this sort of consumer level wireless equipment? Anything I can do to improve it? why is wireless to wireless transfer slow when everything else isn't? Whats steps might I take to figure out what is happening? For example, are lots of packets not making to the access point requiring retransmissions? Above all, I want to find out what the problem actually is. This may seem odd, but at this point I am more interested in understanding what the problem is than fixing it. What I have tried: I have tried messing with lots of settings. Different channels, xmit power, G-Only, none of which has made anything any better. I've also tried upgrading to newer dd-wrt firmware version and doing a reset to wipe out the settings.

    Read the article

  • Cisco ASA user authentication options - OpenID, public RSA sig, others?

    - by Ryan
    My organization has a Cisco ASA 5510 which I have made act as a firewall/gateway for one of our offices. Most resources a remote user would come looking for exist inside. I've implemented the usual deal - basic inside networks with outbound NAT, one primary outside interface with some secondary public IPs in the PAT pool for public-facing services, a couple site-to-site IPSec links to other branches, etc. - and I'm working now on VPN. I have the WebVPN (clientless SSL VPN) working and even traversing the site-to-site links. At the moment I'm leaving a legacy OpenVPN AS in place for thick client VPN. What I would like to do is standardize on an authentication method for all VPN then switch to the Cisco's IPSec thick VPN server. I'm trying to figure out what's really possible for authentication for these VPN users (thick client and clientless). My organization uses Google Apps and we already use dotnetopenauth to authenticate users for a couple internal services. I'd like to be able to do the same thing for thin and thick VPN. Alternatively a signature-based solution using RSA public keypairs (ssh-keygen type) would be useful to identify user@hardware. I'm trying to get away from legacy username/password auth especially if it's internal to the Cisco (just another password set to manage and for users to forget). I know I can map against an existing LDAP server but we have LDAP accounts created for only about 10% of the user base (mostly developers for Linux shell access). I guess what I'm looking for is a piece of middleware which appears to the Cisco as an LDAP server but will interface with the user's existing OpenID identity. Nothing I've seen in the Cisco suggests it can do this natively. But RSA public keys would be a runner-up, and much much better than standalone or even LDAP auth. What's really practical here?

    Read the article

  • OpenVPN with MacOS X Client and same subnets in local and remote net.

    - by Daniel
    I have a homenetwork 192.168.1.0/24 with gteway 192.168.1.1 and a remote network with the same parameters. Now I want to create a OpenVPN tunnel between those networks. I have no problems with Windows, because Windows routes everything to 192.168.1.0/24 except 192.168.1.1 throught the tunnel. On MacOS X however I see the folling line in the Details window: 2010-05-10 09:13:01 WARNING: potential route subnet conflict between local LAN [192.168.1.0/255.255.255.0] and remote VPN [192.168.1.0/255.255.255.0] When I list the routes I get the following: Internet: Destination Gateway Flags Refs Use Netif Expire default 192.168.1.1 UGSc 13 3 en1 127 localhost UCS 0 0 lo0 localhost localhost UH 12 3589 lo0 169.254 link#5 UCS 0 0 en1 192.168.1 link#5 UCS 1 0 en1 192.168.1.1 0:1e:e5:f4:ec:7f UHLW 13 17 en1 1103 192.168.1.101 localhost UHS 0 0 lo0 192.168.6 192.168.6.5 UGSc 0 0 tun0 192.168.6.5 192.168.6.6 UH 1 0 tun0 My Interfaces are en1 - My local Wifi network tun0 - The tunnel interface As can be seen from the routes above there is no entry for 192.168.1.0/24 that routes the traffic through the tunnel interface. When I manually route a single IP like 192.168.1.16 over the tunnel gateway 192.168.6.6, this works. Q: How do I set up my routes in MacOS X for the same behaviour as on windows, to route everything except 192.168.1.1 through the tunnel, but leave the default gateway to be my local 192.168.1.1 ?

    Read the article

  • How do I setup routing for 2 companies with different Internet connections on the same LAN?

    - by Clint Miller
    Here's the setup: 2 companies (A & B) share office space and a LAN. A 2nd ISP is brought in and company A wants it's own Internet connection (ISP A) and company B wants it's own Internet connection (ISP B). VLANs are deployed internally to separate the 2 company's networks (company A: VLAN 1, company B: VLAN 2, shared VOIP: VLAN 3). With separate VLANs it's simple enough to use separate DHCP servers (or separate scopes on the same server) to assign the default gateway to each company's gateway for their Internet connection. Static routes can be created on each gateway to point traffic destined for the other company's VLAN or the voice VLAN so that all nodes are reachable as expected. However, I think this is a form of asymmetrical routing, right? (The path from node A1 to node B1 is not the same as the path back from node B1 to node A1). Can I setup policy-based routing to correct this? In that case, can I assign the same default gateway to every device on all VLANs and create a routing policy on a L3 switch to look at the source address and forward traffic to the appropriate next hop? In that case, I want the routing logic to go like this: If the destination address is known, forward the traffic (traffic destined for a different VLAN). If the destination address is unknown, forward the traffic to ISP A's gateway if the source address is on VLAN A; or forward the traffic to ISP B's gateway if the source address is VLAN B. Am I thinking about this problem in the correct way? Is there another way to solve this problem that I am overlooking?

    Read the article

  • Prevent outgoing traffic unless OpenVPN connection is active using pf.conf on Mac OS X

    - by Nick
    I've been able to deny all connections to external networks unless my OpenVPN connection is active using pf.conf. However, I lose Wi-Fi connectivity if the connection is broken by closing and opening the laptop lid or toggling Wi-Fi off and on again. I'm on Mac OS 10.8.1. I connect to the Web via Wi-Fi (from varying locations, including Internet cafés). The OpenVPN connection is set up with Viscosity. I have the following packet filter rules set up in /etc/pf.conf # Deny all packets unless they pass through the OpenVPN connection wifi=en1 vpn=tun0 block all set skip on lo pass on $wifi proto udp to [OpenVPN server IP address] port 443 pass on $vpn I start the packet filter service with sudo pfctl -e and load the new rules with sudo pfctl -f /etc/pf.conf. I have also edited /System/Library/LaunchDaemons/com.apple.pfctl.plist and changed the line <string>-f</string> to read <string>-ef</string> so that the packet filter launches at system startup. This all seems to works great at first: applications can only connect to the web if the OpenVPN connection is active, so I'm never leaking data over an insecure connection. But, if I close and reopen my laptop lid or turn Wi-Fi off and on again, the Wi-Fi connection is lost, and I see an exclamation mark in the Wi-Fi icon in the status bar. Clicking the Wi-Fi icon shows an "Alert: No Internet connection" message: To regain the connection, I have to disconnect and reconnect Wi-Fi, sometimes five or six times, before the "Alert: No Internet connection" message disappears and I'm able to open the VPN connection again. Other times, the Wi-Fi alert disappears of its own accord, the exclamation mark clears, and I'm able to connect again. Either way, it can take five minutes or more to get a connection again, which can be frustrating. Why does Wi-Fi report "No internet connection" after losing connectivity, and how can I diagnose this issue and fix it?

    Read the article

  • One Active Directory, Multiple Remote Desktop Services (Server 2012 solution)

    - by Trinitrotoluene
    What I am trying to do is quite complex, so I figured I'd throw it out to a wider audience to see if anyone can find a flaw. What I am trying to do (as an MSP/VAR) is design a solution that will give multiple companies a session based remote desktop (companies that need to be kept completely seperate), using only a handful of servers. This is how I imagine it at the moment: CORE SERVER - Server 2012 Datacentre (All below are HyperV servers) Server1: Cloud-DC01 (Active Directory Domain Services for mycloud.local) Server2: Cloud-EX01 (Exchange Server 2010 running multi tenant mode) Server3: Cloud-SG01 (Remote Desktop Gateway) CORE SERVER 2 - Server 2012 Datacentre (All below are HyperV servers) Server1: Cloud-DC02 (Active Directory Domain Services for mycloud.local) Server2: Cloud-TS01 (Remote Desktop Session Host for Company A) Server3: Cloud-TS02 (Remote Desktop Session Host for Company B) Server4: Cloud-TS03 (Remote Desktop Session Host for Company C) What I thought about doing was setting up each Organisation in their own OU (perhaps creating their OU structure based on the Excahnge 2010 tenant OU structure so the accounts are linked). Each company would get a Remote Desktop Session Host server that would also serve as a file server. This server would be seperated from the rest on its own range. The server Cloud-SG01 would have access to all these networks and route the traffic to the appropriate network when a client connects and authenticated so they are pushed onto the correct server (Based on session collections in 2012). I won't lie this is something I have come up with quite quickly so there may well be something gapingly obvious that I am missing. Any feedback would be appreciated.

    Read the article

  • Feasibility of Windows Server 2008 DFS replication over WAN link

    - by CesarGon
    We have just set up a WAN link that connects two buildings in our organisation. The link is provided by a 100-Mbps point to point line. We have a Windows Server 2008 R2 domain controller on each side of the link. Now we are planning to set up DFS for file services across the organisation. The estimated data volume is over 2 TB, and will grow at approximately 20% annually. My idea is to set up a file server in each building and install DFS so that all the contents stay replicated over the 100-Mbps link. I hope that this will ensure that any user will be directed to the closest (and fastest) server when requesting a file from the DFS folders. My concern is whether a 100-Mbps WAN link is good enough to guarantee DFS replication. I've no experience with DFS, so any solid advice is welcome. The line is reliable (i.e. it doesn't crash often) and our data transfer tests show that a 5 MB/sec transfer rate is easily achieved. This is approximately 40% of the nominal bandwidth. I am also concerned about the latency. I mean, how long will users need to wait to see one change on one side of the link after the change has been made on the other side. My questions are: Is this link between networks a reliable infrastructure on which to set up DFS replication? What latency times would be typical (seconds, minutes, hours, days)? Would you recommend that we go for DFS in this scenario, or is there a better alternative? Many thanks.

    Read the article

  • How to tell statd to use portmap on a non-localhost ipadress?

    - by jneves
    How can I make statd connect to other IP address other than 127.0.0.1? I have a server that is connected to 2 different networks (one is public, another a private). I want it to provide a NFS share for only the private network. The host in an ubuntu 8.04. The private ip address is 192.168.1.202 I changed /etc/default/portmap to add: OPTIONS="-i 192.168.1.202" The command lsof -n | grep portmap returns: portmap 10252 daemon cwd DIR 202,0 4096 2 / portmap 10252 daemon rtd DIR 202,0 4096 2 / portmap 10252 daemon txt REG 202,0 15248 13461 /sbin/portmap portmap 10252 daemon mem REG 202,0 83708 32823 /lib/tls/i686/cmov/libnsl-2.7.so portmap 10252 daemon mem REG 202,0 1364388 32817 /lib/tls/i686/cmov/libc-2.7.so portmap 10252 daemon mem REG 202,0 31304 16588 /lib/libwrap.so.0.7.6 portmap 10252 daemon mem REG 202,0 109152 16955 /lib/ld-2.7.so portmap 10252 daemon 0u CHR 1,3 960 /dev/null portmap 10252 daemon 1u CHR 1,3 960 /dev/null portmap 10252 daemon 2u CHR 1,3 960 /dev/null portmap 10252 daemon 3u unix 0xecc8c3c0 4332992 socket portmap 10252 daemon 4u IPv4 4332993 UDP 192.168.1.202:sunrpc portmap 10252 daemon 5u IPv4 4332994 TCP 192.168.1.202:sunrpc (LISTEN) portmap 10252 daemon 6u REG 0,12 289 3821511 /var/run/portmap_mapping I defined in /etc/hosts the following: 192.168.1.202 server.local In /etc/default/nfs-common I changed STATDOPTS to: STATDOPTS="--name server.local" Yet when I run /etc/init.d/nfs-common start if fails to start. The log shows: Jun 8 06:37:44 cookwork-web1 rpc.statd[9723]: Version 1.1.2 Starting Jun 8 06:37:44 cookwork-web1 rpc.statd[9723]: Flags: Jun 8 06:37:44 cookwork-web1 rpc.statd[9723]: unable to register (statd, 1, udp). An strace -f rpc.statd -n server.local results in a lot of lines, including this one: sendto(9, "\200]3\362\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\2\0\1\206\240\0\0\0\2\0\0\0\1"..., 56, 0, {sa_family=AF_INET, sin_port=htons(111), sin_addr=inet_addr("127.0.0.1")}, 16) = 56

    Read the article

  • A star vs internet routing pathfinding

    - by alan2here
    In many respects pathfinding algorythms like A star for finding the shortest route though graphs are similar to the pathfinding on the internet when routing trafic. However the pathfinding routers perform seem to have remarkable properties. As I understand it: It's very perfromant. New nodes can be added at any time that use a free address from a finite (not tree like) address space. It's real routing, like A*, theres never any doubling back for example. IP addresses don't have to be geographicly nearby. The network reacts quickly to changes to the networks shape, for example if a line is down. Routers share information and it takes time for new IP's to be registered everywhere, but presumably every router dosn't have to store a list of all the addresses each of it's directions leads most directly to. I can't find this information elsewhere however I don't know where to look or what search tearms to use. I'm looking for a basic, general, high level description to the algorithms workings, from the point of view of an individual router.

    Read the article

  • Multiple static WAN IP addresses to single LAN subnet

    - by Jessy Houle
    Below is my home network topology. I currently have 5 static IP addresses, 3 of which are in use by 3 routers. These routers in-turn subnet internal networks and port forward. I use my SSL VPN appliance to remote home from work or on the road. At this point I can remotely administer my Windows Server. I know the network is setup wrong, I was matching existing hardware the best I knew how. http://storage.jessyhoule.com.s3.amazonaws.com/network_topology.jpg Ok this said, here is the problem... One of my websites on my Windows Server now needs to be secure (SSL using port 443). However, I'm already port forwarding port 443 to my VPN appliance. Furthermore, if I'm going to have to reconfigure the network, I would really like to be able to use the SSL VPN to remotely administer all machines. I mentioned this to a friend of mine, who said that what I was looking for was a firewall. Explaining that a firewall would take in multiple static (WAN) IP addresses, and still allow all internal devices to be on the same network. So, basically, I could supply my SSL VPN appliance it's very own static (WAN) IP address routing, and yet have it on the same internal network (192.168.1.x) as all my other devices. The first question is... Does this sound right? Secondly, would you suggest anything different? And, finally, what is the cheapest way to do this? I am started down the road of downloading/installing untangle and smoothwall to see if they will do the job, hoping they take multiple static (WAN) IP addresses. Thank you in advance for your answers. -Jessy Houle

    Read the article

  • Options for small windows network setup without dedicated server?

    - by Mitch
    I'm very weak on networking and hope someone can point me in the right direction: I have written some windows client/server software which incorporates a database which is located on a windows server. I have a test installation running at a customer's office where the server has a static IP address. In this case its easy for the clients to access the database because of the fixed IP address. Also, customers with network servers generally have specialist support staff to set up my software, so its not such a problem for me. However I also need to offer the software to customers who have small offices with less than 10 PCs and no dedicated network server. In this case I want the customer to be able to nominate one PC as the database "server" and install my software and have the clients access it. But in this situation I believe the "server" PC may not have a dedicated IP address. Q1: What is the best way to set this up simply and make it work? Can I reliably reference the "server" by using its name, or is there a way to assign dummy fixed IP addresses? Ideally this needs to be workable on small networks running a mixture of XP/Vista/Windows7 as my target market may well have mixed OSes etc. I guess this would be akin to home networking? Many thanks Mitch

    Read the article

  • RRAS Problem routing to central site from RRAS server only?

    - by TomTom
    Given is an office connected to headquarters using a RRAS bridge (2 virtual machines using RRAS to route between the two networks). Naming: The office is A, the RRAS on A is a-lnk. THe headquartters is B, b-lnk the RRAS machine there. The VPN works perfectly - machines can ping and work between the sites. Domain controllers on both ends replicating, DFS working, remote desktop working. All in all... everything is fine. EXCEPT: a-lnk itself can not reach any machine in B. This would normally not be troublesome (noone ever does anything on a-lnk), but there are two exceptions: * a-lnk is supposed to get it's license from a KMS in B, so not being able to reach B means it is not prolonging. * a-lnk is supposed to pull updates from a WSUS in B - and not being able to reach B means - no updates. Given that thigns work (and security is a minor issue - A-lnk is not reachable from the internet as it is behing a NAT hardware anyway) this got not handled for months. I just wan to get this item ticked off now. Anyone an idea what this is? It definitely is not a "dns does not work" or "routing in general is bad" item, as any computer in A can connect to any computer in B, and the other way arount - only the RRAS computer itself seems to do something really awkward. Platform for both: 2008 R2 standard.

    Read the article

  • Can't connect remotely to Windows Server 2008 R2

    - by JohnyD
    I have a new Dell R710 server running Windows Server 2008 R2. I one of it's 4 nic's set up and the rest are not being used. I have successfully given it an ip address, network mask, and dns servers. I can ping and resolve this machine from anywhere else in the network. However, when I try to connect to it via RDP it does several things: 1) it might just outright refuse me with the message, "This computer can't connect to the remote computer. Try connecting again." 2) it might connect me and let me chose the account I would like to log on as... but when you select an account then you receive the same message as in #1 3) it might actually allow you to connect but only for about 1 minute and then you receive the same message and it closes your session. I have configured the firewall service to allow for RDP over the domain network connection. This didn't have any noticible effect. I have now disabled the firewall for all 3 networks and have even stopped the Windows Firewall service. I am still having the same issue. I am new to Server 2008 R2 and things are very different. Please give me any advice you can on how to resolve this issue and/or any other gotchas that are sure to come my way. The 2003 - 2008 learning curve seems steep. Thanks

    Read the article

  • RTL8192SU + RTL8191E Linux Issue Installing Driver

    - by s32ialx
    OK I've read tons of fourms of people getting the onboard RTL8191E working and the RTL8192SU working dif is U = USB they are both N and i have both Toshiba L500D-00T pre-installed Win Vistax64-HP and i have obtained the free Win7x64-HP upgrade the onboard wificard sucks and can't hold a stable connection for more then 20minutes in windows but the usb is amazing. Now problem is i tried both Ubuntu and Mandriva with no resolve the issue is the onboard drive detects and actually SHOWS that it's there but no wireless networks detect so it's saying no SSID's are broadcasting which i know is a lie since I'm running a 2wire bell dsl modem with built in wifi and a Linksys wrt54g w/ DD-WRT firmware and both are broadcasting fine. Why don't i use the USB? new in Mandriva Linux Control Center 2010.0 it shows up in Other/Unknown as RTL8191S WLAN Adapter and on the right pane this shows up Identification Vendor: ?Manufacturer Realtek Description: ?RTL8191S WLAN Adapter Media class: ? Connection Bus: ?USB Bus PCI #: ?1 PCI device #: ?5 Vendor ID: ?0x0bda Device ID: ?0x8172 Sub vendor ID: ?0x0000 Sub device ID: ?0x0000 Misc Module: ?rtl819xU In the hardware device manager in mandriva it shows up as unknown but shows that it's realtek and that it's a 8192 chipset. but no option to for a driver install and when i do a make in terminal i get this error and no clue what it means [root@John-PC rtl8192se_linux_2.6.0010.1020.2009_64bit]# make make: *** /lib/modules/2.6.31.12-desktop-3mnb/build: No such file or directory. Stop. make: *** [all] Error 2 [root@John-PC rtl8192se_linux_2.6.0010.1020.2009_64bit]# any help appreciated. and just encase I'm running currently Mandriva Spring 2010 Free

    Read the article

  • IPSec tunnelling with ISA Server 2000...

    - by Izhido
    Believe it or not, our corporate network still uses ISA Server 2000 (in a Windows Server 2003 machine) to enable / control Internet access to / from it. I was asked recently to configure that ISA Server to create a site-to-site VPN for a new branch in a office about 25 km. away from it. The idea is basically to enable not only computers, but also Palm devices (WiFi-enabled, of course), to be able to see other computers in both sites. I was also told that a simple VPN-enabled wireless AP/router (in this case, a Cisco WRV210 unit) should be enough to establish communications with the main office. To be fair, the router looks easy to configure; it was confusing at first, but further understanding of how site-to-site VPNs work cleared all doubts about it. Now I need to make modifications to our ISA Server in order to recognize the newly installed & configured "remote" VPN site. Thing is, either my Googling skills are pathethically horrible, or there doesn't seem to be much (or any, at all) information about how to configure an ISA Server 2000 for this purpose. Lots of stuff on 2004, of course; also, I think I saw something for 2006. But nothing I could find about 2000. Reading about 2004, it seems that the only way I can do site-on-site with a Cisco router (read: a non-ISA-Server machine) is through something they call a "IPSec tunnel". Fair enough. However, I can't figure for the life of me how could I even start to find, leave alone configure, such a thing. Do you, people, happen to know how to do IPSec tunelling on a ISA Server 2000, so I can connect to a Cisco WRV210 VPN-enabled router, and build a site-to-site VPN for both networks? Or is this not possible at all? (Meaning I should change anything in this configuration to make it work...)

    Read the article

  • Joining Samba to Active Directory with local user authentication

    - by Ansel Pol
    I apologise that this is somewhat incoherent, but hopefully someone will be able to make enough sense of this to understand what I'm trying to achieve and provide pointers. I have a machine with two network interfaces connected to two different networks (one of which it's providing several other services for, such as DNS), running two separate instances of Samba, one bound to each interface. One of the instances is just a workgroup-style setup using share-level authentication, which is all working fine. The problem is that I'm looking to join the other instance to an MS Active Directory domain (provided by MS Windows Small Business Server 2003) to enable a subset of the domain users to access the shares from Windows machines on the other network. The users who need access from the domain environment have accounts (whose names are all-lowercase versions of their domain usernames) on the machine running Samba, but I'm not sure about how to map the UIDs and everything I've read concerns authenticating accounts on that machine against either AD or another LDAP server. To clarify: I only want the credentials for AD users accessing the non-workgroup Samba instance to be authenticated against AD, not the accounts on the machine running Samba. I hope this is sufficiently clear. EDIT: In addition to being able to access the Samba shares from AD, I do also need to be able to access a share on the domain from the machine running Samba but would still like everything non-Samba-related to authenticate locally.

    Read the article

  • Wiring my internet

    - by u8sand
    I have Verizon internet service and am currently using wifi. My router is in the basement and my desktop computer is 2 floors and on the other side of the house above it... Worst possible positioning but that's just how things worked out. My wireless currently is extremely unstable so I've decide to correct the problem by wiring my computer directly. The problem lies here: when redoing the room next to it (when the wall was open) we went ahead and wired some coaxial cable from our attic to our basement (with plenty of slack on both ends, don't ask me why we didn't go ahead and wire a CAT6 cable). The question is: Can I use the coaxial cable to bring me internet connection? Naturally the router (which needs to stay where it is) takes a coaxial cable input and has Ethernet outputs. So maybe I would have to take a ethernet cable, convert to coaxial-coaxial to my computer, convert back to ethernet. Is this even possible to convert from coaxial to ethernet? Or do I have to attempt to go ahead and fish a cat6 cable through my house. I cannot just split the signal because that would require two routers and two networks (which I don't believe would work with one cable-one ISP correct me if I'm wrong). Thanks

    Read the article

  • Intranet Setup for Small business any resources?

    - by Rogue
    Want to setup an intranet for a small business setup. Current Setup 28 computers running Windows ( few older pc's run Windows Xp but most run Windows 7) Spare Dell Pentium 3 which can run as a server. 6 switches spare NIC's and lots of lan cable available for networking. 3 Independent Internet connections Currently we have 3 independent networks which share internet connections, each network uses a different internet connection. Current network is setup solely to share the internet connection. What I need to achieve in this intranet Setup one common network. Instant file transfer via local network (maybe setup a file server?) Local text and voice messenger software Bridge the 3 internet connections and route all the internet connections from the main server Ability to allow or deny internet access to any computer on the network. Remote access from the main server to the client pc's on the network to debug software issues What operating system should I use on the main server? Do I need a hardware firewall? Any setup guides / resources or how-to's on how I can achieve the above requirements.

    Read the article

  • Wireless router that supports Bonjour between wire- and wireless- connected machines

    - by cefstat
    At home I have an ADSL modem that I use also as router. For the record, it is a DavoLink DV-2020 provided by Tele2 in the Netherlands. It turns out that if a computer is connected with a cable to the router and another computer is connected wirelessly, then they cannot see each other's services that are advertised through Bonjour (Apple's service discovery protocol, an implementation of Zeroconf). The combinations wired/wired and wireless/wireless work fine. This means that somehow wire- and wireless- connected machines are on different physical networks although their IPs are in the same range (192.168.1.*). The modem in question doesn't provide many options that I could play with. So, I was thinking of buying a second router to connect to the modem, and then connect all my machines to this second router. The problem is that I am afraid that I will have again the same problem. I am looking for suggestions on routers that offer the functionality I want (Bonjour between wired and wireless connections). I suppose that one solution would be Apple's Airport Extreme Base Station but at 160€ it is ridiculously expensive. Any other options out there? And why is it so difficult to find in the technical characteristics if wired and wireless connections are on the same physical network?

    Read the article

  • Designing a software based load balancer

    - by Kishore pandey
    Hello to all Server fault users, I am new to this website but have constantly been using the mother website, stackover flow. Well to begin with, i would like to design a load balancer for the organization i am working for. As i am very new to this whole, idea about load balancing and networks. I am finding it very difficult to start my project. I did a lot of research on already existing load balancer and found some(HAPROXY,NGINX) that could solve my problems, but the point is, I am still in a dilemma if they could answer the following requirements of mine: The client and server in my architecture are distributed. The load balancer should take care of the firewall. LB server should balance the load among all servers present in WWW cloud. The LB server should have some sort of configuration file, with the help of which it is possible to configure the servers. Heart beat: With the help of which it would be possible to check if any server is down, if any server is down the request should be passed to some other server. Various load balancing algorithms of the incoming requests. Easy error handling. It should be fairly possible to prioritize the incoming requests. Is there any already available load balncer solution on the market that could satisfy these requirements? If not is there any base code available with the help of which i could develop my own load balncer. If not where should i start from scratch? I am practically new to everything. Any help from a load balancer expert is very much appreciated. Thanx a ton in advance. Cheers and regards. Kishore

    Read the article

  • IPv6 - Public IPs, private IPs, IPs derived from the MAC address? Confused!

    - by sinni800
    I'm pretty much excited for IPv6 because of the large address room and (potential?) owning of more than one IP, or even tens of IPs (/122 subnet?) Though one magazine has now confused me. In a current issue (no. 3) of "CT", a German computer magazine, I read that when using IPv6 your IP address consists of your MAC address and various other things, and that this address will be public on the web, no matter what access point / LAN you connect to. My knowledge of IP(v6) is in contrary of this. I thought you will normally always have a a local network IP and NAT takes care of your Internet access, and your provider gives the NAT router an IP. I've heard of the 6to4 interface, but does this one give you your own ip in the IPv6 net? Personally I hope it still is through a personal IP space (like 192.168, 127.16-31, 10. in IPv4) in private networks with a NAT going to the Internet. And also I hope that providers will offer subnets to private customers so they don't have to use NAT anymore. Yay for converting your LAN into the WAN and using better security (so Computers from the same subnet still get access rights like normal).

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71  | Next Page >