Search Results

Search found 963 results on 39 pages for 'peer pressure'.

Page 7/39 | < Previous Page | 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14  | Next Page >

• Why not sync folders outside home with ubuntu-one?

  - by peer

  It took me a while to find out that with ubuntu-one I can sync only folders in my home-folder. On all other folders the ubuntu-one - option is available in preferences, but the actual actions are greyed out. The ubuntu-faq is quite clear on that: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuOne/FAQ/CanISyncAFolderOutsideMyHomeFolder But I actually wonder why and if this is going to change and if there is a trick around it (an other one than setting my home to /) I personally dont have any important data in my home-folder other than the program-configs. All documents, pictures, music are on a folder called /data that is actually on a different partition. That makes it much easier when one wants to reinstall ubuntu.

  Read the article

• Why not sync folders outside home with Ubuntu One?

  - by peer

  It took me a while to find out that with Ubuntu One I can sync only folders in my home folder. On all other folders the Ubuntu One option is available in preferences, but the actual actions are greyed out. The Ubuntu One FAQ is quite clear on that: No, currently you can only select to synchronize folders inside your home directory. But I actually wonder why and if this is going to change and if there is a trick around it (an other one than setting my home to /) ? I personally don't have any important data in my home folder other than the program configs. All documents, pictures, music are on a folder called /data that is actually on a different partition. That makes it much easier when one wants to reinstall Ubuntu.

  Read the article

• background: why not sync folders outside home with ubuntu-one?

  - by peer

  It took me a while to find out that with ubuntu-one I can sync only folders in my home-folder. On all other folders the ubuntu-one - option is available in preferences, but the actual actions are greyed out. the ubuntu-faq is quite clear on that: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuOne/FAQ/CanISyncAFolderOutsideMyHomeFolder But I actually wonder why and if this is going to change and if there is a trick around it (an other one than setting my home to / ;) ) I personally dont have any important data in my home-folder other than the program-configs. All documents, pictures, music are on a folder called /data that is actually on a different partition. That makes it much easier when one wants to reinstall ubuntu. thnx, p

  Read the article

• Simulating MySQL's ORDER BY FIELD() in Postgresql

  - by Peer Allan

  Hello all, Just trying out Postgresql for the first time, coming from MySQL. In our Rails application we have a couple of locations with SQL like so: SELECT * FROM `currency_codes` ORDER BY FIELD(code, 'GBP', 'EUR', 'BBD', 'AUD', 'CAD', 'USD') DESC, name ASC It didn't take long to discover that this is not supported/allowed in Postgresql. Does anyone know how to simulate this behaviour in Postgres or do we have to pull to sorting out into the code? Thanks Peer

  Read the article

• VS 2012 Code Review &ndash; Before Check In OR After Check In?

  - by Tarun Arora

  “Is Code Review Important and Effective?” There is a consensus across the industry that code review is an effective and practical way to collar code inconsistency and possible defects early in the software development life cycle. Among others some of the advantages of code reviews are, Bugs are found faster Forces developers to write readable code (code that can be read without explanation or introduction!) Optimization methods/tricks/productive programs spread faster Programmers as specialists "evolve" faster It's fun “Code review is systematic examination (often known as peer review) of computer source code. It is intended to find and fix mistakes overlooked in the initial development phase, improving both the overall quality of software and the developers' skills. Reviews are done in various forms such as pair programming, informal walkthroughs, and formal inspections.” Wikipedia No where does the definition mention whether its better to review code before the code has been committed to version control or after the commit has been performed. No matter which side you favour, Visual Studio 2012 allows you to request for a code review both before check in and also request for a review after check in. Let’s weigh the pros and cons of the approaches independently. Code Review Before Check In or Code Review After Check In? Approach 1 – Code Review before Check in Developer completes the code and feels the code quality is appropriate for check in to TFS. The developer raises a code review request to have a second pair of eyes validate if the code abides to the recommended best practices, will not result in any defects due to common coding mistakes and whether any optimizations can be made to improve the code quality.                                             Image 1 – code review before check in Pros Everything that gets committed to source control is reviewed. Minimizes the chances of smelly code making its way into the code base. Decreases the cost of fixing bugs, remember, the earlier you find them, the lesser the pain in fixing them. Cons Development Code Freeze – Since the changes aren’t in the source control yet. Further development can only be done off-line. The changes have not been through a CI build, hard to say whether the code abides to all build quality standards. Inconsistent! Cumbersome to track the actual code review process.  Not every change to the code base is worth reviewing, a lot of effort is invested for very little gain. Approach 2 – Code Review after Check in Developer checks in, random code reviews are performed on the checked in code.                                                      Image 2 – Code review after check in Pros The code has already passed the CI build and run through any code analysis plug ins you may have running on the build server. Instruct the developer to ensure ZERO fx cop, style cop and static code analysis before check in. Code is cleaner and smell free even before the code review. No Offline development, developers can continue to develop against the source control. Cons Bad code can easily make its way into the code base. Since the review take place much later in the cycle, the cost of fixing issues can prove to be much higher. Approach 3 – Hybrid Approach The community advocates a more hybrid approach, a blend of tooling and human accountability quotient.                                                               Image 3 – Hybrid Approach 1. Code review high impact check ins. It is not possible to review everything, by setting up code review check in policies you can end up slowing your team. More over, the code that you are reviewing before check in hasn't even been through a green CI build either. 2. Tooling. Let the tooling work for you. By running static analysis, fx cop, style cop and other plug ins on the build agent, you can identify the real issues that in my opinion can't possibly be identified using human reviews. Configure the tooling to report back top 10 issues every day. Mandate the manual code review of individuals who keep making it to this list of shame more often. 3. During Merge. I would prefer eliminating some of the other code issues during merge from Main branch to the release branch. In a scrum project this is still easier because cheery picking the merges is a possibility and the size of code being reviewed is still limited. Let the tooling work for you, if some one breaks the CI build often, put them on a gated check in build course until you see improvement. If some one appears on the top 10 list of shame generated via the build then ensure that all their code is reviewed till you see improvement. At the end of the day, the goal is to ensure that the code being delivered is top quality. By enforcing a code review before any check in, you force the developer to work offline or stay put till the review is complete. What do the experts say? So I asked a few expects what they thought of “Code Review quality gate before Checking in code?" Terje Sandstrom | Microsoft ALM MVP You mean a review quality gate BEFORE checking in code????? That would mean a lot of code staying either local or in shelvesets, and not even been through a CI build, and a green CI build being the main criteria for going further, f.e. to the review state. I would not like code laying around with no checkin’s. Having a requirement that code is checked in small pieces, 4-8 hours work max, and AT LEAST daily checkins, a manual code review comes second down the lane. I would expect review quality gates to happen before merging back to main, or before merging to release.  But that would all be on checked-in code.  Branching is absolutely one way to ease the pain.   Another way we are using is automatic quality builds, running metrics, coverage, static code analysis.  Unfortunately it takes some time, would be great to be on CI’s – but…., so it’s done scheduled every night. Based on this we get, among other stuff,  top 10 lists of suspicious code, which is then subjected to reviews.  If a person seems to be very popular on these top 10 lists, we subject every check in from that person to a review for a period. That normally helps.   None of the clients I have can afford to have every checkin reviewed, so we need to find ways around it. I don’t disagree with the nicety of having all the code reviewed, but I find it hard to find those resources in today’s enterprises. David V. Corbin | Visual Studio ALM Ranger I tend to agree with both sides. I hate having code that is not checked in, but at the same time hate having “bad” code in the repository. I have found that branching is one approach to solving this dilemma. Code is checked into the private/feature branch before the review, but is not merged over to the “official” branch until after the review. I advocate both, depending on circumstance (especially team dynamics)   - The “pre-checkin” is usually for elements that may impact the project as a whole. Think of it as another “gate” along with passing unit tests. - The “post-checkin” may very well not be at the changeset level, but correlates to a review at the “user story” level.   Again, this depends on team dynamics in play…. Robert MacLean | Microsoft ALM MVP I do not think there is no right answer for the industry as a whole. In short the question is why do you do reviews? Your question implies risk mitigation, so in low risk areas you can get away with it after check in while in high risk you need to do it before check in. An example is those new to a team or juniors need it much earlier (maybe that is before checkin, maybe that is soon after) than seniors who have shipped twenty sprints on the team. Abhimanyu Singhal | Visual Studio ALM Ranger Depends on per scenario basis. We recommend post check-in reviews when: 1. We don't want to block other checks and processes on manual code reviews. Manual reviews take time, and some pieces may not require manual reviews at all. 2. We need to trace all changes and track history. 3. We have a code promotion strategy/process in place. For risk mitigation, post checkin code can be promoted to Accepted branches. Or can be rejected. Pre Checkin Reviews are used when 1. There is a high risk factor associated 2. Reviewers are generally (most of times) have immediate availability. 3. Team does not have strict tracking needs. Simply speaking, no single process fits all scenarios. You need to select what works best for your team/project. Thomas Schissler | Visual Studio ALM Ranger This is an interesting discussion, I’m right now discussing details about executing code reviews with my teams. I see and understand the aspects you brought in, but there is another side as well, I’d like to point out. 1.) If you do reviews per check in this is not very practical as a hard rule because this will disturb the flow of the team very often or it will lead to reduce the checkin frequency of the devs which I would not accept. 2.) If you do later reviews, for example if you review PBIs, it is not easy to find out which code you should review. Either you review all changesets associate with the PBI, but then you might review code which has been changed with a later checkin and the dev maybe has already fixed the issue. Or you review the diff of the latest changeset of the PBI with the first but then you might also review changes of other PBIs. Jakob Leander | Sr. Director, Avanade In my experience, manual code review: 1. Does not get done and at the very least does not get redone after changes (regardless of intentions at start of project) 2. When a project actually do it, they often do not do it right away = errors pile up 3. Requires a lot of time discussing/defining the standard and for the team to learn it However code review is very important since e.g. even small memory leaks in a high volume web solution have big consequences In the last years I have advocated following approach for code review - Architects up front do “at least one best practice example” of each type of component and tell the team. Copy from this one. This should include error handling, logging, security etc. - Dev lead on project continuously browse code to validate that the best practices are used. Especially that patterns etc. are not broken. You can do this formally after each sprint/iteration if you want. Once this is validated it is unlikely to “go bad” even during later code changes Agree with customer to rely on static code analysis from Visual Studio as the one and only coding standard. This has HUUGE benefits - You can easily tweak to reach the level you desire together with customer - It is easy to measure for both developers/management - It is 100% consistent across code base - It gets validated all the time so you never end up getting hammered by a customer review in the end - It is easy to tell the developer that you do not want code back unless it has zero errors = minimize communication You need to track this at least during nightly builds and make sure team sees total # issues. Do not allow #issues it to grow uncontrolled. On the project I run I require code analysis to have run on code before checkin (checkin rule). This means -  You have to have clean compile (or CA wont run) so this is extra benefit = very few broken builds - You can change a few of the rules to compile as errors instead of warnings. I often do this for “missing dispose” issues which you REALLY do not want in your app Tip: Place your custom CA rules files as part of solution. That  way it works when you do branching etc. (path to CA file is relative in VS) Some may argue that CA is not as good as manual inspection. But since manual inspection in reality suffers from the 3 issues in start it is IMO a MUCH better (and much cheaper) approach from helicopter perspective Tirthankar Dutta | Director, Avanade I think code review should be run both before and after check ins. There are some code metrics that are meant to be run on the entire codebase … Also, especially on multi-site projects, one should strive to architect in a way that lets men manage the framework while boys write the repetitive code… scales very well with the need to review less by containment and imposing architectural restrictions to emphasise the design. Bruno Capuano | Microsoft ALM MVP For code reviews (means peer reviews) in distributed team I use http://www.vsanywhere.com/default.aspx  David Jobling | Global Sr. Director, Avanade Peer review is the only way to scale and its a great practice for all in the team to learn to perform and accept. In my experience you soon learn who's code to watch more than others and tune the attention. Mikkel Toudal Kristiansen | Manager, Avanade If you have several branches in your code base, you will need to merge often. This requires manual merging, when a file has been changed in both branches. It offers a good opportunity to actually review to changed code. So my advice is: Merging between branches should be done as often as possible, it should be done by a senior developer, and he/she should perform a full code review of the code being merged. As for detecting architectural smells and code smells creeping into the code base, one really good third party tools exist: Ndepend (http://www.ndepend.com/, for static code analysis of the current state of the code base). You could also consider adding StyleCop to the solution. Jesse Houwing | Visual Studio ALM Ranger I gave a presentation on this subject on the TechDays conference in NL last year. See my presentation and slides here (talk in Dutch, but English presentation): http://blog.jessehouwing.nl/2012/03/did-you-miss-my-techdaysnl-talk-on-code.html  I’d like to add a few more points: - Before/After checking is mostly a trust issue. If you have a team that does diligent peer reviews and regularly talk/sit together or peer review, there’s no need to enforce a before-checkin policy. The peer peer-programming and regular feedback during development can take care of most of the review requirements as long as the team isn’t under stress. - Under stress, enforce pre-checkin reviews, it might sound strange, if you’re already under time or budgetary constraints, but it is under such conditions most real issues start to be created or pile up. - Use tools to catch most common errors, Code Analysis/FxCop was already mentioned. HP Fortify, Resharper, Coderush etc can help you there. There are also a lot of 3rd party rules you can add to Code Analysis. I’ve written a few myself (http://fccopcontrib.codeplex.com) and various teams from Microsoft have added their own rules (MSOCAF for SharePoint, WSSF for WCF). For common errors that keep cropping up, see if you can define a rule. It’s much easier. But more importantly make sure you have a good help page explaining *WHY* it's wrong. If you have small feature or developer branches/shelvesets, you might want to review pre-merge. It’s still better to do peer reviews and peer programming, but the most important thing is that bad quality code doesn’t make it into the important branch. So my philosophy: - Use tooling as much as possible. - Make sure the team understands the tooling and the importance of the things it flags. It’s too easy to just click suppress all to ignore the warnings. - Under stress, tighten process, it’s under stress that the problems of late reviews will really surface - Most importantly if you do reviews do them as early as possible, but never later than needed. In other words, pre-checkin/post checking doesn’t really matter, as long as the review is done before the code is released. It’ll just be much more expensive to fix any review outcomes the later you find them. --- I would love to hear what you think!

  Read the article

• l2tp / ipsec debian Openswan U2.6.38 does not connect

  - by locojay

  i am trying to get ipsec/l2tp running on a debian server with an iphone as a client but always get: Dec 2 21:00:04 vpn pluto[22711]: packet from <clientip>:43598: received Vendor ID payload [RFC 3947] method set to=115 Dec 2 21:00:04 vpn pluto[22711]: packet from <clientip>:43598: received Vendor ID payload [draft-ietf-ipsec-nat-t-ike] meth=114, but already using method 115 Dec 2 21:00:04 vpn pluto[22711]: packet from <clientip>:43598: received Vendor ID payload [draft-ietf-ipsec-nat-t-ike-08] meth=113, but already using method 115 Dec 2 21:00:04 vpn pluto[22711]: packet from <clientip>:43598: received Vendor ID payload [draft-ietf-ipsec-nat-t-ike-07] meth=112, but already using method 115 Dec 2 21:00:04 vpn pluto[22711]: packet from <clientip>:43598: received Vendor ID payload [draft-ietf-ipsec-nat-t-ike-06] meth=111, but already using method 115 Dec 2 21:00:04 vpn pluto[22711]: packet from <clientip>:43598: received Vendor ID payload [draft-ietf-ipsec-nat-t-ike-05] meth=110, but already using method 115 Dec 2 21:00:04 vpn pluto[22711]: packet from <clientip>:43598: received Vendor ID payload [draft-ietf-ipsec-nat-t-ike-04] meth=109, but already using method 115 Dec 2 21:00:04 vpn pluto[22711]: packet from <clientip>:43598: received Vendor ID payload [draft-ietf-ipsec-nat-t-ike-03] meth=108, but already using method 115 Dec 2 21:00:04 vpn pluto[22711]: packet from <clientip>:43598: received Vendor ID payload [draft-ietf-ipsec-nat-t-ike-02] meth=107, but already using method 115 Dec 2 21:00:04 vpn pluto[22711]: packet from <clientip>:43598: received Vendor ID payload [draft-ietf-ipsec-nat-t-ike-02_n] meth=106, but already using method 115 Dec 2 21:00:04 vpn pluto[22711]: packet from <clientip>:43598: ignoring Vendor ID payload [FRAGMENTATION 80000000] Dec 2 21:00:04 vpn pluto[22711]: packet from <clientip>:43598: received Vendor ID payload [Dead Peer Detection] Dec 2 21:00:04 vpn pluto[22711]: "L2TP-PSK-noNAT"[4] <clientip> #20: responding to Main Mode from unknown peer <clientip> Dec 2 21:00:04 vpn pluto[22711]: "L2TP-PSK-noNAT"[4] <clientip> #20: transition from state STATE_MAIN_R0 to state STATE_MAIN_R1 Dec 2 21:00:04 vpn pluto[22711]: "L2TP-PSK-noNAT"[4] <clientip> #20: STATE_MAIN_R1: sent MR1, expecting MI2 Dec 2 21:00:04 vpn pluto[22711]: "L2TP-PSK-noNAT"[4] <clientip> #20: NAT-Traversal: Result using draft-ietf-ipsec-nat-t-ike (MacOS X): both are NATed Dec 2 21:00:04 vpn pluto[22711]: "L2TP-PSK-noNAT"[4] <clientip> #20: transition from state STATE_MAIN_R1 to state STATE_MAIN_R2 Dec 2 21:00:04 vpn pluto[22711]: "L2TP-PSK-noNAT"[4] <clientip> #20: STATE_MAIN_R2: sent MR2, expecting MI3 Dec 2 21:00:04 vpn pluto[22711]: "L2TP-PSK-noNAT"[4] <clientip> #20: ignoring informational payload, type IPSEC_INITIAL_CONTACT msgid=00000000 Dec 2 21:00:04 vpn pluto[22711]: "L2TP-PSK-noNAT"[4] <clientip> #20: Main mode peer ID is ID_IPV4_ADDR: '10.2.210.176' Dec 2 21:00:04 vpn pluto[22711]: "L2TP-PSK-noNAT"[4] <clientip> #20: switched from "L2TP-PSK-noNAT" to "L2TP-PSK-noNAT" Dec 2 21:00:04 vpn pluto[22711]: "L2TP-PSK-noNAT"[5] <clientip> #20: deleting connection "L2TP-PSK-noNAT" instance with peer <clientip> {isakmp=#0/ipsec=#0} Dec 2 21:00:04 vpn pluto[22711]: "L2TP-PSK-noNAT"[5] <clientip> #20: transition from state STATE_MAIN_R2 to state STATE_MAIN_R3 Dec 2 21:00:04 vpn pluto[22711]: "L2TP-PSK-noNAT"[5] <clientip> #20: new NAT mapping for #20, was <clientip>:43598, now <clientip>:49826 Dec 2 21:00:04 vpn pluto[22711]: "L2TP-PSK-noNAT"[5] <clientip> #20: STATE_MAIN_R3: sent MR3, ISAKMP SA established {auth=OAKLEY_PRESHARED_KEY cipher=aes_256 prf=oakley_sha group=modp1024} Dec 2 21:00:04 vpn pluto[22711]: "L2TP-PSK-noNAT"[5] <clientip> #20: Dead Peer Detection (RFC 3706): enabled Dec 2 21:00:05 vpn pluto[22711]: "L2TP-PSK-noNAT"[5] <clientip> #20: the peer proposed: <public ip>/32:17/1701 -> 10.2.210.176/32:17/0 Dec 2 21:00:05 vpn pluto[22711]: "L2TP-PSK-noNAT"[5] <clientip> #20: NAT-Traversal: received 2 NAT-OA. using first, ignoring others Dec 2 21:00:05 vpn pluto[22711]: "L2TP-PSK-noNAT"[5] <clientip> #21: responding to Quick Mode proposal {msgid:311d3282} Dec 2 21:00:05 vpn pluto[22711]: "L2TP-PSK-noNAT"[5] <clientip> #21: us: 171.138.2.13<171.138.2.13>:17/1701 Dec 2 21:00:05 vpn pluto[22711]: "L2TP-PSK-noNAT"[5] <clientip> #21: them: <clientip>[10.2.210.176]:17/61719 Dec 2 21:00:05 vpn pluto[22711]: "L2TP-PSK-noNAT"[5] <clientip> #21: transition from state STATE_QUICK_R0 to state STATE_QUICK_R1 Dec 2 21:00:05 vpn pluto[22711]: "L2TP-PSK-noNAT"[5] <clientip> #21: STATE_QUICK_R1: sent QR1, inbound IPsec SA installed, expecting QI2 Dec 2 21:00:05 vpn pluto[22711]: "L2TP-PSK-noNAT"[5] <clientip> #21: Dead Peer Detection (RFC 3706): enabled Dec 2 21:00:05 vpn pluto[22711]: "L2TP-PSK-noNAT"[5] <clientip> #21: transition from state STATE_QUICK_R1 to state STATE_QUICK_R2 Dec 2 21:00:05 vpn pluto[22711]: "L2TP-PSK-noNAT"[5] <clientip> #21: STATE_QUICK_R2: IPsec SA established transport mode {ESP=>0x05e23c9a <0x216077a9 xfrm=AES_256-HMAC_SHA1 NATOA=10.2.210.176 NATD=<clientip>:49826 DPD=enabled} Dec 2 21:00:26 vpn pluto[22711]: "L2TP-PSK-noNAT"[5] <clientip> #20: received Delete SA(0x05e23c9a) payload: deleting IPSEC State #21 Dec 2 21:00:26 vpn pluto[22711]: "L2TP-PSK-noNAT"[5] <clientip> #20: received and ignored informational message Dec 2 21:00:27 vpn pluto[22711]: "L2TP-PSK-noNAT"[5] <clientip> #20: received Delete SA payload: deleting ISAKMP State #20 Dec 2 21:00:27 vpn pluto[22711]: "L2TP-PSK-noNAT"[5] <clientip>: deleting connection "L2TP-PSK-noNAT" instance with peer <clientip> {isakmp=#0/ipsec=#0} Dec 2 21:00:27 vpn pluto[22711]: packet from <clientip>:49826: received and ignored informational message Dec 2 21:00:27 vpn pluto[22711]: ERROR: asynchronous network error report on eth0 (sport=4500) for message to <clientip> port 49826, complainant <clientip>: Connection refused [errno 111, origin ICMP type 3 code 3 (not authenticated)] my setup looks like this verizon fios actiontec -- DMZ-- ddwrt router -- debian xen instance actiontec : 192.168.1.1 ddwrt: 171.138.2.1 debian xen server: 171.138.2.13 forwarded udp 500, 4500, 1701 on ddwrt to debian xen instance. vpn passthrough is enabled /etc/ipsec.conf config setup dumpdir=/var/run/pluto/ nat_traversal=yes virtual_private=%v4:10.0.0.0/8,%v4:192.168.0.0/16,%v4:172.16.0.0/12,%v4:25.0.0.0/8,%v6:fd00::/8,%v6:fe80::/10,%v4:!171.138.2.0/24,%v4:!192.168.1.0/24 protostack=netkey # Add connections here conn L2TP-PSK-NAT rightsubnet=vhost:%priv also=L2TP-PSK-noNAT conn L2TP-PSK-noNAT authby=secret pfs=no auto=add keyingtries=3 # we cannot rekey for %any, let client rekey rekey=no # Apple iOS doesn't send delete notify so we need dead peer detection # to detect vanishing clients dpddelay=30 dpdtimeout=120 dpdaction=clear # Set ikelifetime and keylife to same defaults windows has ikelifetime=8h keylife=1h # l2tp-over-ipsec is transport mode type=transport # left=171.138.2.13 # # For updated Windows 2000/XP clients, # to support old clients as well, use leftprotoport=17/%any leftprotoport=17/1701 # # The remote user. # right=%any # Using the magic port of "%any" means "any one single port". This is # a work around required for Apple OSX clients that use a randomly # high port. rightprotoport=17/%any #force all to be nat'ed. because of ios conn passthrough-for-non-l2tp type=passthrough left=171.138.2.13 leftnexthop=171.138.2.1 right=0.0.0.0 rightsubnet=0.0.0.0/0 auto=route /etc/xl2tp/xl2tp.conf [global] ipsec saref = no listen-addr = 171.138.2.13 ;port = 1701 ;debug network = yes ;debug tunnel = yes ;debug network = yes ;debug packet = yes [lns default] ip range = 171.138.2.231-171.138.2.239 local ip = 171.138.2.13 assign ip = yes require chap = no refuse pap = no require authentication = no ;name = OpenswanVPN ppp debug = yes pppoptfile = /etc/ppp/options.xlt2tpd lenght bit = yes /etc/ppp/options.xl2tpd ;require-mschap-v2 pcp-accept-local ipcp-accept-local ipcp-accept-remote ;ms-dns 171.138.2.1 ms-dns 192.168.1.1 ms-dns 8.8.8.8 name l2tpd noccp auth crtscts idle 1800 mtu 1410 mru 1410 lock proxyarp connect-delay 5000 debug dump logfd 2 logfile /var/log/xl2tpd.log ipsec verify Checking your system to see if IPsec got installed and started correctly: Version check and ipsec on-path [OK] Linux Openswan U2.6.38/K3.0.0-1-amd64 (netkey) Checking for IPsec support in kernel [OK] SAref kernel support [N/A] NETKEY: Testing XFRM related proc values [OK] [OK] [OK] Checking that pluto is running [OK] Pluto listening for IKE on udp 500 [OK] Pluto listening for NAT-T on udp 4500 [OK] Two or more interfaces found, checking IP forwarding [FAILED] Checking NAT and MASQUERADEing [OK] Checking for 'ip' command [OK] Checking /bin/sh is not /bin/dash [WARNING] Checking for 'iptables' command [OK] Opportunistic Encryption Support [DISABLED] The failed can be ignored i guess since cat /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_forward returns 1 any help would be much appreciated as i don't have any idea why this is not working

  Read the article

• WS2008 NTP - Using time.windows.com,0x9 - Time always skewed forwards

  - by David

  I have a domain controller configured to use time.windows.com (with 0x09 flags set). I've noticed that frequently the systems' clock is fast - it varies from 10 minutes to even 45 minutes. I always have to keep resetting the system date/time back to what it should be. When I run "w32tm /query /source" it tells me it's using time.windows.com, and obviously I trust Microsoft not to serve incorrect times, but why is my server's clock fast? EDIT: There are a few Time-Service events in the System log: Event ID: 142 Message: The time service has stopped advertising as a time source because the local clock is not synchronized. Event ID: 139 Message: The time service has started advertising as a time source. These two messages appear in pairs every hour or so. Event 142 appears 14 to 16 minutes after 139 appears. Going back a few months, these events appear: Event ID: 35 Message: The time service is now synchronizing the system time with the time source time.windows.com,0x9 (ntp.m|0x9|0.0.0.0:123-65.55.21.21:123). Event ID: 37 Message: The time provider NtpClient is currently receiving valid time data from time.windows.com,0x9 (ntp.m|0x9|0.0.0.0:123-65.55.21.21:123). Event ID: 47 Message: Time Provider NtpClient: No valid response has been received from manually configured peer time.windows.com,0x9 after 8 attempts to contact it. This peer will be discarded as a time source and NtpClient will attempt to discover a new peer with this DNS name. The error was: The time sample was rejected because: The peer is not synchronized, or it has been too long since the peer's last synchronization. These three events only appear once in the log, back in October.

  Read the article

• How to debug solve 500 Internal error aws micro ec2 with suexec, Apache and php CGi

  - by Oudin

  I'm running WordPress multi-site on an amazon micro ec2 with suexec, Apache and php CGi On Ubuntu 12.04 However I've been experiencing a lot of Internal server 500 errors and I'm in the process of debugging it to find a solution. I've posted my error logs below example.com error.log: [Fri Oct 26 10:10:08 2012] [warn] [client 23.23.xxx.xx] (104)Connection reset by peer: mod_fcgid: error reading data from FastCGI server [Fri Oct 26 10:10:08 2012] [error] [client 23.23.xxx.xx] Premature end of script headers: wp-cron.php [Fri Oct 26 10:50:04 2012] [warn] [client 190.213.xxx.xxx] (104)Connection reset by peer: mod_fcgid: error reading data from FastCGI server, referer: https://www.example.com/wp-admin/ [Fri Oct 26 10:50:04 2012] [error] [client 190.213.xxx.xxx] Premature end of script headers: admin.php, referer: https://www.example.com/wp-admin/ [Fri Oct 26 10:58:14 2012] [warn] [client 190.213.xxx.xxx] (104)Connection reset by peer: mod_fcgid: error reading data from FastCGI server, referer: https://www.example.com/wp-admin/network/index.php [Fri Oct 26 10:58:15 2012] [error] [client 190.213.xxx.xxx] Premature end of script headers: admin-ajax.php, referer: https://www.example.com/wp-admin/network/index.php [Fri Oct 26 10:58:56 2012] [warn] [client 190.213.xxx.xxx] (104)Connection reset by peer: mod_fcgid: error reading data from FastCGI server, referer: https://www.example.com/wp-admin/network/index.php [Fri Oct 26 10:58:57 2012] [error] [client 190.213.xxx.xxx] Premature end of script headers: plugins.php, referer: https://www.example.com/wp-admin/network/index.php [Fri Oct 26 10:59:18 2012] [warn] [client 190.213.xxx.xxx] (104)Connection reset by peer: mod_fcgid: error reading data from FastCGI server, referer: https://www.example.com/wp-admin/network/index.php [Fri Oct 26 10:59:18 2012] [error] [client 190.213.xxx.xxx] Premature end of script headers: admin-ajax.php, referer: https://www.example.com/wp-admin/network/index.php [Fri Oct 26 11:01:49 2012] [warn] [client 190.213.xxx.xxx] (104)Connection reset by peer: mod_fcgid: error reading data from FastCGI server, referer: https://www.example.com/wp-admin/ [Fri Oct 26 11:01:49 2012] [warn] [client 190.213.xxx.xxx] (104)Connection reset by peer: mod_fcgid: ap_pass_brigade failed in handle_request_ipc function, referer: https://www.example.com/wp-admin/ Apache Log: php (pre-forking): Cannot allocate memory php (pre-forking): Cannot allocate memory Recipient names must be specified Recipient names must be specified php (pre-forking): Cannot allocate memory php (pre-forking): Cannot allocate memory php (pre-forking): Cannot allocate memory [Fri Oct 26 10:49:33 2012] [warn] mod_fcgid: cleanup zombie process 2852 [Fri Oct 26 10:49:33 2012] [warn] mod_fcgid: cleanup zombie process 2851 [Fri Oct 26 10:49:33 2012] [warn] mod_fcgid: cleanup zombie process 2853 [Fri Oct 26 10:58:22 2012] [warn] mod_fcgid: process 2892 graceful kill fail, sending SIGKILL php (pre-forking): Cannot allocate memory [Fri Oct 26 10:59:21 2012] [warn] mod_fcgid: process 2894 graceful kill fail, sending SIGKILL [Fri Oct 26 10:59:25 2012] [warn] mod_fcgid: process 2866 graceful kill fail, sending SIGKILL suexec.log: [2012-10-25 16:05:36]: uid: (1002/username) gid: (1002/username) cmd: php-fcgi [2012-10-25 18:09:38]: uid: (1002/username) gid: (1002/username) cmd: php-fcgi [2012-10-25 18:09:51]: uid: (1002/username) gid: (1002/username) cmd: php-fcgi [2012-10-25 18:14:03]: uid: (1002/username) gid: (1002/username) cmd: php-fcgi [2012-10-25 18:14:06]: uid: (1002/username) gid: (1002/username) cmd: php-fcgi [2012-10-25 18:14:35]: uid: (1002/username) gid: (1002/username) cmd: php-fcgi [2012-10-25 20:20:27]: uid: (1002/username) gid: (1002/username) cmd: php-fcgi [2012-10-25 20:20:29]: uid: (1002/username) gid: (1002/username) cmd: php-fcgi [2012-10-25 20:20:31]: uid: (1002/username) gid: (1002/username) cmd: php-fcgi [2012-10-25 21:42:12]: uid: (1002/username) gid: (1002/username) cmd: php-fcgi [2012-10-25 22:56:50]: uid: (1002/username) gid: (1002/username) cmd: php-fcgi [2012-10-26 02:34:43]: uid: (1002/username) gid: (1002/username) cmd: php-fcgi [2012-10-26 04:25:07]: uid: (1002/username) gid: (1002/username) cmd: php-fcgi [2012-10-26 06:35:19]: uid: (1002/username) gid: (1002/username) cmd: php-fcgi [2012-10-26 06:40:05]: uid: (1002/username) gid: (1002/username) cmd: php-fcgi [2012-10-26 07:22:45]: uid: (1002/username) gid: (1002/username) cmd: php-fcgi [2012-10-26 10:10:05]: uid: (1002/username) gid: (1002/username) cmd: php-fcgi [2012-10-26 10:49:24]: uid: (1002/username) gid: (1002/username) cmd: php-fcgi [2012-10-26 10:49:24]: uid: (1002/username) gid: (1002/username) cmd: php-fcgi based on the logs can any determine what might be the cause of this? Thinking that it might be the micro instance I'm thinking of upgrading to a small. Any help would be greatly appreciated.

  Read the article

• Site-to-Site vpn setup amazon ec2 openswan (left) and cisco asa 5540 (right)

  - by user197279

  Need help on this VPN set-up on amazon EC2 using openswan Left side: EC2: setup a peer ip:- according to client using cisco (must be public) encrypted network:- according to client using cisco (must be public) Right side: Cisco ASA 5540: Peer ip: 3.3.3.3 Peer host/rightsubnet: 3.3.3.30/32 (Public NAT'd ip) The goal is to setup a site-to-site vpn connection with the client and I need guidance on the setup required on EC2. Appreciate the help Thanks.

  Read the article

• Puppet gives SSL error because master is not running?

  - by Daniel Huger

  I started with two clean machines this time. My master is running 12.04 Version: 2.7.11-1ubuntu2 Depends: ruby1.8, puppetmaster-common (= 2.7.11-1ubuntu2) My client is 10.04 Version: 2.6.3-0ubuntu1~lucid1 Depends: puppet-common (= 2.6.3-0ubuntu1~lucid1), ruby1.8 To setup Puppet tutorial: http://shapeshed.com/setting-up-puppet-on-ubuntu-10-04/ To connect master and client: http://shapeshed.com/connecting-clients-to-a-puppet-master/ The first time I tried to connect master to client failed with SSL_connect error. So I did rm -rf /etc/puppet/ssl/ to remove all the keys inside ssl folders. It looked like it work.... BUT client# puppet agent --server puppet --waitforce 60 --test /usr/lib/ruby/1.8/facter/util/resolution.rb:46: warning: Insecure world writable dir /etc/condor in PATH, mode 040777 /usr/lib/ruby/1.8/puppet/defaults.rb:67: warning: Insecure world writable dir /etc/condor in PATH, mode 040777 info: Creating a new SSL key for giab10 warning: peer certificate won't be verified in this SSL session info: Caching certificate for ca warning: peer certificate won't be verified in this SSL session warning: peer certificate won't be verified in this SSL session info: Creating a new SSL certificate request for mybox123 info: Certificate Request fingerprint (md5): XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX warning: peer certificate won't be verified in this SSL session warning: peer certificate won't be verified in this SSL session warning: peer certificate won't be verified in this SSL session warning: peer certificate won't be verified in this SSL session info: Caching certificate for mybox123 err: Could not retrieve catalog from remote server: SSL_connect returned=1 errno=0 state=SSLv3 read server certificate B: certificate verify failed warning: Not using cache on failed catalog It cached but then it couldn't retrieve it. Let me stop here.... worrying I would mess something up. But let's check master's status. * master is not running WoW.... ??? master# service puppetmaster start * Starting puppet master [OK] master# service puppetmaster status * master is not running I think time is sync. Well, we are behind a firewall so the port to sync time is disbaled. I checked with date and they seem okay. What about master not running? Is that the cause? Any help is appreciated. Thanks! /var/lib/puppet/log/masterhttp.log [2012-06-30 00:13:25] INFO WEBrick 1.3.1 [2012-06-30 00:13:25] INFO ruby 1.8.7 (2011-06-30) [x86_64-linux] [2012-06-30 00:13:25] WARN TCPServer Error: Address already in use - bind(2) [2012-06-30 00:19:40] INFO WEBrick 1.3.1 [2012-06-30 00:19:40] INFO ruby 1.8.7 (2011-06-30) [x86_64-linux] [2012-06-30 00:19:40] WARN TCPServer Error: Address already in use - bind(2) [2012-06-30 00:28:58] INFO WEBrick 1.3.1 [2012-06-30 00:28:58] INFO ruby 1.8.7 (2011-06-30) [x86_64-linux] [2012-06-30 00:28:58] WARN TCPServer Error: Address already in use - bind(2) [2012-06-30 15:31:25] INFO WEBrick 1.3.1 [2012-06-30 15:31:25] INFO ruby 1.8.7 (2011-06-30) [x86_64-linux] [2012-06-30 15:31:25] WARN TCPServer Error: Address already in use - bind(2) 1 S puppet 5186 1 0 80 0 - 29410 poll_s 15:44 ? 00:00:00 /usr/bin/ruby1.8 /usr/bin/puppet master --masterport=8140 4 S root 5235 5005 0 80 0 - 2344 pipe_w 15:45 pts/0 00:00:00 grep --color=auto puppet kill -9 5186 puppet master service puppetmaster status * master is not running I always have this error, but I always ignored it. http://pastebin.com/exbpArjv What could it mean? Time sync? Package not installed? Then how could we do puppetca in the first place?

  Read the article

• Updating Cisco VPN config to add vpnc support

  - by Igor Kuzmitshov

  I have a Cisco 1841 configured for VPN connections of two types: Peer-to-peer for partners' routers (IPsec) — using different crypto isakmp key and crypto map with set peer, set transform-set, match address for every peer (same map name, different priorities). That crypto map name is added to the WAN interface. Client access (PPTP) — using vpdn-group with accept-dialin protocol pptp. Now, a new partner wants to connect using vpnc client. The latter needs IPSec ID (group name) and IPSec secret in addition to username and password. I guess that IPSec secret is pre-shared key that can be specified in crypto isakmp key on Cisco. But I could not find any VPN tutorials involving groups. Hence, my questions: How to add IPSec ID (group name) and IPSec secret on Cisco router for vpnc connections? Should I add a new crypto map matching all addresses as well? Is it possible to add this configuration without breaking the existing setup? Thank you.

  Read the article

• Site-to-site VPN using MD5 instead of SHA and getting regular disconnection

  - by Steven

  We are experiencing some strange behavior with a site-to-site IPsec VPN that goes down about every week for 30 minutes (Iam told 30 minutes exactly). I don't have access to the logs, so it's difficult to troubleshoot. What is also strange is that the two VPN devices are set to use SHA hash algorithm but apparently end up agreeing to use MD5. Does anybody have a clue? or is this just insufficient information? Edit: Here is an extract of the log of one of the two VPN devices, which is a Cisco 3000 series VPN concentrator. 27981 03/08/2010 10:02:16.290 SEV=4 IKE/41 RPT=16120 xxxxxxxx IKE Initiator: New Phase 1, Intf 2, IKE Peer xxxxxxxx local Proxy Address xxxxxxxx, remote Proxy Address xxxxxxxx, SA (L2L: 1A) 27983 03/08/2010 10:02:56.930 SEV=4 IKE/41 RPT=16121 xxxxxxxx IKE Initiator: New Phase 1, Intf 2, IKE Peer xxxxxxxx local Proxy Address xxxxxxxx, remote Proxy Address xxxxxxxx, SA (L2L: 1A) 27986 03/08/2010 10:03:35.370 SEV=4 IKE/41 RPT=16122 xxxxxxxx IKE Initiator: New Phase 1, Intf 2, IKE Peer xxxxxxxx local Proxy Address xxxxxxxx, remote Proxy Address xxxxxxxx, SA (L2L: 1A) [… same continues for another 15 minutes …] 28093 03/08/2010 10:19:46.710 SEV=4 IKE/41 RPT=16140 xxxxxxxx IKE Initiator: New Phase 1, Intf 2, IKE Peer xxxxxxxx local Proxy Address xxxxxxxx, remote Proxy Address xxxxxxxx, SA (L2L: 1A) 28096 03/08/2010 10:20:17.720 SEV=5 IKE/172 RPT=1291 xxxxxxxx Group [xxxxxxxx] Automatic NAT Detection Status: Remote end is NOT behind a NAT device This end IS behind a NAT device 28100 03/08/2010 10:20:17.820 SEV=3 IKE/134 RPT=79 xxxxxxxx Group [xxxxxxxx] Mismatch: Configured LAN-to-LAN proposal differs from negotiated proposal. Verify local and remote LAN-to-LAN connection lists. 28103 03/08/2010 10:20:17.820 SEV=4 IKE/119 RPT=1197 xxxxxxxx Group [xxxxxxxx] PHASE 1 COMPLETED 28104 03/08/2010 10:20:17.820 SEV=4 AUTH/22 RPT=1031 xxxxxxxx User [xxxxxxxx] Group [xxxxxxxx] connected, Session Type: IPSec/LAN- to-LAN 28106 03/08/2010 10:20:17.820 SEV=4 AUTH/84 RPT=39 LAN-to-LAN tunnel to headend device xxxxxxxx connected 28110 03/08/2010 10:20:17.920 SEV=5 IKE/25 RPT=1291 xxxxxxxx Group [xxxxxxxx] Received remote Proxy Host data in ID Payload: Address xxxxxxxx, Protocol 0, Port 0 28113 03/08/2010 10:20:17.920 SEV=5 IKE/24 RPT=88 xxxxxxxx Group [xxxxxxxx] Received local Proxy Host data in ID Payload: Address xxxxxxxx, Protocol 0, Port 0 28116 03/08/2010 10:20:17.920 SEV=5 IKE/66 RPT=1290 xxxxxxxx Group [xxxxxxxx] IKE Remote Peer configured for SA: L2L: 1A 28117 03/08/2010 10:20:17.930 SEV=5 IKE/25 RPT=1292 xxxxxxxx Group [xxxxxxxx] Received remote Proxy Host data in ID Payload: Address xxxxxxxx, Protocol 0, Port 0 28120 03/08/2010 10:20:17.930 SEV=5 IKE/24 RPT=89 xxxxxxxx Group [xxxxxxxx] Received local Proxy Host data in ID Payload: Address xxxxxxxx, Protocol 0, Port 0 28123 03/08/2010 10:20:17.930 SEV=5 IKE/66 RPT=1291 xxxxxxxx Group [xxxxxxxx] IKE Remote Peer configured for SA: L2L: 1A 28124 03/08/2010 10:20:18.070 SEV=4 IKE/173 RPT=17330 xxxxxxxx Group [xxxxxxxx] NAT-Traversal successfully negotiated! IPSec traffic will be encapsulated to pass through NAT devices. 28127 03/08/2010 10:20:18.070 SEV=4 IKE/49 RPT=17332 xxxxxxxx Group [xxxxxxxx] Security negotiation complete for LAN-to-LAN Group (xxxxxxxx) Responder, Inbound SPI = 0x56a4fe5c, Outbound SPI = 0xcdfc3892 28130 03/08/2010 10:20:18.070 SEV=4 IKE/120 RPT=17332 xxxxxxxx Group [xxxxxxxx] PHASE 2 COMPLETED (msgid=37b3b298) 28131 03/08/2010 10:20:18.750 SEV=4 IKE/41 RPT=16141 xxxxxxxx Group [xxxxxxxx] IKE Initiator: New Phase 2, Intf 2, IKE Peer xxxxxxxx local Proxy Address xxxxxxxx, remote Proxy Address xxxxxxxx, SA (L2L: 1A) 28135 03/08/2010 10:20:18.870 SEV=4 IKE/173 RPT=17331 xxxxxxxx Group [xxxxxxxx] NAT-Traversal successfully negotiated! IPSec traffic will be encapsulated to pass through NAT devices.

  Read the article

• How to stop registration attempts on Asterisk

  - by Travesty3

  The main question: My Asterisk logs are littered with messages like these: [2012-05-29 15:53:49] NOTICE[5578] chan_sip.c: Registration from '<sip:[email protected]>' failed for '37.75.210.177' - No matching peer found [2012-05-29 15:53:50] NOTICE[5578] chan_sip.c: Registration from '<sip:[email protected]>' failed for '37.75.210.177' - No matching peer found [2012-05-29 15:53:55] NOTICE[5578] chan_sip.c: Registration from '<sip:[email protected]>' failed for '37.75.210.177' - No matching peer found [2012-05-29 15:53:55] NOTICE[5578] chan_sip.c: Registration from '<sip:[email protected]>' failed for '37.75.210.177' - No matching peer found [2012-05-29 15:53:57] NOTICE[5578] chan_sip.c: Sending fake auth rejection for device <sip:[email protected]>;tag=cb23fe53 [2012-05-29 15:53:57] NOTICE[5578] chan_sip.c: Sending fake auth rejection for device <sip:[email protected]>;tag=cb23fe53 [2012-05-29 15:54:02] NOTICE[5578] chan_sip.c: Registration from '<sip:[email protected]>' failed for '37.75.210.177' - No matching peer found [2012-05-29 15:54:03] NOTICE[5578] chan_sip.c: Registration from '<sip:[email protected]>' failed for '37.75.210.177' - No matching peer found [2012-05-29 21:20:36] NOTICE[5578] chan_sip.c: Registration from '"55435217"<sip:[email protected]>' failed for '65.218.221.180' - No matching peer found [2012-05-29 21:20:36] NOTICE[5578] chan_sip.c: Registration from '"1731687005"<sip:[email protected]>' failed for '65.218.221.180' - No matching peer found [2012-05-30 01:18:58] NOTICE[5578] chan_sip.c: Sending fake auth rejection for device "unknown" <sip:[email protected]>;tag=dEBcOzUysX [2012-05-30 01:18:58] NOTICE[5578] chan_sip.c: Sending fake auth rejection for device "unknown" <sip:[email protected]>;tag=9zUari4Mve [2012-05-30 01:19:00] NOTICE[5578] chan_sip.c: Sending fake auth rejection for device "unknown" <sip:[email protected]>;tag=sOYgI1ItQn [2012-05-30 01:19:02] NOTICE[5578] chan_sip.c: Sending fake auth rejection for device "unknown" <sip:[email protected]>;tag=2EGLTzZSEi [2012-05-30 01:19:04] NOTICE[5578] chan_sip.c: Sending fake auth rejection for device "unknown" <sip:[email protected]>;tag=j0JfZoPcur [2012-05-30 01:19:06] NOTICE[5578] chan_sip.c: Sending fake auth rejection for device "unknown" <sip:[email protected]>;tag=Ra0DFDKggt [2012-05-30 01:19:08] NOTICE[5578] chan_sip.c: Sending fake auth rejection for device "unknown" <sip:[email protected]>;tag=rR7q7aTHEz [2012-05-30 01:19:10] NOTICE[5578] chan_sip.c: Sending fake auth rejection for device "unknown" <sip:[email protected]>;tag=VHUMtOpIvU [2012-05-30 01:19:12] NOTICE[5578] chan_sip.c: Sending fake auth rejection for device "unknown" <sip:[email protected]>;tag=JxZUzBnPMW I use Asterisk for an automated phone system. The only thing it does is receives incoming calls and executes a Perl script. No outgoing calls, no incoming calls to an actual phone, no phones registered with Asterisk. It seems like there should be an easy way to block all unauthorized registration attempts, but I have struggled with this for a long time. It seems like there should be a more effective way to prevent these attempts from even getting far enough to reach my Asterisk logs. Some setting I could turn on/off that doesn't allow registration attempts at all or something. Is there any way to do this? Also, am I correct in assuming that the "Registration from ..." messages are likely people attempting to get access to my Asterisk server (probably to make calls on my account)? And what's the difference between those messages and the "Sending fake auth rejection ..." messages? Further detail: I know that the "Registration from ..." lines are intruders attempting to get access to my Asterisk server. With Fail2Ban set up, these IPs are banned after 5 attempts (for some reason, one got 6 attempts, but w/e). But I have no idea what the "Sending fake auth rejection ..." messages mean or how to stop these potential intrusion attempts. As far as I can tell, they have never been successful (haven't seen any weird charges on my bills or anything). Here's what I have done: Set up hardware firewall rules as shown below. Here, xx.xx.xx.xx is the IP address of the server, yy.yy.yy.yy is the IP address of our facility, and aa.aa.aa.aa, bb.bb.bb.bb, and cc.cc.cc.cc are the IP addresses that our VoIP provider uses. Theoretically, ports 10000-20000 should only be accessible by those three IPs.+-------+-----------------------------+----------+-----------+--------+-----------------------------+------------------+ | Order | Source Ip | Protocol | Direction | Action | Destination Ip | Destination Port | +-------+-----------------------------+----------+-----------+--------+-----------------------------+------------------+ | 1 | cc.cc.cc.cc/255.255.255.255 | udp | inbound | permit | xx.xx.xx.xx/255.255.255.255 | 10000-20000 | | 2 | any | tcp | inbound | permit | xx.xx.xx.xx/255.255.255.255 | 80 | | 3 | any | tcp | inbound | permit | xx.xx.xx.xx/255.255.255.255 | 2749 | | 4 | any | tcp | inbound | permit | xx.xx.xx.xx/255.255.255.255 | 443 | | 5 | any | tcp | inbound | permit | xx.xx.xx.xx/255.255.255.255 | 53 | | 6 | any | tcp | inbound | permit | xx.xx.xx.xx/255.255.255.255 | 1981 | | 7 | any | tcp | inbound | permit | xx.xx.xx.xx/255.255.255.255 | 1991 | | 8 | any | tcp | inbound | permit | xx.xx.xx.xx/255.255.255.255 | 2001 | | 9 | yy.yy.yy.yy/255.255.255.255 | udp | inbound | permit | xx.xx.xx.xx/255.255.255.255 | 137-138 | | 10 | yy.yy.yy.yy/255.255.255.255 | tcp | inbound | permit | xx.xx.xx.xx/255.255.255.255 | 139 | | 11 | yy.yy.yy.yy/255.255.255.255 | tcp | inbound | permit | xx.xx.xx.xx/255.255.255.255 | 445 | | 14 | aa.aa.aa.aa/255.255.255.255 | udp | inbound | permit | xx.xx.xx.xx/255.255.255.255 | 10000-20000 | | 17 | bb.bb.bb.bb/255.255.255.255 | udp | inbound | permit | xx.xx.xx.xx/255.255.255.255 | 10000-20000 | | 18 | any | tcp | inbound | permit | xx.xx.xx.xx/255.255.255.255 | 1971 | | 19 | any | tcp | inbound | permit | xx.xx.xx.xx/255.255.255.255 | 2739 | | 20 | any | tcp | inbound | permit | xx.xx.xx.xx/255.255.255.255 | 1023-1050 | | 21 | any | all | inbound | deny | any on server | 1-65535 | +-------+-----------------------------+----------+-----------+--------+-----------------------------+------------------+ Set up Fail2Ban. This is sort of working, but it's reactive instead of proactive, and doesn't seem to be blocking everything (like the "Sending fake auth rejection ..." messages). Set up rules in sip.conf to deny all except for my VoIP provider. Here is my sip.conf with almost all commented lines removed (to save space). Notice at the bottom is my attempt to deny all except for my VoIP provider:[general] context=default allowguest=no allowoverlap=no bindport=5060 bindaddr=0.0.0.0 srvlookup=yes disallow=all allow=g726 allow=ulaw allow=alaw allow=g726aal2 allow=adpcm allow=slin allow=lpc10 allow=speex allow=g726 insecure=invite alwaysauthreject=yes ;registertimeout=20 registerattempts=0 register = user:pass:[email protected]:5060/700 [mysipprovider] type=peer username=user fromuser=user secret=pass host=sip.mysipprovider.com fromdomain=sip.mysipprovider.com nat=no ;canreinvite=yes qualify=yes context=inbound-mysipprovider disallow=all allow=ulaw allow=alaw allow=gsm insecure=port,invite deny=0.0.0.0/0.0.0.0 permit=aa.aa.aa.aa/255.255.255.255 permit=bb.bb.bb.bb/255.255.255.255 permit=cc.cc.cc.cc/255.255.255.255

  Read the article

• No Homegroup Computers, Network Troubleshooter Fails

  - by Mokubai

  I have a problem with my Windows 7 Homegroup, between two Windows 7 Home Premium machines. On one machine I get this: The other machine in the Homegroup is perfectly happy and is able to see and browse this faulty machine as if there is nothing wrong. The Network and Sharing Center shows that I am joined to a Homegroup on my "Home" network and nothing is out of the ordinary. I have tried leaving the Homegroup and rejoining/recreating it several times and that does nothing at all. Normal browsing to machine names and looking through folders seems to work, but it's a much more clunky way to get stuff compared to the convenience of the Homegroup facilities. Starting the troubleshooter detects some problems with a "Peer Networking" (PNRpr or something like that) service not starting but fails to fix anything. Sure enough when I go to view the services via Control Panel - Administrative Tools - Services I see that both the "Peer Name Resolution Protocol" and "Peer Networking Grouping" services are stopped. Attempting to start the "Peer Networking Grouping" gives an error that a dependency service will not start, the only service it is dependant on is the "Peer Name Resolution Protocol" so I try to start that and I get an error saying that the "service could not start due to error 0x80630801" This has happened before and I have fixed it then by using System Restore and restoring the machine to a week before when I knew it had all worked. This time though I cannot remember when I last used the Homegroup from this machine and I've installed quite a bit so I don't want to go fumbling through restore points trying to find one that works... Can anyone tell me if there is a way to reset things so that this machine is able to use the Homegroup again?

  Read the article

• SNTP, why do you mock me?!

  - by Matthew

  --- SOLVED SEE EDIT 5 --- My w2k3 pdc is configured as an authoritative time server. Other servers on the domain are able to sync with it if I manually specify it in the peer list. By if I try to sync from flags 'domhier', it wont resync; I get the error message The computer did not resync because no time data was available. I can only think that it is not querying the pdc. I also tried setting the registry as shown here (http://support.microsoft.com/kb/193825). But no luck (I have not restarted the server, I am hoping I wont have to since it is the pdc) If you would like any further information on my config, please let me know. Edit 1: I have set the w32time service config AnnouceFlags to 0x05 as documented here www.krr.org/microsoft/authoritative_time_servers.php and a number of other places. The PDC syncs to an external time source (ntp). I can get the stripchart on the client from the pdc no problems. The loginserver for the host I am trying to configure is shown as the pdc. Edit 2: The packet capture has revealed something interesting. The client is contacting the correct server, and getting a valid response but I still get the same error message. Here is the NTP excerpt from the client to the server Flags: 11.. .... = Leap Indicator: alarm condition (clock not synchronized) (3) ..01 1... = Version number: NTP Version 3 (3) .... .011 = Mode: client (3) Peer Clock Stratum: unspecified or unavailable (0) Peer Polling Interval: 10 (1024 sec) Peer Clock Precision: 0.015625 sec Root Delay: 0.0000 sec Root Dispersion: 1.0156 sec Reference Clock ID: NULL Reference Clock Update Time: Sep 1, 2010 05:29:39.8170 UTC Originate Time Stamp: NULL Receive Time Stamp: NULL Transmit Time Stamp: Nov 8, 2010 01:44:44.1450 UTC Key ID: DC080000 Here is the reply NTP excerpt from the server to the client Flags: 0x1c 00.. .... = Leap Indicator: no warning (0) ..01 1... = Version number: NTP Version 3 (3) .... .100 = Mode: server (4) Peer Clock Stratum: secondary reference (3) Peer Polling Interval: 10 (1024 sec) Peer Clock Precision: 0.00001 sec Root Delay: 0.1484 sec Root Dispersion: 0.1060 sec Reference Clock ID: 192.189.54.17 Reference Clock Update Time: Nov 8,2010 01:18:04.6223 UTC Originate Time Stamp: Nov 8, 2010 01:44:44.1450 UTC Receive Time Stamp: Nov 8, 2010 01:46:44.1975 UTC Transmit Time Stamp: Nov 8, 2010 01:46:44.1975 UTC Key ID: 00000000 Edit 3: dumpreg for paramters on pdc Value Name Value Type Value Data ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ServiceMain REG_SZ SvchostEntry_W32Time ServiceDll REG_EXPAND_SZ C:\WINDOWS\system32\w32time.dll NtpServer REG_SZ bhvmmgt01.domain.com,0x1 Type REG_SZ AllSync and config Value Name Value Type Value Data -------------------------------------------------------------------------- LastClockRate REG_DWORD 156249 MinClockRate REG_DWORD 155860 MaxClockRate REG_DWORD 156640 FrequencyCorrectRate REG_DWORD 4 PollAdjustFactor REG_DWORD 5 LargePhaseOffset REG_DWORD 50000000 SpikeWatchPeriod REG_DWORD 900 HoldPeriod REG_DWORD 5 LocalClockDispersion REG_DWORD 10 EventLogFlags REG_DWORD 2 PhaseCorrectRate REG_DWORD 7 MinPollInterval REG_DWORD 6 MaxPollInterval REG_DWORD 10 UpdateInterval REG_DWORD 100 MaxNegPhaseCorrection REG_DWORD -1 MaxPosPhaseCorrection REG_DWORD -1 AnnounceFlags REG_DWORD 5 MaxAllowedPhaseOffset REG_DWORD 300 FileLogSize REG_DWORD 10000000 FileLogName REG_SZ C:\Windows\Temp\w32time.log FileLogEntries REG_SZ 0-300 Edit 4: Here are some notables from the ntp log file on the pdc. ReadConfig: failed. Use default one 'TimeJumpAuditOffset'=0x00007080 DomainHierachy: we are now the domain root. ClockDispln: we're a reliable time service with no time source: LS: 0, TN: 864000000000, WAIT: 86400000 Edit 5: F&^%ING SOLVED! Ok so I was reading about people with similar problems, some mentioned w32time server settings applied by GPO, but I tested this early on and there were no settings applied to this service by gpo. Others said that the reporting software may not be picking up some old gpo settings applied. So I searched the registry for all w32time instaces. I came across an interesting key that indicated there may be some other ntp software running on the server. Sure enough, I look through the installed software list and there the little F*&%ER is. Uninstalled and now working like a dream. FFFFFFFUUUUUUUUUUUU

  Read the article

• SQL SERVER – SOS_SCHEDULER_YIELD – Wait Type – Day 8 of 28

  - by pinaldave

  This is a very interesting wait type and quite often seen as one of the top wait types. Let us discuss this today. From Book On-Line: Occurs when a task voluntarily yields the scheduler for other tasks to execute. During this wait the task is waiting for its quantum to be renewed. SOS_SCHEDULER_YIELD Explanation: SQL Server has multiple threads, and the basic working methodology for SQL Server is that SQL Server does not let any “runnable” thread to starve. Now let us assume SQL Server OS is very busy running threads on all the scheduler. There are always new threads coming up which are ready to run (in other words, runnable). Thread management of the SQL Server is decided by SQL Server and not the operating system. SQL Server runs on non-preemptive mode most of the time, meaning the threads are co-operative and can let other threads to run from time to time by yielding itself. When any thread yields itself for another thread, it creates this wait. If there are more threads, it clearly indicates that the CPU is under pressure. You can fun the following DMV to see how many runnable task counts there are in your system. SELECT scheduler_id, current_tasks_count, runnable_tasks_count, work_queue_count, pending_disk_io_count FROM sys.dm_os_schedulers WHERE scheduler_id < 255 GO If you notice a two-digit number in runnable_tasks_count continuously for long time (not once in a while), you will know that there is CPU pressure. The two-digit number is usually considered as a bad thing; you can read the description of the above DMV over here. Additionally, there are several other counters (%Processor Time and other processor related counters), through which you can refer to so you can validate CPU pressure along with the method explained above. Reducing SOS_SCHEDULER_YIELD wait: This is the trickiest part of this procedure. As discussed, this particular wait type relates to CPU pressure. Increasing more CPU is the solution in simple terms; however, it is not easy to implement this solution. There are other things that you can consider when this wait type is very high. Here is the query where you can find the most expensive query related to CPU from the cache Note: The query that used lots of resources but is not cached will not be caught here. SELECT SUBSTRING(qt.TEXT, (qs.statement_start_offset/2)+1, ((CASE qs.statement_end_offset WHEN -1 THEN DATALENGTH(qt.TEXT) ELSE qs.statement_end_offset END - qs.statement_start_offset)/2)+1), qs.execution_count, qs.total_logical_reads, qs.last_logical_reads, qs.total_logical_writes, qs.last_logical_writes, qs.total_worker_time, qs.last_worker_time, qs.total_elapsed_time/1000000 total_elapsed_time_in_S, qs.last_elapsed_time/1000000 last_elapsed_time_in_S, qs.last_execution_time, qp.query_plan FROM sys.dm_exec_query_stats qs CROSS APPLY sys.dm_exec_sql_text(qs.sql_handle) qt CROSS APPLY sys.dm_exec_query_plan(qs.plan_handle) qp ORDER BY qs.total_worker_time DESC -- CPU time You can find the most expensive queries that are utilizing lots of CPU (from the cache) and you can tune them accordingly. Moreover, you can find the longest running query and attempt to tune them if there is any processor offending code. Additionally, pay attention to total_worker_time because if that is also consistently higher, then  the CPU under too much pressure. You can also check perfmon counters of compilations as they tend to use good amount of CPU. Index rebuild is also a CPU intensive process but we should consider that main cause for this query because that is indeed needed on high transactions OLTP system utilized to reduce fragmentations. Note: The information presented here is from my experience and there is no way that I claim it to be accurate. I suggest reading Book OnLine for further clarification. All of the discussions of Wait Stats in this blog is generic and varies from system to system. It is recommended that you test this on a development server before implementing it to a production server. Reference: Pinal Dave (http://blog.SQLAuthority.com) Filed under: Pinal Dave, PostADay, SQL, SQL Authority, SQL Query, SQL Scripts, SQL Server, SQL Tips and Tricks, SQL Wait Stats, SQL Wait Types, T SQL, Technology

  Read the article

• Web Writing Services - When It's Time to Pass the Ball

  When it comes to making our online marketing campaigns a success, most of us would be better off hiring a variety of web writing services to help. After all, while we've all seen (and envied) the one-man-act extraordinaire, there isn't too many of us who haven't been victim to the frazzled, pressure-cooker feeling of having sole responsibility for our companies' successes either. Besides, who in their right mind would put that kind of pressure on themselves when outsourcing to a web writing service can be just as profitable?

  Read the article

• Setup VPN issue on Ubuntu Server 12.04

  - by Yozone W.

  I have a problem with setup VPN server on my Ubuntu VPS, here is my server environments: Ubuntu Server 12.04 x86_64 xl2tpd 1.3.1+dfsg-1 pppd 2.4.5-5ubuntu1 openswan 1:2.6.38-1~precise1 After install software and configuration: ipsec verify Checking your system to see if IPsec got installed and started correctly: Version check and ipsec on-path [OK] Linux Openswan U2.6.38/K3.2.0-24-virtual (netkey) Checking for IPsec support in kernel [OK] SAref kernel support [N/A] NETKEY: Testing XFRM related proc values [OK] [OK] [OK] Checking that pluto is running [OK] Pluto listening for IKE on udp 500 [OK] Pluto listening for NAT-T on udp 4500 [OK] Checking for 'ip' command [OK] Checking /bin/sh is not /bin/dash [WARNING] Checking for 'iptables' command [OK] Opportunistic Encryption Support [DISABLED] /var/log/auth.log message: Oct 16 06:50:54 vpn pluto[3963]: packet from [My IP Address]:2251: received Vendor ID payload [RFC 3947] method set to=115 Oct 16 06:50:54 vpn pluto[3963]: packet from [My IP Address]:2251: received Vendor ID payload [draft-ietf-ipsec-nat-t-ike] meth=114, but already using method 115 Oct 16 06:50:54 vpn pluto[3963]: packet from [My IP Address]:2251: received Vendor ID payload [draft-ietf-ipsec-nat-t-ike-08] meth=113, but already using method 115 Oct 16 06:50:54 vpn pluto[3963]: packet from [My IP Address]:2251: received Vendor ID payload [draft-ietf-ipsec-nat-t-ike-07] meth=112, but already using method 115 Oct 16 06:50:54 vpn pluto[3963]: packet from [My IP Address]:2251: received Vendor ID payload [draft-ietf-ipsec-nat-t-ike-06] meth=111, but already using method 115 Oct 16 06:50:54 vpn pluto[3963]: packet from [My IP Address]:2251: received Vendor ID payload [draft-ietf-ipsec-nat-t-ike-05] meth=110, but already using method 115 Oct 16 06:50:54 vpn pluto[3963]: packet from [My IP Address]:2251: received Vendor ID payload [draft-ietf-ipsec-nat-t-ike-04] meth=109, but already using method 115 Oct 16 06:50:54 vpn pluto[3963]: packet from [My IP Address]:2251: received Vendor ID payload [draft-ietf-ipsec-nat-t-ike-03] meth=108, but already using method 115 Oct 16 06:50:54 vpn pluto[3963]: packet from [My IP Address]:2251: received Vendor ID payload [draft-ietf-ipsec-nat-t-ike-02] meth=107, but already using method 115 Oct 16 06:50:54 vpn pluto[3963]: packet from [My IP Address]:2251: received Vendor ID payload [draft-ietf-ipsec-nat-t-ike-02_n] meth=106, but already using method 115 Oct 16 06:50:54 vpn pluto[3963]: packet from [My IP Address]:2251: ignoring Vendor ID payload [FRAGMENTATION 80000000] Oct 16 06:50:54 vpn pluto[3963]: packet from [My IP Address]:2251: received Vendor ID payload [Dead Peer Detection] Oct 16 06:50:54 vpn pluto[3963]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[5] [My IP Address] #5: responding to Main Mode from unknown peer [My IP Address] Oct 16 06:50:54 vpn pluto[3963]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[5] [My IP Address] #5: transition from state STATE_MAIN_R0 to state STATE_MAIN_R1 Oct 16 06:50:54 vpn pluto[3963]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[5] [My IP Address] #5: STATE_MAIN_R1: sent MR1, expecting MI2 Oct 16 06:50:55 vpn pluto[3963]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[5] [My IP Address] #5: NAT-Traversal: Result using draft-ietf-ipsec-nat-t-ike (MacOS X): peer is NATed Oct 16 06:50:55 vpn pluto[3963]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[5] [My IP Address] #5: transition from state STATE_MAIN_R1 to state STATE_MAIN_R2 Oct 16 06:50:55 vpn pluto[3963]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[5] [My IP Address] #5: STATE_MAIN_R2: sent MR2, expecting MI3 Oct 16 06:50:55 vpn pluto[3963]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[5] [My IP Address] #5: ignoring informational payload, type IPSEC_INITIAL_CONTACT msgid=00000000 Oct 16 06:50:55 vpn pluto[3963]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[5] [My IP Address] #5: Main mode peer ID is ID_IPV4_ADDR: '192.168.12.52' Oct 16 06:50:55 vpn pluto[3963]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[5] [My IP Address] #5: switched from "L2TP-PSK-NAT" to "L2TP-PSK-NAT" Oct 16 06:50:55 vpn pluto[3963]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[6] [My IP Address] #5: deleting connection "L2TP-PSK-NAT" instance with peer [My IP Address] {isakmp=#0/ipsec=#0} Oct 16 06:50:55 vpn pluto[3963]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[6] [My IP Address] #5: transition from state STATE_MAIN_R2 to state STATE_MAIN_R3 Oct 16 06:50:55 vpn pluto[3963]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[6] [My IP Address] #5: new NAT mapping for #5, was [My IP Address]:2251, now [My IP Address]:2847 Oct 16 06:50:55 vpn pluto[3963]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[6] [My IP Address] #5: STATE_MAIN_R3: sent MR3, ISAKMP SA established {auth=OAKLEY_PRESHARED_KEY cipher=aes_256 prf=oakley_sha group=modp1024} Oct 16 06:50:55 vpn pluto[3963]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[6] [My IP Address] #5: Dead Peer Detection (RFC 3706): enabled Oct 16 06:50:56 vpn pluto[3963]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[6] [My IP Address] #5: the peer proposed: [My Server IP Address]/32:17/1701 -> 192.168.12.52/32:17/0 Oct 16 06:50:56 vpn pluto[3963]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[6] [My IP Address] #5: NAT-Traversal: received 2 NAT-OA. using first, ignoring others Oct 16 06:50:56 vpn pluto[3963]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[6] [My IP Address] #6: responding to Quick Mode proposal {msgid:8579b1fb} Oct 16 06:50:56 vpn pluto[3963]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[6] [My IP Address] #6: us: [My Server IP Address]<[My Server IP Address]>:17/1701 Oct 16 06:50:56 vpn pluto[3963]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[6] [My IP Address] #6: them: [My IP Address][192.168.12.52]:17/65280===192.168.12.52/32 Oct 16 06:50:56 vpn pluto[3963]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[6] [My IP Address] #6: transition from state STATE_QUICK_R0 to state STATE_QUICK_R1 Oct 16 06:50:56 vpn pluto[3963]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[6] [My IP Address] #6: STATE_QUICK_R1: sent QR1, inbound IPsec SA installed, expecting QI2 Oct 16 06:50:56 vpn pluto[3963]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[6] [My IP Address] #6: Dead Peer Detection (RFC 3706): enabled Oct 16 06:50:56 vpn pluto[3963]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[6] [My IP Address] #6: transition from state STATE_QUICK_R1 to state STATE_QUICK_R2 Oct 16 06:50:56 vpn pluto[3963]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[6] [My IP Address] #6: STATE_QUICK_R2: IPsec SA established transport mode {ESP=>0x08bda158 <0x4920a374 xfrm=AES_256-HMAC_SHA1 NATOA=192.168.12.52 NATD=[My IP Address]:2847 DPD=enabled} Oct 16 06:51:16 vpn pluto[3963]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[6] [My IP Address] #5: received Delete SA(0x08bda158) payload: deleting IPSEC State #6 Oct 16 06:51:16 vpn pluto[3963]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[6] [My IP Address] #5: ERROR: netlink XFRM_MSG_DELPOLICY response for flow eroute_connection delete included errno 2: No such file or directory Oct 16 06:51:16 vpn pluto[3963]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[6] [My IP Address] #5: received and ignored informational message Oct 16 06:51:16 vpn pluto[3963]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[6] [My IP Address] #5: received Delete SA payload: deleting ISAKMP State #5 Oct 16 06:51:16 vpn pluto[3963]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[6] [My IP Address]: deleting connection "L2TP-PSK-NAT" instance with peer [My IP Address] {isakmp=#0/ipsec=#0} Oct 16 06:51:16 vpn pluto[3963]: packet from [My IP Address]:2847: received and ignored informational message xl2tpd -D message: xl2tpd[4289]: Enabling IPsec SAref processing for L2TP transport mode SAs xl2tpd[4289]: IPsec SAref does not work with L2TP kernel mode yet, enabling forceuserspace=yes xl2tpd[4289]: setsockopt recvref[30]: Protocol not available xl2tpd[4289]: This binary does not support kernel L2TP. xl2tpd[4289]: xl2tpd version xl2tpd-1.3.1 started on vpn.netools.me PID:4289 xl2tpd[4289]: Written by Mark Spencer, Copyright (C) 1998, Adtran, Inc. xl2tpd[4289]: Forked by Scott Balmos and David Stipp, (C) 2001 xl2tpd[4289]: Inherited by Jeff McAdams, (C) 2002 xl2tpd[4289]: Forked again by Xelerance (www.xelerance.com) (C) 2006 xl2tpd[4289]: Listening on IP address [My Server IP Address], port 1701 Then it just stopped here, and have no any response. I can't connect VPN on my mac client, the /var/log/system.log message: Oct 16 15:17:36 azone-iMac.local configd[17]: SCNC: start, triggered by SystemUIServer, type L2TP, status 0 Oct 16 15:17:36 azone-iMac.local pppd[3799]: pppd 2.4.2 (Apple version 596.13) started by azone, uid 501 Oct 16 15:17:38 azone-iMac.local pppd[3799]: L2TP connecting to server 'vpn.netools.me' ([My Server IP Address])... Oct 16 15:17:38 azone-iMac.local pppd[3799]: IPSec connection started Oct 16 15:17:38 azone-iMac.local racoon[359]: Connecting. Oct 16 15:17:38 azone-iMac.local racoon[359]: IPSec Phase1 started (Initiated by me). Oct 16 15:17:38 azone-iMac.local racoon[359]: IKE Packet: transmit success. (Initiator, Main-Mode message 1). Oct 16 15:17:38 azone-iMac.local racoon[359]: IKE Packet: receive success. (Initiator, Main-Mode message 2). Oct 16 15:17:38 azone-iMac.local racoon[359]: IKE Packet: transmit success. (Initiator, Main-Mode message 3). Oct 16 15:17:38 azone-iMac.local racoon[359]: IKE Packet: receive success. (Initiator, Main-Mode message 4). Oct 16 15:17:38 azone-iMac.local racoon[359]: IKE Packet: transmit success. (Initiator, Main-Mode message 5). Oct 16 15:17:38 azone-iMac.local racoon[359]: IKEv1 Phase1 AUTH: success. (Initiator, Main-Mode Message 6). Oct 16 15:17:38 azone-iMac.local racoon[359]: IKE Packet: receive success. (Initiator, Main-Mode message 6). Oct 16 15:17:38 azone-iMac.local racoon[359]: IKEv1 Phase1 Initiator: success. (Initiator, Main-Mode). Oct 16 15:17:38 azone-iMac.local racoon[359]: IPSec Phase1 established (Initiated by me). Oct 16 15:17:39 azone-iMac.local racoon[359]: IPSec Phase2 started (Initiated by me). Oct 16 15:17:39 azone-iMac.local racoon[359]: IKE Packet: transmit success. (Initiator, Quick-Mode message 1). Oct 16 15:17:39 azone-iMac.local racoon[359]: IKE Packet: receive success. (Initiator, Quick-Mode message 2). Oct 16 15:17:39 azone-iMac.local racoon[359]: IKE Packet: transmit success. (Initiator, Quick-Mode message 3). Oct 16 15:17:39 azone-iMac.local racoon[359]: IKEv1 Phase2 Initiator: success. (Initiator, Quick-Mode). Oct 16 15:17:39 azone-iMac.local racoon[359]: IPSec Phase2 established (Initiated by me). Oct 16 15:17:39 azone-iMac.local pppd[3799]: IPSec connection established Oct 16 15:17:59 azone-iMac.local pppd[3799]: L2TP cannot connect to the server Oct 16 15:17:59 azone-iMac.local racoon[359]: IPSec disconnecting from server [My Server IP Address] Oct 16 15:17:59 azone-iMac.local racoon[359]: IKE Packet: transmit success. (Information message). Oct 16 15:17:59 azone-iMac.local racoon[359]: IKEv1 Information-Notice: transmit success. (Delete IPSEC-SA). Oct 16 15:17:59 azone-iMac.local racoon[359]: IKE Packet: transmit success. (Information message). Oct 16 15:17:59 azone-iMac.local racoon[359]: IKEv1 Information-Notice: transmit success. (Delete ISAKMP-SA). Anyone help? Thanks a million!

  Read the article

• What to filter when providing very limited open WiFi to a small conference or meeting?

  - by Tim Farley

  Executive Summary The basic question is: if you have a very limited bandwidth WiFi to provide Internet for a small meeting of only a day or two, how do you set the filters on the router to avoid one or two users monopolizing all the available bandwidth? For folks who don't have the time to read the details below, I am NOT looking for any of these answers: Secure the router and only let a few trusted people use it Tell everyone to turn off unused services & generally police themselves Monitor the traffic with a sniffer and add filters as needed I am aware of all of that. None are appropriate for reasons that will become clear. ALSO NOTE: There is already a question concerning providing adequate WiFi at large (500 attendees) conferences here. This question concerns SMALL meetings of less than 200 people, typically with less than half that using the WiFi. Something that can be handled with a single home or small office router. Background I've used a 3G/4G router device to provide WiFi to small meetings in the past with some success. By small I mean single-room conferences or meetings on the order of a barcamp or Skepticamp or user group meeting. These meetings sometimes have technical attendees there, but not exclusively. Usually less than half to a third of the attendees will actually use the WiFi. Maximum meeting size I'm talking about is 100 to 200 people. I typically use a Cradlepoint MBR-1000 but many other devices exist, especially all-in-one units supplied by 3G and/or 4G vendors like Verizon, Sprint and Clear. These devices take a 3G or 4G internet connection and fan it out to multiple users using WiFi. One key aspect of providing net access this way is the limited bandwidth available over 3G/4G. Even with something like the Cradlepoint which can load-balance multiple radios, you are only going to achieve a few megabits of download speed and maybe a megabit or so of upload speed. That's a best case scenario. Often it is considerably slower. The goal in most of these meeting situations is to allow folks access to services like email, web, social media, chat services and so on. This is so they can live-blog or live-tweet the proceedings, or simply chat online or otherwise stay in touch (with both attendees and non-attendees) while the meeting proceeds. I would like to limit the services provided by the router to just those services that meet those needs. Problems In particular I have noticed a couple of scenarios where particular users end up abusing most of the bandwidth on the router, to the detriment of everyone. These boil into two areas: Intentional use. Folks looking at YouTube videos, downloading podcasts to their iPod, and otherwise using the bandwidth for things that really aren't appropriate in a meeting room where you should be paying attention to the speaker and/or interacting.At one meeting that we were live-streaming (over a separate, dedicated connection) via UStream, I noticed several folks in the room that had the UStream page up so they could interact with the meeting chat - apparently oblivious that they were wasting bandwidth streaming back video of something that was taking place right in front of them. Unintentional use. There are a variety of software utilities that will make extensive use of bandwidth in the background, that folks often have installed on their laptops and smartphones, perhaps without realizing.Examples: Peer to peer downloading programs such as Bittorrent that run in the background Automatic software update services. These are legion, as every major software vendor has their own, so one can easily have Microsoft, Apple, Mozilla, Adobe, Google and others all trying to download updates in the background. Security software that downloads new signatures such as anti-virus, anti-malware, etc. Backup software and other software that "syncs" in the background to cloud services. For some numbers on how much network bandwidth gets sucked up by these non-web, non-email type services, check out this recent Wired article. Apparently web, email and chat all together are less than one quarter of the Internet traffic now. If the numbers in that article are correct, by filtering out all the other stuff I should be able to increase the usefulness of the WiFi four-fold. Now, in some situations I've been able to control access using security on the router to limit it to a very small group of people (typically the organizers of the meeting). But that's not always appropriate. At an upcoming meeting I would like to run the WiFi without security and let anyone use it, because it happens at the meeting location the 4G coverage in my town is particularly excellent. In a recent test I got 10 Megabits down at the meeting site. The "tell people to police themselves" solution mentioned at top is not appropriate because of (a) a largely non-technical audience and (b) the unintentional nature of much of the usage as described above. The "run a sniffer and filter as needed" solution is not useful because these meetings typically only last a couple of days, often only one day, and have a very small volunteer staff. I don't have a person to dedicate to network monitoring, and by the time we got the rules tweaked completely the meeting will be over. What I've Got First thing, I figured I would use OpenDNS's domain filtering rules to filter out whole classes of sites. A number of video and peer-to-peer sites can be wiped out using this. (Yes, I am aware that filtering via DNS technically leaves the services accessible - remember, these are largely non-technical users attending a 2 day meeting. It's enough). I figured I would start with these selections in OpenDNS's UI: I figure I will probably also block DNS (port 53) to anything other than the router itself, so that folks can't bypass my DNS configuration. A savvy user could get around this, because I'm not going to put a lot of elaborate filters on the firewall, but I don't care too much. Because these meetings don't last very long, its probably not going to be worth the trouble. This should cover the bulk of the non-web traffic, i.e. peer-to-peer and video if that Wired article is correct. Please advise if you think there are severe limitations to the OpenDNS approach. What I Need Note that OpenDNS focuses on things that are "objectionable" in some context or another. Video, music, radio and peer-to-peer all get covered. I still need to cover a number of perfectly reasonable things that we just want to block because they aren't needed in a meeting. Most of these are utilities that upload or download legit things in the background. Specifically, I'd like to know port numbers or DNS names to filter in order to effectively disable the following services: Microsoft automatic updates Apple automatic updates Adobe automatic updates Google automatic updates Other major software update services Major virus/malware/security signature updates Major background backup services Other services that run in the background and can eat lots of bandwidth I also would like any other suggestions you might have that would be applicable. Sorry to be so verbose, but I find it helps to be very, very clear on questions of this nature, and I already have half a solution with the OpenDNS thing.

  Read the article

• How to make software which will work like torrent?

  - by Nitz

  Hey guys How to make software work like torrent work? Bcz always when i see that torrent software then i am really amazed by their sizes and what they do in that sizes? How they managed the download by parts and then all together as soon as u downloaded full part? and as soon as you had great speed then your download speed automatically goes up? How to make software which will work like torrent means peer-to-peer? how to make this kind of software which can download from different servers and managed to know each users download and upload? and how they have pretty small size? which tech. they have used in that kind of software? Sorry i had asked many question. I know how downloading is happening means peer-to-peer all that.. but i don't know how they have built that kind of thing?

  Read the article

• how to bind/connect multiple UDP socket

  - by nicboul

  My initial UDP socket is binded to 127.0.0.1:9898. The first time that I get notified of incoming data by epoll/kqueue, I do recvfrom() and I fill a struct sockaddr called peer_name that contain the peer informations (ip:port). Then I create a new UPD socket using socket(), then I bind() this newly created socket to the same ip:port (127.0.0.1:9898) than my original socket. then I connect my newly created socket using connect() to the peer who just sent me something. I have the information in the struct sockaddr called peer_name. I then add my newly created socket in my epoll/kqueue vector and wait for notification. I would expect to ONLY receive UDP frame from the peer i'm ""connected to"". 1/ does netstat -a -p udp is suppose to show me the IP:PORT of the peer my newly created socket is ""connected to"" ? 2/ I'm probably doing something wrong since after creating my new socket, this socket receive all incoming UDP packets destinated to the IP:PORT I'm binded to, regardless of the source peer IP:PORT. I would like to see a working example of what I'm trying to do :) or any hint on what I'm doing wrong. thanks!

  Read the article

• Giving an Error Object Expected Line 48 Char 1

  - by Leslie Peer

  Giving an Error Object Expected Line 48 Char 1------What did I do wrong??? *Note Line # are for reference only not on Original Web page****** <HTML><HEAD><TITLE></TITLE> <META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=utf-8"> <META content="Leslie Peer" name=author> <META content="Created with Trellian WebPage" name=description> <META content="MSHTML 6.00.6000.16809" name=GENERATOR> <META content=Index name=keywords> <STYLE type=text/css>BODY { COLOR: #000000; BACKGROUND-REPEAT: repeat; FONT-FAMILY: Accent SF, Arial, Arial Black, Arial Narrow, Century Gothic, Comic Sans MS, Courier, Courier New, Georgia, Microsoft Sans Serif, Monotype Corsiva, Symbol, Tahoma, Times New Roman; BACKGROUND-COLOR: #666666 } A { FONT-SIZE: 14px; FONT-FAMILY: Arial Black, Bookman Old Style, DnD4Attack, Lucida Console, MS Serif, MS Outlook, MS Sans Serif, Rockwell Extra Bold, Roman, Star Time JL, Tahoma, Terminal, Times New Roman, Verdana, Wingdings 2, Wingdings 3, Wingdings } A:link { COLOR: #9966cc; TEXT-DECORATION: underline } A:visited { COLOR: #66ff66; TEXT-DECORATION: underline } A:hover { COLOR: #ffff00; TEXT-DECORATION: underline } A:active { COLOR: #ff0033; TEXT-DECORATION: underline } H1 { FONT-SIZE: 25px; COLOR: #9966cc; FONT-FAMILY: Century Gothic } H2 { FONT-SIZE: 20px; COLOR: #ff33cc; FONT-FAMILY: Century Gothic } H3 { FONT-SIZE: 18px; COLOR: #6666cc; FONT-FAMILY: Century Gothic } H4 { FONT-SIZE: 15px; COLOR: #00cc33; FONT-FAMILY: Century Gothic } H5 { FONT-SIZE: 10px; COLOR: #ffff33; FONT-FAMILY: Century Gothic } H6 { FONT-SIZE: 5px; COLOR: #996666; FONT-FAMILY: Century Gothic } </STYLE> line 46-<SCRIPT> line 47- CharNum=6; line 48-var Character=newArray();Character[0]="Larry Lightfoot";Character[1]="Sam Wrightfield";Character[2]="Gavin Hartfild";Character[3]="Gail Quickfoot";Character[4]="Robert Gragorian";Character[5]="Peter Shain"; line 49-var ExChar=newArray();ExChar[0]="Tabor Bloomfield"; line 50-var Class=newArray();Class[0]="MagicUser";Class[1]="Fighter";Class[2]="Fighter";Class[3]="Thief";Class[4]="Cleric";Class[5]="Fighter"; line 51-line 47var ExClass=newArray();ExClass[0]="MagicUser"; line 52-var Level=newArray();Level[0]="2";Level[1]="1";Level[2]="1";Level[3]="2";Level[4]="2";Level[5]="1"; line 53-var ExLevel=newArray();ExLevel[0]="23"; line 54-var Hpts=newArray();Hpts[0]="6";Hpts[1]="14";Hpts[2]="13";Hpts[3]="8";Hpts[4]="12";Hpts[5]="15"; line 55-var ExHpts=newArray();ExHpts[0]="145"; line 56-var Armor=newArray();Armor[0]="Cloak";Armor[1]="Splinted Armor";Armor[2]="Chain Armor";Armor[3]="Leather Armor";Armor[4]="Chain Armor";Armor[5]="Splinted Armor"; line 57-var ExArmor=newArray();ExArmor[0]="Robe of Protection +5"; line 58-var Ac1=newArray();Ac1[0]="0";Ac1[1]="3";Ac1[2]="3";Ac1[3]="4";Ac1[4]="2";Ac1[5]="3"; line 59-var ExAc=newArray();ExAc[0]="5"; line 60-var Armor1b=newArray();Armor1b[0]="Ring of Protection +1";Armor1b[1]="Small Shield";Armor1b[2]="Small Shield";Armor1b[3]="Wooden Shield";Armor1b[4]="Large Shield";Armor1b[5]="Small Shield"; line 61-var ExArmor1b=newArray();ExArmor1b[0]="Ring of Protection +5"; line 62-var Ac2=newArray();Ac2[0]="1";Ac2[1]="1";Ac2[2]="1";Ac2[3]="1";Ac2[4]="1";Ac2[5]="1"; line 63-var ExAc1b=newArray();ExAc1b[0]="5" line 64-var Str=newArray();Str[0]="15";Str[1]="16";Str[2]="14";Str[3]="13";Str[4]="14";Str[5]="13"; line 65-var ExStr=newArray();ExStr[0]=21; line 66-var Int=newArray();Int[0]="17";Int[1]="11";Int[2]="12";Int[3]="13";Int[4]="14";Int[5]="13"; line 67-var ExInt=newArray();ExInt[0]="19"; line 68-var Wis=newArray();Wis[0]="17";Wis[1]="12";Wis[2]="14";Wis[3]="13";Wis[4]="14";Wis[5]="12"; line 69-var ExWis=newArray();ExWis[0]="18"; line 70-var Dex=newArray();Dex[0]="15";Dex[1]="14";Dex[2]="13";Dex[3]="15";Dex[4]="14";Dex[5]="12"; line 71-var ExDex=newArray();ExDex[0]="19"; line 72-var Con=newArray();Con[0]="16";Con[1]="15";Con[2]="16";Con[3]="13";Con[4]="12";Con[5]="10"; line 73-var ExCon=newArray();ExCon[0]="19"; line 74-var Chr=newArray();Chr[0]="16";Chr[1]="14";Chr[2]="13";Chr[3]="12";Chr[4]="14";Chr[5]="13"; line 75-var ExChr=newArray();ExChr[0]="21"; line 76-var Expt=newArray();Expt[0]="45";Expt[1]="21";Expt[2]="16";Expt[3]="18";Expt[4]="22";Expt[5]="34"; line 77-var ExExpt=newArray();ExExpt[0]="245678"; line 78-var ExBp=newArray();ExBp[0]="Unknown";ExBp[1]="Extrademensional Plane World of Amborsia";ExBp[2]="Evil Wizard Banished for Mass Geniocodes"; line 79-</SCRIPT> line 80-</HEAD> line 81-<BODY> Giving an Error Object Expected Line 48 Char 1------What did I do wrong??? *Note Line # are for reference only not on Original Web page******

  Read the article

• How to sync the actions in a mutiplayer game?

  - by Wheeler

  I connect the clients with UDP (its a peer to peer connection on a multicast network) and the clients are sending their positions in every frame (in WP7 it means the default 30 FPS) to each other. This game is kinda a pong game, and my problem is the next: whenever the opponent hits the ball the angle will not be the same on both mobiles. I think its because the latency (1 pixel difference can cause a different angle). So my question is: how can I sync the hitting event?

  Read the article

• Gluster bricks are offline and errors in logs

  - by Roman Newaza

  I have substituted all the IP addresses with hostnames and renamed configs (IP to hostname) in /var/lib/glusterd by my shell script. After that I restarted Gluster Daemon and the volume. Then I checked if all the peers are connected: root@GlusterNode1a:~# gluster peer status Number of Peers: 3 Hostname: gluster-1b Uuid: 47f469e2-907a-4518-b6a4-f44878761fd2 State: Peer in Cluster (Connected) Hostname: gluster-2b Uuid: dc3a3ff7-9e30-44ac-9d15-00f9dab4d8b9 State: Peer in Cluster (Connected) Hostname: gluster-2a Uuid: 72405811-15a0-456b-86bb-1589058ff89b State: Peer in Cluster (Connected) I could see mounted volumes size change on all the nodes when I execute df command, so new data is coming. But recently I noticed error messages in app log: copy(/storage/152627/dat): failed to open stream: Structure needs cleaning readfile(/storage/1438227/dat): failed to open stream: Input/output error unlink(/storage/189457/23/dat): No such file or directory Finally, I have found out some bricks are offline: root@GlusterNode1a:~# gluster volume status Status of volume: storage Gluster process Port Online Pid ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Brick gluster-1a:/storage/1a 24009 Y 1326 Brick gluster-1b:/storage/1b 24009 N N/A Brick gluster-2a:/storage/2a 24009 N N/A Brick gluster-2b:/storage/2b 24009 N N/A Brick gluster-1a:/storage/3a 24011 Y 1332 Brick gluster-1b:/storage/3b 24011 N N/A Brick gluster-2a:/storage/4a 24011 N N/A Brick gluster-2b:/storage/4b 24011 N N/A NFS Server on localhost 38467 Y 24670 Self-heal Daemon on localhost N/A Y 24676 NFS Server on gluster-2b 38467 Y 4339 Self-heal Daemon on gluster-2b N/A Y 4345 NFS Server on gluster-2a 38467 Y 1392 Self-heal Daemon on gluster-2a N/A Y 1402 NFS Server on gluster-1b 38467 Y 2435 Self-heal Daemon on gluster-1b N/A Y 2441 What can I do about that? I need to fix it. Note: CPU and Network usage of all the four nodes are about the same.

  Read the article

• setup L2TP on Ubuntu 10.10

  - by luca

  I'm following this guide to setup a VPS on my Ubuntu VPS: http://riobard.com/blog/2010-04-30-l2tp-over-ipsec-ubuntu/ My config files are setup as in that guide, openswan version is 2.6.26 I think.. It doesn't work, I can show you my auth.log (on the VPS): Feb 18 06:11:07 maverick pluto[6909]: packet from 93.36.127.12:500: received Vendor ID payload [RFC 3947] method set to=109 Feb 18 06:11:07 maverick pluto[6909]: packet from 93.36.127.12:500: received Vendor ID payload [draft-ietf-ipsec-nat-t-ike] method set to=110 Feb 18 06:11:07 maverick pluto[6909]: packet from 93.36.127.12:500: ignoring unknown Vendor ID payload [8f8d83826d246b6fc7a8a6a428c11de8] Feb 18 06:11:07 maverick pluto[6909]: packet from 93.36.127.12:500: ignoring unknown Vendor ID payload [439b59f8ba676c4c7737ae22eab8f582] Feb 18 06:11:07 maverick pluto[6909]: packet from 93.36.127.12:500: ignoring unknown Vendor ID payload [4d1e0e136deafa34c4f3ea9f02ec7285] Feb 18 06:11:07 maverick pluto[6909]: packet from 93.36.127.12:500: ignoring unknown Vendor ID payload [80d0bb3def54565ee84645d4c85ce3ee] Feb 18 06:11:07 maverick pluto[6909]: packet from 93.36.127.12:500: ignoring unknown Vendor ID payload [9909b64eed937c6573de52ace952fa6b] Feb 18 06:11:07 maverick pluto[6909]: packet from 93.36.127.12:500: received Vendor ID payload [draft-ietf-ipsec-nat-t-ike-03] meth=108, but already using method 110 Feb 18 06:11:07 maverick pluto[6909]: packet from 93.36.127.12:500: received Vendor ID payload [draft-ietf-ipsec-nat-t-ike-02] meth=107, but already using method 110 Feb 18 06:11:07 maverick pluto[6909]: packet from 93.36.127.12:500: received Vendor ID payload [draft-ietf-ipsec-nat-t-ike-02_n] meth=106, but already using method 110 Feb 18 06:11:07 maverick pluto[6909]: packet from 93.36.127.12:500: received Vendor ID payload [Dead Peer Detection] Feb 18 06:11:07 maverick pluto[6909]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[7] 93.36.127.12 #7: responding to Main Mode from unknown peer 93.36.127.12 Feb 18 06:11:07 maverick pluto[6909]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[7] 93.36.127.12 #7: transition from state STATE_MAIN_R0 to state STATE_MAIN_R1 Feb 18 06:11:07 maverick pluto[6909]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[7] 93.36.127.12 #7: STATE_MAIN_R1: sent MR1, expecting MI2 Feb 18 06:11:07 maverick pluto[6909]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[7] 93.36.127.12 #7: NAT-Traversal: Result using draft-ietf-ipsec-nat-t-ike (MacOS X): peer is NATed Feb 18 06:11:07 maverick pluto[6909]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[7] 93.36.127.12 #7: transition from state STATE_MAIN_R1 to state STATE_MAIN_R2 Feb 18 06:11:07 maverick pluto[6909]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[7] 93.36.127.12 #7: STATE_MAIN_R2: sent MR2, expecting MI3 Feb 18 06:11:07 maverick pluto[6909]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[7] 93.36.127.12 #7: Main mode peer ID is ID_IPV4_ADDR: '10.0.1.8' Feb 18 06:11:07 maverick pluto[6909]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[7] 93.36.127.12 #7: switched from "L2TP-PSK-NAT" to "L2TP-PSK-NAT" Feb 18 06:11:07 maverick pluto[6909]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[8] 93.36.127.12 #7: deleting connection "L2TP-PSK-NAT" instance with peer 93.36.127.12 {isakmp=#0/ipsec=#0} Feb 18 06:11:07 maverick pluto[6909]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[8] 93.36.127.12 #7: transition from state STATE_MAIN_R2 to state STATE_MAIN_R3 Feb 18 06:11:07 maverick pluto[6909]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[8] 93.36.127.12 #7: new NAT mapping for #7, was 93.36.127.12:500, now 93.36.127.12:36810 Feb 18 06:11:07 maverick pluto[6909]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[8] 93.36.127.12 #7: STATE_MAIN_R3: sent MR3, ISAKMP SA established {auth=OAKLEY_PRESHARED_KEY cipher=oakley_3des_cbc_192 prf=oakley_sha group=modp1024} Feb 18 06:11:07 maverick pluto[6909]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[8] 93.36.127.12 #7: ignoring informational payload, type IPSEC_INITIAL_CONTACT msgid=00000000 Feb 18 06:11:07 maverick pluto[6909]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[8] 93.36.127.12 #7: received and ignored informational message Feb 18 06:11:08 maverick pluto[6909]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[8] 93.36.127.12 #7: the peer proposed: 69.147.233.173/32:17/1701 -> 10.0.1.8/32:17/0 Feb 18 06:11:08 maverick pluto[6909]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[8] 93.36.127.12 #8: responding to Quick Mode proposal {msgid:183463cf} Feb 18 06:11:08 maverick pluto[6909]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[8] 93.36.127.12 #8: us: 69.147.233.173<69.147.233.173>[+S=C]:17/1701 Feb 18 06:11:08 maverick pluto[6909]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[8] 93.36.127.12 #8: them: 93.36.127.12[10.0.1.8,+S=C]:17/64111===10.0.1.8/32 Feb 18 06:11:08 maverick pluto[6909]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[8] 93.36.127.12 #8: transition from state STATE_QUICK_R0 to state STATE_QUICK_R1 Feb 18 06:11:08 maverick pluto[6909]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[8] 93.36.127.12 #8: STATE_QUICK_R1: sent QR1, inbound IPsec SA installed, expecting QI2 Feb 18 06:11:08 maverick pluto[6909]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[8] 93.36.127.12 #8: transition from state STATE_QUICK_R1 to state STATE_QUICK_R2 Feb 18 06:11:08 maverick pluto[6909]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[8] 93.36.127.12 #8: STATE_QUICK_R2: IPsec SA established transport mode {ESP=>0x0b1cf725 <0x0b719671 xfrm=AES_128-HMAC_SHA1 NATOA=none NATD=93.36.127.12:36810 DPD=none} Feb 18 06:11:28 maverick pluto[6909]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[8] 93.36.127.12 #7: received Delete SA(0x0b1cf725) payload: deleting IPSEC State #8 Feb 18 06:11:28 maverick pluto[6909]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[8] 93.36.127.12 #7: netlink recvfrom() of response to our XFRM_MSG_DELPOLICY message for policy eroute_connection delete was too long: 100 > 36 Feb 18 06:11:28 maverick pluto[6909]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[8] 93.36.127.12 #7: netlink recvfrom() of response to our XFRM_MSG_DELPOLICY message for policy [email protected] was too long: 168 > 36 Feb 18 06:11:28 maverick pluto[6909]: | raw_eroute result=0 Feb 18 06:11:28 maverick pluto[6909]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[8] 93.36.127.12 #7: received and ignored informational message Feb 18 06:11:28 maverick pluto[6909]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[8] 93.36.127.12 #7: received Delete SA payload: deleting ISAKMP State #7 Feb 18 06:11:28 maverick pluto[6909]: "L2TP-PSK-NAT"[8] 93.36.127.12: deleting connection "L2TP-PSK-NAT" instance with peer 93.36.127.12 {isakmp=#0/ipsec=#0} Feb 18 06:11:28 maverick pluto[6909]: packet from 93.36.127.12:36810: received and ignored informational message and my system log on OSX (from where I'm connecting): Feb 18 13:11:09 luca-ciorias-MacBook-Pro pppd[68656]: pppd 2.4.2 (Apple version 412.3) started by luca, uid 501 Feb 18 13:11:09 luca-ciorias-MacBook-Pro pppd[68656]: L2TP connecting to server '69.147.233.173' (69.147.233.173)... Feb 18 13:11:09 luca-ciorias-MacBook-Pro pppd[68656]: IPSec connection started Feb 18 13:11:09 luca-ciorias-MacBook-Pro racoon[68453]: Connecting. Feb 18 13:11:09 luca-ciorias-MacBook-Pro racoon[68453]: IKE Packet: transmit success. (Initiator, Main-Mode message 1). Feb 18 13:11:09 luca-ciorias-MacBook-Pro racoon[68453]: IKE Packet: receive success. (Initiator, Main-Mode message 2). Feb 18 13:11:09 luca-ciorias-MacBook-Pro racoon[68453]: IKE Packet: transmit success. (Initiator, Main-Mode message 3). Feb 18 13:11:09 luca-ciorias-MacBook-Pro racoon[68453]: IKE Packet: receive success. (Initiator, Main-Mode message 4). Feb 18 13:11:09 luca-ciorias-MacBook-Pro racoon[68453]: IKE Packet: transmit success. (Initiator, Main-Mode message 5). Feb 18 13:11:09 luca-ciorias-MacBook-Pro racoon[68453]: IKEv1 Phase1 AUTH: success. (Initiator, Main-Mode Message 6). Feb 18 13:11:09 luca-ciorias-MacBook-Pro racoon[68453]: IKE Packet: receive success. (Initiator, Main-Mode message 6). Feb 18 13:11:09 luca-ciorias-MacBook-Pro racoon[68453]: IKEv1 Phase1 Initiator: success. (Initiator, Main-Mode). Feb 18 13:11:09 luca-ciorias-MacBook-Pro racoon[68453]: IKE Packet: transmit success. (Information message). Feb 18 13:11:09 luca-ciorias-MacBook-Pro racoon[68453]: IKEv1 Information-Notice: transmit success. (ISAKMP-SA). Feb 18 13:11:10 luca-ciorias-MacBook-Pro racoon[68453]: IKE Packet: transmit success. (Initiator, Quick-Mode message 1). Feb 18 13:11:10 luca-ciorias-MacBook-Pro racoon[68453]: IKE Packet: receive success. (Initiator, Quick-Mode message 2). Feb 18 13:11:10 luca-ciorias-MacBook-Pro racoon[68453]: IKE Packet: transmit success. (Initiator, Quick-Mode message 3). Feb 18 13:11:10 luca-ciorias-MacBook-Pro racoon[68453]: IKEv1 Phase2 Initiator: success. (Initiator, Quick-Mode). Feb 18 13:11:10 luca-ciorias-MacBook-Pro racoon[68453]: Connected. Feb 18 13:11:10 luca-ciorias-MacBook-Pro pppd[68656]: IPSec connection established Feb 18 13:11:30 luca-ciorias-MacBook-Pro pppd[68656]: L2TP cannot connect to the server Feb 18 13:11:30 luca-ciorias-MacBook-Pro configd[20]: SCNCController: Disconnecting. (Connection tried to negotiate for, 22 seconds). Feb 18 13:11:30 luca-ciorias-MacBook-Pro racoon[68453]: IKE Packet: transmit success. (Information message). Feb 18 13:11:30 luca-ciorias-MacBook-Pro racoon[68453]: IKEv1 Information-Notice: transmit success. (Delete IPSEC-SA). Feb 18 13:11:30 luca-ciorias-MacBook-Pro racoon[68453]: IKE Packet: transmit success. (Information message). Feb 18 13:11:30 luca-ciorias-MacBook-Pro racoon[68453]: IKEv1 Information-Notice: transmit success. (Delete ISAKMP-SA). Feb 18 13:11:31 luca-ciorias-MacBook-Pro racoon[68453]: Disconnecting. (Connection was up for, 20.157953 seconds).

  Read the article

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