Search Results

Search found 8366 results on 335 pages for 'admin routing'.

Page 7/335 | < Previous Page | 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14  | Next Page >

• Automatically updating routing table on server

  - by bramp

  I have a LAN with three routers on it, one connected to the Internet, one VPN router connected to a few remote sites, and a final route connected to a private network (using BGP to get prefix advertisements). On the same LAN I have multiple Linux servers which needs access to the networks behind each router. I have achieved this by configuring static routes on the server, pointing the different network prefixes to the correct router. This has worked well, but every time we connect to a new remote VPN, we have to change all the servers to be aware that the network is now accessible via the VPN, and not via the default Internet route. What I want is a way to automatically update the routes on all of the servers, when the route is added to a routers. Now, I could install Quagga or something similar on all the servers to receive router advertisements, but that seems like overkill. So my question is what is the easiest/simpliest way to update the routing tables on the server automatically, and what protocol is best suited for this purpose. thanks

  Read the article

• Iptables mark incoming packet - vpn routing

  - by Tom

  I have connected my home to my workplace for out of house backup reasons through openvpn. The connection is working nicely. At work I have 5 fixed IP addresses. Now I would like to assign one of these IP addresses to be forwarded to my home machine. I have confirmed packet arrival at my home machine with tcpdump. The problem is that my default route at home is NOT the tun0 (naturally), but eth0 to my own ISP. So I created a separate routing table to route my tun0 packets back to where they belong, but do not how to mark the incoming packet which arrive through tun0 with iptables, so I can drive them back. I do not want any port restrictions, but only what comes from tun0 should leave through tun0 thanks tom

  Read the article

• Routing table change to access Internet over mifi

  - by Randall Blake

  I have two networks at home. One uses a Verizon mifi wireless on 192.168.1.1. The other uses a dlink router on 192.168.0.1. I have one laptop with two nics, one wireless and one not. The wireless nic connects to the mifi. The Ethernet nic connects to the dlink router. It's ip is 192.168.0.2. I also have a laptop with only one nic connected to the dlink on 192.168.0.3. I want to connect laptop 2 to the Internet. Can I do that by adding an entry to the routing table so that destination 0.0.0.0 routes to 192.168.0.2? If I do that, will laptop 1 "know" that it should route traffic from 192.168.0.3 to 192.168.1.1? Thanks for any assistance.

  Read the article

• Odd internet packet routing

  - by NachoChip

  I want to know is there anyway to explicitly control the packet routing. I try to connect my computer in HK from San Francisco. It is extremely slow and I use tracert to see what is going on. It seems the packet get routed from HK to Europe and then to New York and then to San Francisco. In US, I am using Astound Cable. Is there any suggestion I can force the packet to not go around the world before it reach my computer? Or it is all ISP dependent?

  Read the article

• Cannot Delete Shortcut from Desktop because I need Admin Permissions even though I am Admin

  - by DavidB

  Installing the new Malwarebytes 2.0 put a shortcut on my desktop that I want to remove, but dragging it to the recycle bin shows this message: I am an administrator on this computer, so normally clicking "Continue" solves the problem, but it didn't work here. Instead, I got this message. How can I resolve this? I have tried using the built in super administrator account to remove it, but that does not work either.

  Read the article

• Windows 2008, 2 NICS, routing problem

  - by Srodriguez

  Dear all, I've some questions regarding basic routing, can't seem to relate to other questions posted in this site. My architecture: Windows 2008 server with 2 nics in the server. NIC1: IP 10.198.6.xxx, submask 255.255.252.0, gateway 10.198.4.xxx NIC2: IP 192.168.168.xxx, submask 255.255.255, no gateway defined both NICS are just connected to two separate switches, with other computers. I want to be able that all the requests that have a destination of 192.168.168.xxx are redirected to the NIC2, all the other to the NIC1. I know it's possible to do it with the route command, but normally we have to specify a gateway? (route ADD 192.168.168.0 MASK 255.255.255.0 ???) How can this be archived? Thanks a lot for your help!

  Read the article

• ping alternative to measure routing distance (on Windows)

  - by Marco Demaio

  Hello, in order to measure aprroximately the rouitng distance (to see if a server is close to my country or too far away) I usually use ping command. I'm in Italy, when I ping Italian servers I get 36ms when I ping US EAST servers I get an average of 120ms when I ping US WEST servers I get an average of 200ms etc. Unfortunately some web hosters turn off the ping reply on their servers, so my question is how do I detect the routing distance, is there another easy to use command in Windows to accomplish the same task? Thanks!

  Read the article

• Dial-in VPN Routing issue when on 192.168.x.x network range

  - by Ian

  I'm not an expert on networks but have a small office on the 192.168.x.x. range which is managed by a vigor (2800) router. I have enabled the VPN dial-in option on the router so I can get to the server on 192.168.1.100 which works fine from my macbook when i'm NOT on a local network with that is on the 192.168.x.x range. e.g. works fine when I tether over my Android smartphone but when I try & connect when on my home network, it connects, I can access the router (192.168.1.1) but cannot access 192.168.1.100 - traceroute doesn't hop via 192.168.1.1 I have enabled "send all traffic over VPN connection but again, not joy... Feels like the osx platform isn't routing the traffic out to the vpn endpoint as the destination address is on the local subnet but expect it would be. This work fine on a windows PC on the same home network. Any thoughts on what the issue could be?

  Read the article

• ip routing policy in linux

  - by Dragos

  I have a linux system with two network interfaces (eth0 in x.x.x.0 and eth1 in x.x.y.0). Is there any posibility to add some route policy to send all the traffic to network x.x.y.0. I would like even the traffic from eth0 to be send to eth1's network. I cannot delete the direct connected networks from the routing table so all the traffic from x.x.x.0 network is send to eth0. I would like to send all traffic to eth1.

  Read the article

• OpenBSD Routing Problem

  - by Ozkan SENOVA

  I am running OpenBSD on a network appliance hardware. It has 5 NICs. I want to give different IP's in same subnet to 3 nics. Eg: em0: 192.168.1.5 em1: 192.168.1.90 em2: 192.168.1.56 I make the necessary configuration with ifconfig, all interfaces works as expected when all the ethernet ports are plugged in to switch. But there is something wrong in routing. If I connect to 192.16.1.5 via any service(http, smtp etc.), traffic goes over link#3. If I unpug the cable from em2 I can't reach any IP's binded on device. Is there any way to route traffic over different links in this IP configuration?

  Read the article

• Routing using Linux with 2 NIC cards

  - by Kevin Parker

  Configured Clear OS to be in Gateway mode on a machine with two NIC cards. eth0:192.168.2.0/24 with ip 192.168.2.27 which is connected to a modem and thus have internet connectivity. eth1:192.168.122.0/24 with ip 192.168.122.10 which is connected to other machines in LAN through switch. LAN machines with network 192.168.122.0 is not getting internet.How can they get internet Through Clear OS gateway.I have enabled packet forwarding in clear os using "ip_forward=1" What am i missing?.Can you please help me in this. Following are the static routing i have added: on LAN machine1 with ip address 192.168.122.11 ip route add 192.168.2.0/24 via 192.168.122.10 dev eth0 ip route show 192.168.2.0/24 via 192.168.122.10 dev eth0 192.168.122.0/24 dev eth0 proto kernel scope link src 192.168.122.11 But still 192.168.2.0/24 network is not reachable.Where can be the problem??

  Read the article

• What does path finding in internet routing do and how is it different from A*?

  - by alan2here

  Note: If you don't understand this question then feel free to ask clarification in the comments instead of voting down, it might be that this question needs some more work at the moment. I've been directed here from the Stack Excange chat room Root Access because my question didn't fit on Super User. In many aspects path finding algorithms like A star are very similar to internet routing. For example: A node in an A* path finding system can search for a path though edges between other nodes. A router that's part of the internet can search for a route though cables between other routers. In the case of A*, open and closed lists are kept by the system as a whole, sepratly from any individual node as well as each node being able to temporarily store a state involving several numbers. Routers on the internet seem to have remarkable properties, as I understand it: They are very performant. 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*, there's never any doubling back for example. Similar IP addresses don't have to be geographically 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 doesn't have to store a list of all the addresses each of it's directions leads most directly to. I'm looking for a basic, general, high level description of the algorithms workings from the point of view of an individual router. Does anyone have one? I presume public internet routers don't use A* as the overheads would be to large, and scale to poorly. I also presume there is a single method worldwide because it seems as if must involve a lot of transferring data to update and communicate a reasonable amount of state between neighboring routers. For example, perhaps the amount of data that needs to be stored in each router scales logarithmically with the number of routers that exist worldwide, the detail and reliability of the routing is reduced over increasing distances, there is increasing backtracking involved in parts of the network that are less geographically uniform or maybe each router really does perform an A* style search, temporarily maintaining open and closed lists when a packet arrives.

  Read the article

• Network Role based routing

  - by Steve Butler

  Apologies my networking skills are a tad rusty. I'm looking for a way to setup a system that gives me the ability to setup Role-based access to specific network resources. For example, i have three private subnets for specific groups, users will need access to one one or more subnets. I'd like to have all client machines on the same subnet/vlan, and then use 802.1x to authorize into a router(NAC device/whatever), the router would then see what user had authenticated(huge plus if it could determine AD group), and then allow routing to one or more of the three private subnets based upon their group membership. I've looked at packetFence, and it appears to work by assigning a client to a VLAN, but i'd still need a way to route some users into different back-end networks.

  Read the article

• Routing connections to passthrough a local machine

  - by xiamx

  Please tell me if what I'm trying to do is feasible. I have a router named "R" which is connected to WAN. R allows adding rules to the routing table. There are numerous of machines connected to the LAN port of R, they all have ip addresses 192.168.1.* assigned with DHCP on R. Among those machines, there's a machine C with ip address 192.168.1.100. I want all traffic of other machines in the subnet to pass-through machine C where some filtering and logging will be done. Is this possible? Is there a name for what I'm trying to do? (so i can do more googling later)

  Read the article

• Selectively routing traffic via ethernet or wifi, with proper DNS (Mac OS X 10.6)

  - by Dan

  When I'm at work, I access various intranet pages as well as the wider Internet through ethernet. However, the company LAN blocks some ports (e.g. Google Calendar). I can get to those through WiFi. So, I gave the Airport priority, and then using route add, I set up selective routing: all intranet traffic goes through the ethernet and everything else via WiFi: sudo route add 10.0.0.0/8 <intranet gateway>. However, there are a number of intranet sites that have their own DNS; i.e., hr.company.com only resolves on the intranet. The only way that I can get the DNS to work properly is to add the internal DNS server to the Airport DNS listing, however I fear that when I go elsewhere and forget, this will break things. What's the right way to get the DNS to resolve using this setup?

  Read the article

• xampp admin page access forbidden

  - by Vihaan Verma

  I m new to apache world ! I read some docs online to setup virtual host . Which works fine ! Here are the content of httpd-vhosts.conf file <Directory C:/vhosts> Order Deny,Allow Allow from all </Directory> NameVirtualHost *:80 <VirtualHost *:80> DocumentRoot "C:/htdocs" ServerName localhost </VirtualHost> <VirtualHost *:80> DocumentRoot "C:/vhosts/phpdw" ServerName phpdw </VirtualHost> But now when I access the xampp control panel and try accessing the apache admin page I get access defined eror (403) . My guess is that there needs to be some more configuration in this file to allow access to localhost. I could not find anything relevant . Thanks

  Read the article

• nginx not serving admin static files?

  - by toto_tico

  First, I want to clarify that this error is just for the admin static files. This means my problem is specific just to the static files that corresponds to the Django admin. The rest of the static files are working perfect. Basically my problem is that for some reason I cannot access those admin static files with the ngix server. It works perfect with the micro server of Django and the collect static is doing its job. This means it is putting the files on the expected place in the static folder. The urls are correct but I cannot even access the admin static files directly, but the others I can. So, for example, I am able to access this url (copying it in the browser): myserver.com:8080/static/css/base/base.css but i am not able to access this other url (copying it in the browser): myserver.com:8080/static/admin/css/admin.css I also tried to copy the admin/ directory structure into other_admin_directory_name/. Then I can access myserver.com:8080/static/other_admin_directory_name/css/admin.css Then, it works. So, I checked permissions and everything is fine. I tried to change ADMIN_MEDIA_PREFIX = '/static/admin/' to ADMIN_MEDIA_PREFIX = '/static/other_admin_directory_name/', it doesn't work. This a mistery in itself that I am exploring but still no luck. Finally, and it seems to be an important clue: I tried to copy the admin/ directory structure into admin_and_then_any_suffix/. Then I cannot access myserver.com:8080/static/admin_and_then_any_suffix//css/admin.css So, if the name of the directory starts with admin (for example administration or admin2) it doesn't work. * added thanks to sarnold observation ** the problem seems to be in the nginx configuration file /etc/nginx/sites-available/mysite location /static/admin { alias /home/vl3/.virtualenvs/vl3/lib/python2.7/site-packages/django/contrib/admin/media/; }

  Read the article

• Changing Mac OS X 10.6 Routing after VPN'd In

  - by Matt Rogish

  I have a coffee shop around the corner that I use to do some work when I want to get away from home. They offer free wi-fi and I then use my Mac 10.6 VPN to log into my work network. I have "Send all traffic over VPN connection" checked. Before, their network was 10.0.0.x. I think they got a new router because it's now 192.168.2.x However, this interferes with one of the subnets at work so now I can't visit 192.168.2.x at work. So: 1) Office network: VPN gives IPs as 192.168.1.x. Another network is 192.168.2.x 2) Coffee network: Gives IPs as 192.168.2.x I think if I set a route to send all 2.x traffic over the tunnel, it would blow up my routing to their system, right? What should I do? I know the individual IPs of the servers I want... Maybe I could add each one, or can I add all of them minus the default gateway of their router? How do I set that up "temporarily" in my Mac? Thanks!!

  Read the article

• VMware Server Host-Only Network Routing

  - by Chris

  I have a windows 2008 web server machine running VMware server. I have 3 VM's - All 3 are test servers so security isn't really a concern... each of them running windows 2008 standard and some of them serving web content. My ISP only allows one MAC address to access the physical switch, however they give me 10 public IP addresses to use. My question is, if I put each VM on their own Host only network, how can I route all traffic from a specific public IP on the host, to the corresponding host only adapter, therefore routing to the specific VM? For example: A single physical Adapter on the Host has the following public IP's assigned to it in windows networking: 74.208.14.10 74.208.14.20 74.208.14.30 Each VM is on a host-only network vm1 - 192.168.196.1 vm2 - 192.168.197.1 vm3 - 192.168.198.1 On the host, I want to route all traffic from 74.208.14.10 to VM1 and 74.208.14.20 to VM2 and 74.208.14.30 to vm3 without using VMware NAT, or bridged connections. I want each server to appear to have its own public IP address. My guess is i can modify the route tables somehow, or perhaps in ICS...but i'm not sure how.

  Read the article

• Windows server 2008R2 routing with single NIC

  - by Fabian

  I'm trying to duplicate a Linux server configuration to a windows server 2008R2 box. Basicaly this linux server acts as a router, but it is doing its job with only 1 interface (1 NIC). Here is the network configuration in place (I cannot change it) : INTERNET <== Router (local ip = 194.168.0.3) <== linux Server (ip : 194.168.0.2). The router is configured with a DMZ to 194.168.0.2, and only allow this IP to connect to internet (Cannot change this router configuration). The linux server is configured with a default gateway to 194.168.0.3, with the option : "Act as router". All other computer on the lan have this configuration (given by DHCP) : IP range : 194.168.0.X MASK : 255.255.255.0 Default gateway : 194.168.0.2 And everything is working perfectly. I'm trying to reproduce this way of routing with only one NIC from a windows server 2008R2, but it seems that you cannnot do it with only one NIC (all exemples I see are refering to 2 NIC with 2 different network). Does someone have an idea how to achieved this in Windows server 2008R2 ? Tx you for your help ! Fabian.

  Read the article

• Windows server 2008R2 routing with single NIC

  - by Fabian

  I'm trying to duplicate a Linux server configuration to a windows server 2008R2 box. Basicaly this linux server acts as a router, but it is doing its job with only 1 interface (1 NIC). Here is the network configuration in place (I cannot change it) : INTERNET <== Router (local ip = 194.168.0.3) <== linux Server (ip : 194.168.0.2). The router is configured with a DMZ to 194.168.0.2, and only allow this IP to connect to internet (Cannot change this router configuration). The linux server is configured with a default gateway to 194.168.0.3, with the option : "Act as router". All other computer on the lan have this configuration (given by DHCP) : IP range : 194.168.0.X MASK : 255.255.255.0 Default gateway : 194.168.0.2 And everything is working perfectly. I'm trying to reproduce this way of routing with only one NIC from a windows server 2008R2, but it seems that you cannnot do it with only one NIC (all exemples I see are refering to 2 NIC with 2 different network). Does someone have an idea how to achieved this in Windows server 2008R2 ? Tx you for your help ! Fabian.

  Read the article

• IPv6 Routing / Subnetting

  - by nappo

  Recently I have installed Citrix Xen Server 6.2 on a machine. My Provider (Hetzner) gave me the IPv6 Subnet 2a01:4f8:200:xxxx::/64. Followed an article in the providers wiki (1) i got it working and can assign IPs to my guests (CentOS). However i can't assign a second IP to a single guest - it will result in a timeout. I'm not very familiar with IPv6 routing / subnetting - any help or tips for further troubleshooting is welcome! My Setup: XenServer 6.2 IPv6: 2a01:4f8:200:xxxx::2/112 ip -6 route: 2a01:4f8:200:xxxx::/112 dev xenbr0 proto kernel metric 256 mtu 1500 advmss 1440 hoplimit 0 fe80::1 dev xenbr0 metric 1024 mtu 1500 advmss 1440 hoplimit 0 default via fe80::1 dev xenbr0 metric 1024 mtu 1500 advmss 1440 hoplimit 0 Guest 1 IPv6: 2a01:4f8:200:xxxx::3/64 IPv6: 2a01:4f8:200:xxxx::4/64 ip -6 route: 2a01:4f8:200:xxxx::/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::1 dev eth0 metric 1 mtu 1500 advmss 1440 hoplimit 4294967295 Guest 2 IPv6: 2a01:4f8:200:xxxx::5/64 Guest 1 IPv6 is working fine, Guest 2 too. As suggested by the wiki article (1) i split my /64 network into a /112. Is it right to set the host /112 and the guests /64? Why is that?

  Read the article

• Problem routing between directly connected Subnets w/ ASA-5510

  - by Zephyr Pellerin

  This is an issue I've been struggling with for quite some time, with a seemingly simple answer (Aren't all IT problems?). And that is the problem of passing traffic between two directly connected subnets with an ASA While I'm aware that best practice is to have Internet - Firewall - Router, in many cases this isn't possible. For example, In have an ASA with two interfaces, named OutsideNetwork (10.19.200.3/24) and InternalNetwork (10.19.4.254/24). You'd expect Outside to be able to get to, say, 10.19.4.1, or at LEAST 10.19.4.254, but pinging the interface gives only bad news. Result of the command: "ping OutsideNetwork 10.19.4.254" Type escape sequence to abort. Sending 5, 100-byte ICMP Echos to 10.19.4.254, timeout is 2 seconds: ????? Success rate is 0 percent (0/5) Naturally, you'd assume that you could add a static route, to no avail. [ERROR] route Outsidenetwork 10.19.4.0 255.255.255.0 10.19.4.254 1 Cannot add route, connected route exists At this point, you might gander if its a NAT or Access list problem. access-list Outsidenetwork_access_in extended permit ip any any access-list Internalnetwork_access_in extended permit ip any any There is no dynamic nat (or static nat for that matter), and Unnatted traffic is permitted. When I try pinging the above address (10.19.4.254 from Outsidenetwork), I get this error message from level 0 logging (debugging). Routing failed to locate next hop for icmp from NP Identity Ifc:10.19.200.3/0 to Outsidenetwork:10.19.4.1/0 This led me to set same-security traffic permit, and assigned the same, lesser and greater security numbers between the two interfaces. Am I overlooking something obvious? Is there a command to set static routes that are classified higher than connected routes?

  Read the article

• Help with routing table

  - by user68752

  I have tried to find the answer to my question but not really found a clean and easy solution. I have a box (Ubuntu headless 10.04.1 server, with one Ethernet port) on LAN behind a router (running m0n0wall), that I have successfully installed a PPTP device (ppp0) on, this is working flawlessly (following this link) The thing is I want this box to route all it's internet traffic through the VPN tunnel (ppp0 device) but also being able to access the local LAN on 192.168.1.* subnet. I've succeeded a bit with this, but my problem right now is that I have port forwards (e.g. SSH) done in the m0n0wall pointing to this specific box which forces me to do "add routes" to all boxes that want to access this machine through this specific port. For instance a machine with ip xyz.xyz.xyz.xyz needs to have a static route setup in the routing table on the box to be able to access the box. This is the result of route -n xxx.xxx.137.2 192.168.1.1 255.255.255.255 UGH 0 0 0 eth0 xxx.xxx.137.2 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.255 UH 0 0 0 ppp0 192.168.1.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth0 yyy.yyy.0.0 192.168.1.1 255.255.0.0 UG 0 0 0 eth0 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 U 0 0 0 ppp0 Where xxx is the IPs provided from VPN server. yyy.yyy.0.0 is a net that i want to have access to the box, without this I can't access the box from outside the LAN (via port-forwards done in router software, m0n0wall) is there away round this ugly solution?

  Read the article

• Different subnets routing with just one layer 3 switch

  - by GustavoFSx

  Our current network looks like this: Location 1: 2 Layer 2 switches | subnet 192.168.1.0/24 | Firewall for our VPN Location 2: 1 Layer 2 switch | subnet 192.168.3.0/24 | Firewall for our VPN Location 3: 1 Layer 2 switch | subnet 192.168.5.0/24 | Firewall for our VPN We just got a direct fiber connection between location 1 and 2, we also got a new HP V1910 24G layer 3 switch. I tried to follow the instructions on this site, but I can't get it to work. I think our network should look like this: Location 1: HP Switch FIBER to L2 | subnet 192.168.1.0/24 | Firewall for our VPN Location 2: 1 Layer 2 switch | subnet 192.168.3.0/24 | FIBER to L1 Location 3: 1 Layer 2 switch | subnet 192.168.5.0/24 | Firewall for our VPN So, how can I get routing working on our location 2? It's old gateway was a firewall device on ip 192.168.3.1. I'm thinking on creating a VLAN Interface on 192.168.3.1 on the switch for the Location 2. But how will I handle that on the HP switch that has a direct fiber connection with that switch? Please help, I'm not very good with networking.

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14  | Next Page >