Search Results

Search found 2051 results on 83 pages for 'neural networks'.

Page 65/83 | < Previous Page | 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72  | Next Page >

• How do I get a Wireless N PCi card to connect to a wireless G router?

  - by Andy

  I'm having some problems setting up a new wireless PCI card on a WinXP SP3 PC. I know that the router is configured correctly. It is a Linksys WRT54GL, using 802.11b/g. Security mode is WPA2 Personal with TKIP+AES encryption. I am able to connect to this fine using my laptop (first gen MacBook with a 802.11b built in card). The new PCI card is also Linksys, but it supports 802.11n. Card seems to be installed ok (Windows sees it fine, doesn't list any errors in Device Manager), however when it scans for available wireless networks it can't find my wireless network (the router is set to broadcast the SSID). I tried to enter the network SSID manually, but that didn't seem to help. I chose WPA2-PSK for network authentication. The only options for encryption are TKIP or AES - I've tried both, neither worked. I am sure that I typed in my wireless key correctly. At this point, I don't think the problem is with encryption, but something else. It almost seems like I need to switch the wireless card into g mode, but I haven't found a way to do that (if that is even possible/necessary - I thought n was fully backwards compatible with g). Also, the PC is in the same room as the router, and my laptop, so I don't think that it is an interference issue. Any ideas what I'm doing wrong? I'm running out of things to try at this point. :(

  Read the article

• How to use the AWUS036H on MacBook Pro with Lion and Backtrack in VM?

  - by Swader

  I have the AWUS036H USB WiFi adapter and have recently upgraded the OSX to Lion. The thing is, there are no drivers for Lion for the AWUS036H, and I would have to boot into 32bit mode every time I want to launch the adapter as per instructions here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n9_HAGi1ce0 I also want to install BackTrack as I deal in networks a lot for my company. While this would be a simple matter on any other laptop, the company issued Macbook does not allow booting into any OS other than MacOSX or Windows with Bootcamp. Now, since dual booting into BT is not an option, I would like Backtrack to run in VM inside my MacOSX Lion - and this it does. It works like a charm inside VirtualBox. But since there are no 64bit drivers for the wifi adapter, Lion doesn't recognize it and cannot install it. This, in turn, means that Backtrack cannot see it even though AWUS036H usually works flawlessly with BT. How can I make my VM-based BT see the wifi adapter even if the parent OS doesn't see it, if at all? Is there a way, or am I better off buying a new WiFi adapter that supports OSX 10.7 such as the AWUS036NHR?

  Read the article

• windows Home Server backup error

  - by domen

  I've finally built my WHS, but some other problems have showed up. I've googled, binged and searched SU with no success. The problem is following: at the moment I've got a Win7 laptop and Win7 PC, which should be backed up by the WHS. Laptop is backed up just fine with no issues, but when I try to manually backup the PC, after "backup is starting" message, when backup service should be monitoring changes on partitions, PC gets disconnected from the home network and thus, the backup process is stuck. Disabling/enabling network adapter gets PC back on the network. The only thing I've tried was reinstalling connector software. no success. Also, I've downloaded connector troubleshooter and only thing it says is "DHCP server was not found". I'm not good with networks, so I couldn't figure out what could that indicate (all computers in the network are assigned static IPs). Any ideas what the problem can be? I can provide any additional information, I'm just not sure what may be helpful right now. Thanks.

  Read the article

• Creating basic, redundant gigE or IB storage network for Xen?

  - by StaringSkyward

  With only a modest budget, I want to move my 4 xen servers over to network storage -either NFS or iSCSI which will be determined based on how well it performs when we test it (we need good throughput and it must continue to work through link and switch failure tests). We may add another couple of xen servers at some point when this is done. I don't know much about the design and operation of storage networks, so would really appreciate some hints from those with experience. The budget is around $3,800 excluding the storage appliance. I am currently thinking these are my options to remain on budget: 1) Go for used infiniband hardware and aim for 10gb performance. 2) Stick with gig ethernet and buy some new switches (cisco or procurve) to create a storage-only ethernet LAN. Upgrade to 10gigE later but try to use hardware capable of it where possible to reduce upgrade costs. I have seen used, warrantied infiniband switches at reasonable prices (presumably because big companies are converging on 10gbit ethernet?) and the promise of cheap 10gb is attractive. I know nothing about IB, so here come the questions: Can I buy 2 x switches and have multiple HBAs in my xen and storage nodes to get redundancy and increased performance without complexity or expensive management software costs? If so, can you point me to some examples? Do NFS and iSCSI work just the same regardless? Is IB a sensible choice or could/should I use ethernet or FC on the same budget - I'm keen not to get boxed into a corner for future upgrades, however. For the storage I am likely to build a storage server using nexentastor with the intention that I can later add more disks, SSDs and add another server to provide a failover option at the storage level. An HP LeftHand starter SAN is also under consideration, too. Thanks in advance.

  Read the article

• Windows 7 - Windwos XP - sharing - why isn't working?

  - by durumdara

  Hi! This is seems to be "hardware" and not "software" / "programming" question, but I need to use this share in my programs, so it is "close to programming". We had an XP based wireless network. The server is XP Professional, the clients are XP Home (Notebooks). This was working well with folder sharing (with user rights, not simple share). Then we replaced the one of the notebook with Win7/X64 notebook. First time this can reach the server, and the another client too. Later I went to another sites, and connect to another servers, another networks. And then, when I return to this network, I saw that I cannot connect to this server. Nothing of resources I see, and when try to dbl click on this computer, I got login window, where I can write anything, never I can login... The interesting part, that: Another XP home can see the server, can login as quest, or with other user. The server can see the XP home notebook. The Win7 can see the notebook's shared folders, and XP home can see the Win7 shared folders. The server can see the Win7 folders, BUT: the Win7 cannot see the server folders. Cannot see the resources too... The Win7 is in "work networking group", the group name is not mshome. I tried everything on the server, I tried to remove MS client, restore it with simple sharing, set guest password, etc., but I lost the possibilities to access this server from Win7. Does anyone have any idea what I need to see, what I need to set to access these resource - to use them in my programs? Thanks for every info, link: dd

  Read the article

• hosts file seems to be ignored

  - by z4y4ts

  I have almost fresh Ubuntu desktop box. OS was installed two weeks ago and updated from karmic repositories. Last week I had no problems with DNS. But this week something had changed. I'm not sure what and when, and not sure whether I changed any configs. So now I have some really weird situation. According to logs name resolving should work normally. /etc/hosts 127.0.0.1 localhost test 127.0.1.1 desktop /etc/host.conf order hosts,bind multi on /etc/resolv.conf # Generated by NetworkManager search search servers obtained via DHCP nameserver 192.168.0.3 /etc/nsswitch.conf passwd: compat group: compat shadow: compat hosts: files mdns4_minimal [NOTFOUND=return] dns mdns4 networks: files protocols: db files services: db files ethers: db files rpc: db files netgroup: nis But if fact it is not. user@test ~ping test PING localhost (127.0.0.1) 56(84) bytes of data. [skip] Pinging is ok. user@test ~host test test.mydomain.com has address xx.xxx.161.201 But pure I suspect that NetworkManager might cause this misbehavior, but don't know where to start to check it. Any thoughts, suggestions?

  Read the article

• Multiple Set Peer for VPN Failover

  - by Kyle Brandt

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

  Read the article

• How to give wife emergency access to logins, passwords, etc.?

  - by Torben Gundtofte-Bruun

  I'm the digital guru in my household. My wife is good with email and forum websites but she trusts me with all our important digital stuff -- such as online banking and other things that require passwords, but also family photos and the plethora of other digital things in a modern home. We discuss relevant actions but it's always me that executes the actions. If I should get "hit by a bus" then my wife would be thoroughly stranded -- she would have no idea what digital stuff is where on our computer, how to access it, what online accounts we have, and their login credentials are. It would also leave my many public appearances (personal websites, email accounts, social networks, etc.) unresolved. To complicate things, I'm one of those people who don't use password as my password everywhere; I use a mix of SuperGenPass and LastPass, and also two-factor authentication whenever possible. I don't have much hope that she would find her way through a written explanation of all that in a stressful situation. I could just tell her that she should ask my tech-savvy twin brother and then entrust him with my LastPass master passphrase. I feel that would have a high chance of success, but it's inelegant and leaves my wife without control of the information. How can I ensure that my wife has access to my digital remains?

  Read the article

• Is encryption really needed for having network security? [closed]

  - by Cawas

  I welcome better key-wording here, both on tags and title. I'm trying to conceive a free, open and secure network environment that would work anywhere, from big enterprises to small home networks of just 1 machine. I think since wireless Access Points are the most, if not only, true weak point of a Local Area Network (let's not consider every other security aspect of having internet) there would be basically two points to consider here: Having an open AP for anyone to use the internet through Leaving the whole LAN also open for guests to be able to easily read (only) files on it, and even a place to drop files on Considering these two aspects, once everything is done properly... What's the most secure option between having that, or having just an encrypted password-protected wifi? Of course "both" would seem "more secure". But it shouldn't actually be anything substantial. I've always had the feeling using any kind of the so called "wireless security" methods is actually a bad design. I'm talking mostly about encrypting and pass-phrasing (which are actually two different concepts), since I won't even consider hiding SSID and mac filtering. I understand it's a natural way of thinking. With cable networking nobody can access the network unless they have access to the physical cable, so you're "secure" in the physical way. In a way, encrypting is for wireless what building walls is for the cables. And giving pass-phrases would be adding a door with a key. So, what do you think?

  Read the article

• Can't connect to research.microsoft.com on home Qwest DSL connection

  - by rakingleaves

  I have a puzzling issue regarding accessing research.microsoft.com from my home Qwest DSL connection. By default, I frequently get timeouts when accessing research.microsoft.com from Firefox, Safari, or Chrome on my Mac. I also cannot access the site from Internet Explorer in a Windows VM. However, I am able to access the site through proxify.com, so I know the site is not down. Furthermore, I haven't noticed problems accessing other sites (in particular, www.microsoft.com works fine). Also, I can access research.microsoft.com when I'm connected to networks other than my home Qwest DSL connection. Together, the above make me suspect a problem with either my router (Airport Express) or, more likely, my ISP. Anyone have any thoughts on how I can narrow down the problem further? I could call my ISP and tell them the above, but my feeling is that probably won't get me very far. I can get by browsing research.microsoft.com through a proxy, but it would be nice to figure out what's going on here and fix the problem. Oh, the only relevant discussion I found via Google was here: http://forums.whirlpool.net.au/forum-replies-archive.cfm/1311734.html Update: Thanks to those who have tried to help! I found one other thing while Googling that may be vaguely relevant: http://thedaneshproject.com/posts/supportmicrosoftcom-not-working-behind-squid/ Disabling the Accept-Encoding headers in Firefox actually didn't make a difference for me. I just thought the above might spark some other ideas about how mishandling of HTTP headers somewhere might be causing this problem. Thanks again! Another update: In case anyone is still thinking about this; I've found that I can't surf research.microsoft.com using the links text-based browser, but I can reliably download individual files with wget. Maybe that helps?

  Read the article

• Two DHCP servers on the same network

  - by CesarGon

  We are setting up a routing link between the Windows Server 2008 networks of two different buildings in my organisation. Each network uses a different IP addressing scheme (one uses public addresses, the other one uses private), but the goal is having a single Windows Server domain across the gap between the buildings. The link is provided by a 100-Mbps point-to-point line. I have always understood that you should not have more than one DHCP server on a network. However, we are planning to put a domain controller on each building, and each domain controller will be a DNS server and a DHCP server as well. The intention is that a machine booting up in building A gets its IP address from the DHCP server closer to it, in building A, while a machine booting up in building B gets an address from the DHCP server in building B. Since the two buildings will be linked and the network will be only one, will this work? How can I avoid that a machine booting up in building A gets an address from the DHCP server in building B (or vice versa)? Thanks.

  Read the article

• Two DHCP servers on the same network

  - by CesarGon

  We are setting up a routing link between the Windows Server 2008 networks of two different buildings in my organisation. Each network uses a different IP addressing scheme (one uses public addresses, the other one uses private), but the goal is having a single Windows Server domain across the gap between the buildings. The link is provided by a 100-Mbps point-to-point line. I have always understood that you should not have more than one DHCP server on a network. However, we are planning to put a domain controller on each building, and each domain controller will be a DNS server and a DHCP server as well. The intention is that a machine booting up in building A gets its IP address from the DHCP server closer to it, in building A, while a machine booting up in building B gets an address from the DHCP server in building B. Since the two buildings will be linked and the network will be only one, will this work? How can I avoid that a machine booting up in building A gets an address from the DHCP server in building B (or vice versa)? Thanks.

  Read the article

• Do all routers really must know all routes to every router?

  - by Philipili

  This is my complicated and long question. First let's talk about the context. Network topology: PC A --- RT A --- RT C --- RT B --- PC B (RT C has a WAN NIC connected to "the cloud") With this situation : PC A must send a packet to PC B Default routes direct packets to the cloud We haven't access to RT C's configuration RT C only knows how to join network A, not network B RT A knows about network B RT B knows about network A RT C's routing table: Destination NIC Gateway 0.0.0.0 WAN Cloud Network A LAN A RT A's WAN RT A's routing table: Destination NIC Gateway 0.0.0.0 WAN LAN A Network B WAN LAN A RT B's routing table: Destination NIC Gateway 0.0.0.0 WAN LAN B Network A WAN LAN B I would like to permit PC A and PC B to communicate, but I don't have access to RT C. Networks B and BC are new. Can PC A send a packet to RT B's WAN NIC (which is possible) and "ask RT B to direct the packet to PC B" ? I believe replacing RT B with a VPN server should do the trick, but I would like to know if it is possible to make it without establishing a new connection.

  Read the article

• Campus VLAN Segmentation - By OS?

  - by Moduspwnens

  We've been thinking through re-arranging our network and VLAN configuration. Here's the situation. We already have our servers, VoIP phones, and printers on their own VLANs, but our problem lies with end user devices. There are just too many to lump on the same VLAN without being hammered with broadcasts! Our current segmentation strategy has them split into VLANs like this: Student iPads Staff iPads Student Macbooks Staff Macbooks Gaming devices Staff (Other) Student (Other) *Note that our network has many more iPads and MacBooks than most. Since the primary reason we're splitting them is just to put them in smaller groups, this has been working for us (for the most part). However, this required our staff to maintain access control lists (MAC addresses) of all devices belonging in these groups. It also has the unfortunate side effect of illogically grouping broadcast traffic. For example, using this setup, students on opposite ends of campus using iPads will share broadcasts, but two devices belonging to the same user (in the same room) will likely be on completely separate VLANs. I feel like there must be a better way of doing this. I've done a lot of research and I'm having trouble finding instances of this kind of segmentation being recommended. The feedback on the most relevant SO question seems to point toward VLAN segmentation by building/physical location. I feel like that makes sense because logically, at least among miscellaneous end users, broadcasts will typically be intended for nearby devices. Are there other campuses/large-scale networks out there segmenting VLANs based on end-system OS? Is this a typical configuration? Would VLAN segmentation based on physical location (or some other criteria) be more effective? EDIT: I've been told that we will soon be able to dynamically determine device OS without maintaining access lists, although I'm not sure how much that affects the answers to the questions.

  Read the article

• Why Ubuntu could treat hosts file so strange?

  - by z4y4ts

  I have almost fresh Ubuntu desktop box. OS was installed two weeks ago and updated from karmic repositories. Last week I had no problems with DNS. But this week something had changed. I'm not sure what and when, and not sure whether I changed any configs. So now I have some really weird situation. According to logs name resolving should work normally. /etc/hosts 127.0.0.1 localhost test 127.0.1.1 desktop /etc/host.conf order hosts,bind multi on /etc/resolv.conf # Generated by NetworkManager search search servers obtained via DHCP nameserver 192.168.0.3 /etc/nsswitch.conf passwd: compat group: compat shadow: compat hosts: files mdns4_minimal [NOTFOUND=return] dns mdns4 networks: files protocols: db files services: db files ethers: db files rpc: db files netgroup: nis But if fact it is not. user@test ~ping test PING localhost (127.0.0.1) 56(84) bytes of data. [skip] Pinging is ok. user@test ~host test test.myviacube.com has address xx.xxx.161.201 But pure I suspect that NetworkManager might cause this misbehavior, but don't know where to start to check it. Any thoughts, suggestions?

  Read the article

• Windows 7 x64 wired connection problem. IP, gateway, dns assigned, can't ping. Network detected as "Network"

  - by Emil Lerch

  I am having a problem connecting to a specific wired network with my Latitude E6410 laptop. Other wired networks seem to work fine, but this one does not. I have a coworker with me with the same Intel 82577LM Gigabit Network card, and he can connect just fine. I've updated to the latest Intel drivers (11.8.75.0) and am not using Pro Set. I obtain all DHCP information just fine (IP, netmask, DNS server, default gateway). I cannot ping anything (internal or on the Internet - I tried pinging Google's public DNS servers by IP 8.8.8.8), nor can I get answers to any DNS queries through NS Lookup. Windows troubleshooting says everything is fine, but I can't get DNS responses. I've seen issues like this in the past that were related to link speed/duplex autonegotiaion failures, so I've tried manually setting link speed/duplex to all values one by one with no success. My coworker is using all default settings, so he is just using autonegotiate. Any ideas of other things to try?

  Read the article

• I have added a port to the public zone in firewalld but still can't access the port

  - by mikemaccana

  I've been using iptables for a long time, but have never used firewalld until recently. I have enabled port 3000 TCP via firewalld with the following command: # firewall-cmd --zone=public --add-port=3000/tcp --permanent However I can't access the server on port 3000. From an external box: telnet 178.62.16.244 3000 Trying 178.62.16.244... telnet: connect to address 178.62.16.244: Connection refused There are no routing issues: I have a separate rule for a port forward from port 80 to port 8000 which works fine externally. My app is definitely listening on the port too: Proto Recv-Q Send-Q Local Address Foreign Address State User Inode PID/Program name tcp 0 0 0.0.0.0:3000 0.0.0.0:* LISTEN 99 36797 18662/node firewall-cmd doesn't seem to show the port either - see how ports is empty. You can see the forward rule I mentioned earlier. # firewall-cmd --list-all public (default, active) interfaces: eth0 sources: services: dhcpv6-client ssh ports: masquerade: no forward-ports: port=80:proto=tcp:toport=8000:toaddr= icmp-blocks: rich rules: However I can see the rule in the XML config file: # cat /etc/firewalld/zones/public.xml <?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?> <zone> <short>Public</short> <description>For use in public areas. You do not trust the other computers on networks to not harm your computer. Only selected incoming connections are accepted.</description> <service name="dhcpv6-client"/> <service name="ssh"/> <port protocol="tcp" port="3000"/> <forward-port to-port="8000" protocol="tcp" port="80"/> </zone> What else do I need to do to allow access to my app on port 3000? Also: is adding access via a port the correct thing to do? Or should I make a firewalld 'service' for my app instead?

  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

• 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

• 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

• 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

• Microsoft Windows DHCP: Steering IPv4 clients into specific scopes based on MAC

  - by Easter Sunshine

  We have visitors on our campus who bring their own laptops and devices and use our wireless and wired networks. When we receive a copyright infringement notice (typically BitTorrenting), we are required to quarantine that MAC address so that it no longer has Internet access. No matter what website it tries to visit, it is sent to a web page explaining to the user that the device has been quarantined. We have thus far implemented this in ISC DHCP on Linux. We have multiple VLANs with one or more public-IP subnets and one RFC1918 quarantine subnet each. All clients are leased IPs in the public-IP subnet(s) unless you're in a list of known bad MACs. Then, you are sent to the quarantine subnet so that your traffic is unroutable on the Internet (you are isolated by subnet only, not by VLAN). We would like to move to Windows DHCP in light of the IPAM role but I cannot figure out how to replicate this in Windows DHCP 2012 (Assign DHCP IPs for specific MAC prefixes on Windows Server 2008 R2 suggests it was not possible in 2008 R2), even while using policies. So here's what I'd like: The administrator/help desk provides and maintains a list of MAC addresses that are to be quarantined. The DHCP server places those MACs into the quarantine subnet on the respective VLAN, no matter which VLAN the client is in. I don't think reservations would work: We currently have about 300 registered bad MACs and about 12 VLANs. I don't want to make 300 x 12 reservations nor have to add 12 reservations per new MAC address. Not to mention all of the quarantine subnets are /24s. We do not have NPS/NAC. You do not have to register your MAC address get network access. We use Cisco routers/switches. Thanks.

  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

< Previous Page | 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72  | Next Page >