Search Results

Search found 3637 results on 146 pages for 'dhcp over vpn'.

Page 71/146 | < Previous Page | 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78  | Next Page >

  • Routing table on Linux not respected

    - by MRHaarmann
    I have a very specific problem, building a Linux VPN endpoint (with external VPN Gateway), which should route certain networks over the tunnel, others via default gateway. The Linux VPN should do a NAT on the outgoing connections for the VPN peers. Setup is as following: Internet gateway LAN 192.168.25.1/24 VPN Gateway LAN 10.45.99.2/24 (VPN tunnel 10.45.99.1 to net 87.115.17.40/29, separate connection to Internet) Linux VPN Router eth0 192.168.25.71/24 eth0:503 10.45.99.1/24 Default 192.168.25.1 route to 87.115.17.40/29 via 10.45.99.2 (send_redirects disabled, ip_forward enabled) Linux clients (multiple): eth0 192.168.25.x/24 Default 192.168.25.1 route to 87.115.17.40/29 via 192.168.25.71 Ping to the machines via tunnel from the VPN Router is working. Now I want to establish a routing from my clients over the VPN gateway and the client packet gets routed to 192.168.25.1 ! traceroute output shows the packets get routed to 192.168.25.71, but then to 192.168.25.1. So the route is not respected in forward ! IPTables and Routing: ip route show 87.115.17.40/29 via 10.45.99.2 dev eth0 10.45.99.0/24 dev eth0 proto kernel scope link src 10.45.99.1 192.168.25.0/24 dev eth0 proto kernel scope link src 192.168.25.71 default via 192.168.25.1 dev eth0 iptables -A INPUT -i eth0:503 -j REJECT iptables -t nat -A POSTROUTING -o eth0:503 -j MASQUERADE iptables -A FORWARD -i eth0:503 -m state --state RELATED,ESTABLISHED -j ACCEPT iptables -A FORWARD -s 192.168.25.0/24 -o eth0:503 -j ACCEPT So what is wrong with my setup ? The route is chosen correctly from localhost, but all the clients get forwarded to the Internet GW. thanks for helping, Marcus

    Read the article

  • help me about install ubuntu server 12.04 on vmware

    - by zohreh
    I want to install Ubuntu server 64-bit on vmware 8.0.2 but I face with a problem ! I don't know why ! the problem is: From here you can choose to retry DHCP network autoconfiguration (which may succeed if your DHCP server takes a long time to respond) or to configure the network manually. Some DHCP servers require a DHCP hostname to be sent by the client, so you can also choose to retry DHCP network autoconfiguration with a hostname that you provide. there are 4 option for Continuation i don't know exactly to select which option also what is The cause of the problem? thanks a lot

    Read the article

  • Multiple routers, subnets, gateways etc

    - by allentown
    My current setup is: Cable modem dishes out 13 static IP's (/28), a GB switch is plugged into the cable modem, and has access to those 13 static IP's, I have about 6 "servers" in use right now. The cable modem is also a firewall, DHCP server, and 3 port 10/100 switch. I am using it as a firewall, but not currently as a DHCP server. I have plugged into the cable modem, two network cables, one which goes to the WAN port of a Linksys Dual Band Wireless 10/100/1000 router/switch. Into the linksys are a few workstations, a few printers, and some laptops connecting to wifi. I set the Linksys to use take static IP, and enabled DHCP for the workstations, printers, etc in 192.168.1.1/24. The network for the Linksys is mostly self contained, backups go to a SAN, on that network, it all happens through that switch, over GB. But I also get internet access from it as well via the cable modem using one static IP. This all works, however, I can not "see" the static IP machines when I am on the Linksys. I can get to them via ssh and other protocols, and if I want to from "outside", I open holes, like 80, 25, 587, 143, 22, etc. The second wire, from the cable modem/fireall/switch just uplinks to the managed GB switch. What are the pros and cons of this? I do not like giving up the static IP to the Linksys. I basically have a mixed network of public servers, and internal workstations. I want the public servers on public IP's because I do not want to mess with port forwarding and mappings. Is it correct also, that if someone breaches the Linksys wifi, they still would have a hard time getting to the static IP range, just by nature of the network topology? Today, just for a test, I toggled on the DHCP in the firewall/cable modem at 10.1.10.1/24 range, the Linksys is n the 192.168.1.100/24 range. At that point, all the static IP machines still had in and out access, but Linksys was unreachable. The cable modem only has 10/100 ports, so I will not plug anything but the network drop into it, which is 50Mb/10Mb. Which makes me think this could be less than ideal, as transfers from the workstation network to the server network will be bottlenecked at 100Mb when I have 1000Mb available. I may not need to solve that, if isolation is better though. I do not move a lot of data, if any, from Linsys network to server network, so for it to pretend to be remote is ok. Should I approach this any different? I could enable DHCP on the cable modem/firewall, it should still send out the statics to the GB switch, but will also be a DHCP in 10.1.10.1/24 range? I can then plug the Linksys into the GB switch, which is now picking up statics and the 10.1.10.1/24 ranges, tell the Linksys to use 10.1.10.5 or so. Now, do I disable DHCP on the Linksys, and the cable modem/firewall will pass through the statics and 10.0.10.1/24 ranges as well? Or, could I open a second DHCP pool on the Linksys? I guess doing so gives me network isolation again, but it is just the reverse of what I have now. But I get out of the bottleneck, not that the Linksys could ever really touch real GB speeds anyway, but the managed switch certainly can. This is all because 13 statics are not that many. Right now, 6 "servers", the Linksys, a managed switch, a few SSL certs, and I am running out. I do not want to waste a static IP on the managed GB switch, or the Linksys, unless it provides me some type of benefit. Final question, under my current setup, if I am on a workstation, sitting at 192.168.1.109, the Linksys, with GB, and I send a file over ssh to the static IP machine, is that literally leaving the internet, and coming back in, or does it stay local? To me it seems like: Workstation (192.168.1.109) -> Linksys DHCP -> Linksys Static IP -> Cable Modem -> Server ( and it hits the 10/100 ports on the cable modem, slowing me down. But does it round trip the network, leave and come back in, limiting me to the 50/10 internet speeds? *These are all made up numbers, I do not use default router IP's as I will one day add a VPN, and do not want collisions. I need some recommendations, do I want one big network, or two isolated ones. Printers these days need an IP, everything does, I can not get autoconf/bonjour to be reliable on most printers. but I am also not sure I want the "server" side of my operation to be polluted by the workstation side of my operation. Unless there is some magic subetting I have not learned yet, here is what I am thinking: Cable modem 10/100, has 13 static IP, publicly accessible -> Enable DHCP on the cable modem -> Cable modem plugs into managed switch -> Managed switch gets 10.1.10.1 ssh, telnet, https admin management address -> Managed switch sends static IP's to to servers -> Plug Linksys into managed switch, giving it 10.1.10.2 static internally in Linksys admin -> Linksys gets assigned 10.1.10.x as its DHCP sending range -> Local printers, workstations, iPhones etc, connect to this -> ( Do I enable DHCP or disable it on the Linksys, just define a non over lapping range, or create an entirely new DHCP at 10.1.50.0/24, I think I am back isolated again with that method too? ) Thank you for any suggestions. This is the first time I have had to deal with less than a /24, and most are larger than that, but it is just a drop to a cabinet. Otherwise, it's a router, a few repeaters, and soho stuff that is simple, with one IP. I know a few may suggest going all DHCP on the servers, and I may one day, just not now, there has been too much moving of gear for me to be interested in that, and I would want something in the Catalyst series to deal with that.

    Read the article

  • OpenVPN Bridge on pfsense: once LAN pings clients, connectivity breaks

    - by Lucas Kauffman
    So I'm using a pfsense openvpn to bridge my LAN segment so VPN users can access the servers. The problem I'm having now is that I can establish a connection, I can ping the LAN server from the VPN, but as soon as I ping the client from the LAN server, there is no connectivity anymore between both parties. So: connect from the VPN client to the LAN = works ping the LAN from the VPN client = works access server from the VPN (ssh, ftp,...) = works ping client from server = doesn't work ping LAN from the VPN client = doesn't work anymore My bridge has em1 and ovpns1 bridged. I noted with tcpdump that ICMP is reaching the bridge between LAN and the VPN segment. But it's not put onto the em1 interface for some reason. My pfsense is running on an ESXi host with th vSwitch port enabled in promiscious mode. Firewall rules allow in and outbound traffic regardless origin or destination.

    Read the article

  • Firewalling a Cisco ASA Split tunnel

    - by dunxd
    I have a Cisco ASA 5510 at head office, and Cisco ASA 5505 in remote offices. The remote offices are connected over a split tunnelled VPN - the ASA 5505s use "Easy VPN" Client type VPN in Network Extension Mode (NEM). I'd like to set firewall rules for the non-tunnelled traffic only. Traffic over the VPN to head office should not have any firewall rules applied. I might want to apply different firewall rules to different remote offices. All the documentation I have been able to find assumes the Client VPN is a software endpoint, and all the configuration is done at the 5510. When using a Cisco 5505 as the VPN client, is it possible to configure any firewalling at the Client end, or does it all have to come from the 5510? Are there any other issues to look out for when split-tunnelling a VPN by this method?

    Read the article

  • Help with IPTables - Masquerading + Forwarding, 1-to-1?

    - by Artiom Chilaru
    I've got a clean Ubuntu Server 10.10 with OpenSSH, OpenVPN and vsFTPd installed. The server is running as a VM on the Hyper-V server (hypervisor), has two network interfaces mapped to physical adapters (eth0 and eth1), and a virtual interface with a direct connection to the hypervisor (eth2). The VPN will create a tun0 interface when a client connects. What I want is the remote user, connecting over VPN to be able to connect to the hypervisor (all ports, ping etc). The initial idea was to make the VPN create a tap0 interface, and bridge eth2 to tap0, but this didn't work, unfortunately, as it seems that the adapters don't want to go into promiscuous mode (partially confirmed by MS) At the same time, both the hypervisor and the remove client over VPN can successfully ping/connect to the ubuntu server with no problems. So my plan right now is to try doing some 1-1 masquerading, if possible. Basically, I want every request sent from the VPN client to the ubuntu server to be redurected to the hypervisor instead (with IP translation ofc), and every request from the hypervisor to the ubuntu machine sent to the VPN client (IP translated too). Only 1 client will be connected at a time to the VPN, so I can force limit it to a single IP at all times, if necessary. Is this the right way to go, and if true, how can this be achieved? It's almost like a special case of port-forwarding, except every single port on tun0 is forwarded to a machine in eth2, and every port on the eth2 side forwards to an ip on tun0 I guess it could be done with iptables, but I'm rather new in linux, so I can't do it myself... help? :(

    Read the article

  • Why will network manager not allow me save my VPN settings?

    - by Solignis
    I am trying to configure am OpenVPN client on my laptop. I am running Ubuntu 11.10 64-bit. When I open network manager and import the VPN settings from the premade config folder everything takes. The problem is when I try to save the settings, the save button at the bottom of the network manager applet is greyed out. Further more when I hover over the button it says Authenticate to save this connection for all users of this machine. The problem is I did not check the box Available to all users it was already checked and it is also greyed out and won't let me manipulate it. What is going on? Is this a bug or is there something I am missing? Any help would be wonderful.

    Read the article

  • E-learning, VPN décentralisé et voitures connectées gagnent le concours de start-ups de l'Epitech : bravo aux jeunes développeurs

    E-learning, VPN décentralisé et voitures connectées gagnent le concours 2012 de start-ups de l'Epitech Créées par de jeunes développeurs Chaque année, l'Epitech organise un concours de création d'entreprise (baptisé EIP) auquel participent ses étudiants en 4ème et 5ème année. Le but est de leur mettre le pied à l'étrier et de leur faire toucher du doigt tous les impératifs (marketing, communication, partenariat, etc.) qu'ils seront amenés à gérer dans le monde du travail et des affaires. A la clef, en moyenne 15% des étudiants deviennent de « vrais » entrepreneurs. Pour l'école il s'agit évidemment d'une formidable vitrine pour rappeler que l'esprit d'initiative est au coeur de sa pédagogi...

    Read the article

  • How to use a Network adapter only for a specific Connection on Win7?

    - by Tokk
    Hey, Guys I've got several network adapter in my PC (from LAN, WLAN, VPN etc...) and what I want to accomplish is that some specific adresses use the VPN adapter, while all others use eiter LAN or WLAN. (So for example http://win-server/ is using VPN, while www.google still uses LAN connection.) I've want to solve this with the Windows settings and not the VPN settings to make sure I can do it with every VPN-Provider. Thank You

    Read the article

  • How to open a server port outside of an OpenVPN tunnel with a pf firewall on OSX (BSD)

    - by Timbo
    I have a Mac mini that I use as a media server running XBMC and serves media from my NAS to my stereo and TV (which has been color calibrated with a Spyder3Express, happy). The Mac runs OSX 10.8.2 and the internet connection is tunneled for general privacy over OpenVPN through Tunnelblick. I believe my anonymous VPN provider pushes "redirect_gateway" to OpenVPN/Tunnelblick because when on it effectively tunnels all non-LAN traffic in- and outbound. As an unwanted side effect that also opens the boxes server ports unprotected to the outside world and bypasses my firewall-router (Netgear SRX5308). I have run nmap from outside the LAN on the VPN IP and the server ports on the mini are clearly visible and connectable. The mini has the following ports open: ssh/22, ARD/5900 and 8080+9090 for the XBMC iOS client Constellation. I also have Synology NAS which apart from LAN file serving over AFP and WebDAV only serves up an OpenVPN/1194 and a PPTP/1732 server. When outside of the LAN I connect to this from my laptop over OpenVPN and over PPTP from my iPhone. I only want to connect through AFP/548 from the mini to the NAS. The border firewall (SRX5308) just works excellently, stable and with a very high throughput when streaming from various VOD services. My connection is a 100/10 with a close to theoretical max throughput. The ruleset is as follows Inbound: PPTP/1723 Allow always to 10.0.0.40 (NAS/VPN server) from a restricted IP range >corresponding to possible cell provider range OpenVPN/1194 Allow always to 10.0.0.40 (NAS/VPN server) from any Outbound: Default outbound policy: Allow Always OpenVPN/1194 TCP Allow always from 10.0.0.40 (NAS) to a.b.8.1-a.b.8.254 (VPN provider) OpenVPN/1194 UDP Allow always to 10.0.0.40 (NAS) to a.b.8.1-a.b.8.254 (VPN provider) Block always from NAS to any On the Mini I have disabled the OSX Application Level Firewall because it throws popups which don't remember my choices from one time to another and that's annoying on a media server. Instead I run Little Snitch which controls outgoing connections nicely on an application level. I have configured the excellent OSX builtin firewall pf (from BSD) as follows pf.conf (Apple App firewall tie-ins removed) (# replaced with % to avoid formatting errors) ### macro name for external interface. eth_if = "en0" vpn_if = "tap0" ### wifi_if = "en1" ### %usb_if = "en3" ext_if = $eth_if LAN="{10.0.0.0/24}" ### General housekeeping rules ### ### Drop all blocked packets silently set block-policy drop ### all incoming traffic on external interface is normalized and fragmented ### packets are reassembled. scrub in on $ext_if all fragment reassemble scrub in on $vpn_if all fragment reassemble scrub out all ### exercise antispoofing on the external interface, but add the local ### loopback interface as an exception, to prevent services utilizing the ### local loop from being blocked accidentally. ### set skip on lo0 antispoof for $ext_if inet antispoof for $vpn_if inet ### spoofing protection for all interfaces block in quick from urpf-failed ############################# block all ### Access to the mini server over ssh/22 and remote desktop/5900 from LAN/en0 only pass in on $eth_if proto tcp from $LAN to any port {22, 5900, 8080, 9090} ### Allow all udp and icmp also, necessary for Constellation. Could be tightened. pass on $eth_if proto {udp, icmp} from $LAN to any ### Allow AFP to 10.0.0.40 (NAS) pass out on $eth_if proto tcp from any to 10.0.0.40 port 548 ### Allow OpenVPN tunnel setup over unprotected link (en0) only to VPN provider IPs ### and port ranges pass on $eth_if proto tcp from any to a.b.8.0/24 port 1194:1201 ### OpenVPN Tunnel rules. All traffic allowed out, only in to ports 4100-4110 ### Outgoing pings ok pass in on $vpn_if proto {tcp, udp} from any to any port 4100:4110 pass out on $vpn_if proto {tcp, udp, icmp} from any to any So what are my goals and what does the above setup achieve? (until you tell me otherwise :) 1) Full LAN access to the above ports on the mini/media server (including through my own VPN server) 2) All internet traffic from the mini/media server is anonymized and tunneled over VPN 3) If OpenVPN/Tunnelblick on the mini drops the connection, nothing is leaked both because of pf and the router outgoing ruleset. It can't even do a DNS lookup through the router. So what do I have to hide with all this? Nothing much really, I just got carried away trying to stop port scans through the VPN tunnel :) In any case this setup works perfectly and it is very stable. The Problem at last! I want to run a minecraft server and I installed that on a separate user account on the mini server (user=mc) to keep things partitioned. I don't want this server accessible through the anonymized VPN tunnel because there are lots more port scans and hacking attempts through that than over my regular IP and I don't trust java in general. So I added the following pf rule on the mini: ### Allow Minecraft public through user mc pass in on $eth_if proto {tcp,udp} from any to any port 24983 user mc pass out on $eth_if proto {tcp, udp} from any to any user mc And these additions on the border firewall: Inbound: Allow always TCP/UDP from any to 10.0.0.40 (NAS) Outbound: Allow always TCP port 80 from 10.0.0.40 to any (needed for online account checkups) This works fine but only when the OpenVPN/Tunnelblick tunnel is down. When up no connection is possbile to the minecraft server from outside of LAN. inside LAN is always OK. Everything else functions as intended. I believe the redirect_gateway push is close to the root of the problem, but I want to keep that specific VPN provider because of the fantastic throughput, price and service. The Solution? How can I open up the minecraft server port outside of the tunnel so it's only available over en0 not the VPN tunnel? Should I a static route? But I don't know which IPs will be connecting...stumbles How secure would to estimate this setup to be and do you have other improvements to share? I've searched extensively in the last few days to no avail...If you've read this far I bet you know the answer :)

    Read the article

  • Have to dhclient each restart to access internet

    - by Zeophlite
    So each time I restart my ubuntu server (virtual 10.04, via Xencenter), I have to call dhclient before I can access the internet: http://img813.imageshack.us/i/dhclient.png/ What do I need to change to get internet access automatically? Apologies for posting images, I'm using Xencenter, so I can't copy/paste the console output EDIT:: daniel@workwork:~$ cat /etc/network/interfaces # This file describes the network interfaces available on your system # and how to activate them. For more information, see interfaces(5). # The loopback network interface auto lo iface lo inet loopback # The primary network interface auto eth0 iface eth0 inet static address 192.168.69.136 netmask 255.255.255.0 network 192.168.69.0 broadcast 192.168.69.255 gateway 192.168.69.1 # dns-* options are implemented by the resolvconf package, if installed dns-nameservers 192.168.69.120 dns-search workwork.com.au daniel@workwork:~$ ifconfig eth0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr ae:11:14:22:0a:03 inet6 addr: fe80::ac11:14ff:fe22:a03/64 Scope:Link UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 RX packets:32 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:85 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:1000 RX bytes:10496 (10.4 KB) TX bytes:13086 (13.0 KB) Interrupt:32 Base address:0x6000 eth1 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr b2:2c:40:f2:a0:fa inet addr:192.168.69.167 Bcast:192.168.69.255 Mask:255.255.255.0 inet6 addr: fe80::b02c:40ff:fef2:a0fa/64 Scope:Link UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 RX packets:13448 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:3100 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:1000 RX bytes:7679428 (7.6 MB) TX bytes:282286 (282.2 KB) Interrupt:36 Base address:0xa100 lo Link encap:Local Loopback inet addr:127.0.0.1 Mask:255.0.0.0 inet6 addr: ::1/128 Scope:Host UP LOOPBACK RUNNING MTU:16436 Metric:1 RX packets:179 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:179 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:0 RX bytes:36905 (36.9 KB) TX bytes:36905 (36.9 KB) daniel@workwork:/var/lib/dhcp3$ cat dhclient.leases lease { interface "eth1"; fixed-address 192.168.69.167; filename "boot\\x86\\wdsnbp.com"; option subnet-mask 255.255.255.0; option routers 192.168.69.1; option dhcp-lease-time 28800; option dhcp-message-type 5; option domain-name-servers 192.168.69.120,192.168.69.121; option dhcp-server-identifier 192.168.69.120; option dhcp-renewal-time 14400; option dhcp-rebinding-time 25200; option domain-name "workwork.com.au"; renew 5 2011/03/18 07:36:53; rebind 5 2011/03/18 11:35:39; expire 5 2011/03/18 12:35:39; } lease { interface "eth1"; fixed-address 192.168.69.167; filename "boot\\x86\\wdsnbp.com"; option subnet-mask 255.255.255.0; option routers 192.168.69.1; option dhcp-lease-time 28800; option dhcp-message-type 5; option domain-name-servers 192.168.69.120,192.168.69.121; option dhcp-server-identifier 192.168.69.120; option dhcp-renewal-time 14400; option dhcp-rebinding-time 25200; option domain-name "workwork.com.au"; renew 5 2011/03/18 08:51:58; rebind 5 2011/03/18 12:24:16; expire 5 2011/03/18 13:24:16; } daniel@workwork:/var/lib/dhcp3$ cat dhclient.eth0.leases daniel@workwork:/var/lib/dhcp3$ ifconfig eth1 before and after dhclient http://img692.imageshack.us/i/prepost.png/

    Read the article

  • Best all in one linux based proxy,firewall, dhcp and wins server.

    - by BeStRaFe
    I help to run a lan in Sydney. We have a need for a proxy/gateway solution to allow those pesky games that require internet to work. I have been doing this with an ISA server and it has worked quite well. However now i wish to port this over to run on the same hardware as our cacti / nagios box under a vmware VM. ISA server is horridly nad due to the massive ram and i/o requirement for something is basically port blocking and handing out IP's. The needs are as follows. 1. DHCP 2. WINS (otherwise network devices fight over who is the WINS master) 3. Filtering based in PORT for outbound traffic. 4. Ability to whitelist IP/MAC's for internet access. 5. Web Interface. I had been thinking to use PFSENSE however there is no option for a WINS server and i cbf working my way around bsd.

    Read the article

  • How to configure CISCO switch 2960 for port-based address allocation on a single port only?

    - by Jack
    CISCO 2960 allows you to configure so-called Port-Based address allocation. It makes the switch to associate IP address it is giving out via DHCP with port-identifier, which is random, switch created identifier. In practice it means that any machine connected to such configured port will always get the same IP address, regardless of what that machine's MAC address is. I want to have that feature configured on --some ports-- only. But no matter what commands I try it seems that this can only be done for all ports, all for none. Even though CISCO manual seems to indicate there's both global and per-port command to enable that. Here are relevant commands from CISCO manual: configure terminal ip dhcp use subscriber-id client-id (this configures the DHCP server to globally use the subscriber ID as the client ID on all incoming DHCP messages) interface FastEthernet0/1 ip dhcp server use subscriber-id client-id (Optional: Configures the DHCP server to use the subscriber ID as the client ID on all incoming DHCP messages on the interface) but it appears if I configure only per-interface than there's no effect at all, if I configure globally and per interface - CISCo behaves as if all ports were configured to use that feature. Any ideas?

    Read the article

  • Watchguard Firewall - Issues with SSLVPN

    - by David W
    I have a client who has a WatchGuard XTM 23 device on site as their primary firewall. I just upgraded its firmware a couple days ago to the latest version for that series, 11.6.6. The problem is that I haven't successfully been able to setup a VPN connection for them. Using the instructions at http://www.watchguard.com/help/docs/webui/11_XTM/en-US/index.html#en-US/mvpn/ssl/configure_fb_for_mvpn_ssl_c.html, I'm trying to setup a VPN with SSL connection: From the firewall web GUI / Dashboard, I go to VPN - Mobile VPN with SSL, I enable it, add the organization's public IP address to which the firewall is connected. I've setup a group in Active Directory named "SSLVPN-Users", verified that the WatchGuard box can talk to the Active Directory Server, and added myself to that group. I then downloaded the WatchGuard Mobile VPN with SSL client onto my own Windows 7 machine, walked to the client's 2nd building across the street (which has a different public internet connection), and tried to connect to the VPN. When I do try to connect with the client, I get the following errors: 2013-06-24T15:41:32.119 Launching WatchGuard Mobile VPN with SSL client. Version 11.6.0 (Build 343814) Built:Jun 13 2012 01:42:55 2013-06-24T15:41:37.595 Requesting client configuration from 184.174.143.176:443 2013-06-24T15:41:50.106 FAILED:Cannot perform http request, timeout 12002 2013-06-24T15:41:50.106 failed to get domain name I discovered today the Firebox System Manager, and its "Traffic Monitor" which gives current log information (refreshes every 5 seconds). Unfortunately, it doesn't look like the client has setup any sort of WatchGuard / Firebox logging server, so actually recording server-side logs to file hasn't been done. I can work on implementing that if I need to. I noticed that if I try to ping the client's public IP address from an outside source, I don't get a response back (unless I added a policy into the firewall to allow ICMP traffic from "External", which I successfully did a few seconds ago for testing purposes - that rule has since been reverted to not respond to external ping requests). There's a policy in the firewall for allowing SSLVPN Traffic authentication requests coming from any external source TO the Firebox, and then to do the authentication / actually allow the VPN traffic, there's a policy allowing traffic for anyone in the SSLVPN-Users group to flow between that user and the inside network. So my questions are: Has anyone seen these errors before from the Watchguard VPN Client, and/or do you have any suggestions on how I can resolve that error? If I need to setup logging server to grab the firewall logs (in order to further troubleshoot this issue), how complicated a task is that and does it require a lot of system resources? The organization I'm consulting with only has 1 server and not a lot of resources or technical know-how.

    Read the article

  • Why can I not get a WDS-originated PXE boot to progress past the first file download?

    - by Jeff Shattock
    I'm trying to work out an automated Windows install process, and thought I'd give WDS a look. After some promising initial progress, I seem to have hit a wall. I imported the boot and install WIMs, and created the capture WIM successfully. However, whenever I try to PXE boot the reference machine against the WDS server, it kinda craps out. It finds the server and downloads WDSNBP.COM successfully, and then gives the message "TFTP download failed." According to WireShark, the only communication between the WDS box and the client box is the successful TFTP request and download of boot\x86\WDSNBP.COM. No further requests are sent. The WDS log on the server shows the same thing, one successful download and no more activity. I've tried every combination of the following, with exactly zero change in behaviour: Win Server 2008R2 vs 2012 vs 2012R2 WDS virtualized on KVM, ESXi, VirtualBox, VMWare Workstation Client virtualized on KVM, ESXi, VirtualBox, VMWare Workstation Every network adaptor type offered by the virtualization platforms. "Actual" network vs isolated, virtual network. MS DHCP server vs Linux isc-dhcp-server Joined to a domain vs Stand-alone I tried changing the boot filename in DHCP to pxeboot.com instead, and it has no problem downloading that file instead, but it then crabs about Boot\BCD being corrupted. Also, with 2012, it doesnt appear that WDSNBP.com does the architecture detection, or at least does'nt report that it did. 2008 reports that it found x64, and then errors. I find myself out of things to check, and I dont see anything immediately wrong. Where do I go from here? WDS server is at 192.168.1.50, DHCP/DNS at 192.168.1.7. Console of the client computer after the boot: MAC: 52:54:00:28:94:0E UUID: blah blah Searching for server (DHCP)..... Me: 192.168.1.155, DHCP: 192.168.1.7, Gateway 192.168.1.1 Loading 192.168.1.50:boot\x86\wdsnbp.com ...(PXE).................done Downloaded WDSNCP... TFPT download failed Interesting parts of /etc/dhcp/dhcpd.conf on the Linux DHCP server: allow booting; allow bootp; option option-60 code 60 = string; option option-66 code 66 = string; option option-67 code 67 = string; subnet 192.168.1.0 netmask 255.255.255.0 { range 192.168.1.110 192.168.1.253; next-server 192.168.1.50; option tftp-server-name "192.168.1.50"; option option-60 "PXEClient"; filename "boot\\x86\\wdsnbp.com"; option bootfile-name "boot\\x86\\wdsnbp.com"; }

    Read the article

  • VMWare Network bug in multiple VMWare Workstation versions if using a hardcoded IP address

    - by onyxruby
    I'm having a very tricky problem with some of my VM sessions being unable to reach the Internet or even ping the gateway. I have just set up a new VM Workstation (7) on a W2K8 64bit server (I'll be converting to ESXI 4 once I can find a decent book on it, so for the meanwhile I use workstation). I have imported a number of VM's and setup some new ones on the server.In short the problem with some of the VM's being unable to reach the Internet is that they can't reach the gateway. I've looking at a number of things and can pretty safely rule out the following: Switch, Router, DHCP Server, DNS, Client IP configuration, Routes and typos. The problem is that some of the new clients cannot reach the gateway if their IP address is hardcoded, they can't even ping it by IP address. That rules out DNS and DHCP. Now, if I allow them to get their IP address by DHCP they can reach the gateway and Internet without issue. The interesting thing on this, is that this behavior occurs even if I leave the DNS information hardcoded under TCP/IP settings. It doesn't work unless the IP and gateway are handed out by DHCP even though the same information IP info is being used by the host. Fundamentally from the standpoint of the clients, they are trying to reach the exact same gateway using the exact same IP information regardless of whether they are hardcoded or assigned by DHCP. Here's an example of one client. IP Address 192.168.7.66 - Subnet Mask 255.255.255.0 - Gateway 192.168.7.254 - DNS1 192.168.7.44 - DNS2 192.168.7.254. The issue occurs across six different microsoft operating systems, Windows 7 and Windows 2008 variants all have the issue. My W2K3, XP, Vista and W98 clients all work without issue with hardcoded IP addresses. I have tried things like rearranging the DNS order, flushing DNS and so on. It's not a routing or switch issue as the clients can work just fine if they get their IP by DHCP. It's not a paramater issue as the exact same paramaters are handed out by DHCP as I plug in by hand. It's not a DNS issue as clients cant reach other clients even with IP addresses only. I have run a tracert to the gateway by IP address and it times out on the very first hop before failing on hop3 with destination host unreachable. If I get the IP address by DHCP the tracert finds the gateway (and Internet) without issue. I have read a few other posts online in forums talking about this problem randomly occuring over the years in other VM versions as well, so I suspect some kind of long standing bug. Does anyone have any ideas on this? Is it possibly a bug with Windows 7 and W2K clients under VM?

    Read the article

  • How to connect FortiGate1 SSL VPN remote access from Fedora/CentOS/Ubuntu Linux?

    - by YumYumYum
    How can i connect to FortiGate1 SSL VPN Remote Access router from Fedora/CentOS or Ubuntu/Debian? It only working with Windows Internet explorer for the moment using Vbox (But i cant use Windows only for this) How can i use it from my favourate Linux? # vpnc Enter IPSec gateway address: xx.xx.xx.42 Enter IPSec ID for xx.xx.xx.42: Enter IPSec secret for @xx.xx.xx.42: Enter username for xx.xx.xx.42: Myusername Enter password for [email protected]: vpnc: no response from target

    Read the article

  • Error while installing ltsp server package in fedora 12

    - by paragjain16
    Hi, i am using fedora 12, while i was installing ltsp(Linux terminal server project) server package, it told me that some more packages need to be installed with it as well, while downloading the packages i got the following error - Local Conflict between packages Test Transaction Errors: file /usr/share/man/man5/dhcp-eval.5.gz from install of dhcp-12:4.1.1-5.fc12.i686 conflicts with file from package dhclient-12:4.1.0p1-12.fc12.i686 file /usr/share/man/man5/dhcp-options.5.gz from install of dhcp-12:4.1.1-5.fc12.i686 conflicts with file from package dhclient-12:4.1.0p1-12.fc12.i686 i also deleted all the dhcp packages from man5 directory, even then it is giving the same error msg. please help me with it

    Read the article

  • Apache on Mac Mavericks issue [migrated]

    - by Michael
    Trying to run Apache so that I can create a testing server on my mac.When I start apache it starts, but it doesn't run (no connection to local host. Ill upload the unix,you'll see that after starting there is no processes, and I did a check to show you what was running on my port 80... I don't entirely know that means. Michaels-MacBook-Pro-3:~ michaelramos$ sudo apachectl start Michaels-MacBook-Pro-3:~ michaelramos$ ps aux | grep httpd michaelramos 348 0.0 0.0 2442000 624 s000 S+ 8:51AM 0:00.00 grep httpd Michaels-MacBook-Pro-3:~ michaelramos$ sudo apachectl start org.apache.httpd: Already loaded Michaels-MacBook-Pro-3:~ michaelramos$ sudo lsof -i ':80' COMMAND PID USER FD TYPE DEVICE SIZE/OFF NODE NAME ocspd 96 root 18u IPv4 0x8402f926599c58df 0t0 TCP dhcp-92-67.radford.edu:49267->108.162.232.196:http (ESTABLISHED) ocspd 96 root 20u IPv4 0x8402f926599c58df 0t0 TCP dhcp-92-67.radford.edu:49267->108.162.232.196:http (ESTABLISHED) ocspd 96 root 21u IPv4 0x8402f926599c50f7 0t0 TCP dhcp-92-67.radford.edu:49268->108.162.232.206:http (ESTABLISHED) ocspd 96 root 23u IPv4 0x8402f926599c50f7 0t0 TCP dhcp-92-67.radford.edu:49268->108.162.232.206:http (ESTABLISHED)

    Read the article

  • Productivity vs Security [closed]

    - by nerijus
    Really do not know is this right place to ask such a questions. But it is about programming in a different light. So, currently contracting with company witch pretends to be big corporation. Everyone is so important that all small issues like developers are ignored. Give you a sample: company VPN is configured so that if you have VPN then HTTP traffic is banned. Bearing this in mind can you imagine my workflow: Morning. Ok time to get latest source. Ups, no VPN. Let’s connect. Click-click. 3 sec. wait time. Ok getting source. Do I have emails? Ups. VPN is on, can’t check my emails. Need to wait for source to come up. Finally here it is! Ok Click-click VPN is gone. What is in my email. Someone reported a bug. Good, let’s track it down. It is in TFS already. Oh, dam, I need VPN. Click-click. Ok, there is description. Yea, I have seen this issue in stachoverflow.com. Let’s go there. Ups, no internet. Click-click. No internet. What? IPconfig… DHCP server kicked me out. Dam. Renew ip. 1..2..3. Ok internet is back. Google: site: stachoverflow.com 3 min. I have solution. Great I love stackoverflow.com. Don’t want to remember days where there was no stackoveflow.com. Ok. Copy paste this like to studio. Dam, studio is stalled, can’t reach files on TFS. Click-click. VPN is back. Get source out, paste my code. Grand. Let’s see what other comments about an issue in stackoverflow.com tells. Hmm.. There is a link. Click. Dammit! No internet. Click-click. No internet. DHCP kicked me out. Dammit. Now it is even worse: this happens 3-4 times a day. After certain amount of VPN connections open\closed my internet goes down solid. Only way to get internet back is reboot. All my browser tabs/SQL windows/studio will be gone. This happened just now when I am typing this. Back to issue I am solving right now: I am getting frustrated - I do not care about better solution for this issue. Let’s do it somehow and forget. This Click-click barrier between internet and TFS kills me… Sounds familiar? You could say there are VPN settings to change. No! This is company laptop, not allowed to do changes. I am very very lucky to have admin privileges on my machine. Most of developers don’t. So just learned to live with this frustration. It takes away 40-60 minutes daily. Tried to email company support, admins. They are too important ant too busy with something that just ignored my little man’s problem. Politely ignored. Question is: Is this normal in corporate world? (Have been in States, Canada, Germany. Never seen this.)

    Read the article

  • Juju bootstrap fails to start network on local environment

    - by Amith KK
    I've followed the instructions at https://juju.ubuntu.com/CharmSchool and rebooted 5 times...... I cant seem to do a juju-bootstrap (local) This is the output: amith@amith-desktop:~$ juju bootstrap 2011-11-24 17:08:05,708 INFO Bootstrapping environment 'local' (type: local)... 2011-11-24 17:08:05,710 INFO Checking for required packages... 2011-11-24 17:08:06,593 INFO Starting networking... error: Failed to start network default error: internal error Child process (dnsmasq --strict-order --bind-interfaces --pid-file=/var/run/libvirt/network/default.pid --conf-file= --except-interface lo --listen-address 192.168.122.1 --dhcp-range 192.168.122.2,192.168.122.254 --dhcp-leasefile=/var/lib/libvirt/dnsmasq/default.leases --dhcp-lease-max=253 --dhcp-no-override) status unexpected: exit status 2 Command '['virsh', 'net-start', 'default']' returned non-zero exit status 1 2011-11-24 17:08:07,217 ERROR Command '['virsh', 'net-start', 'default']' returned non-zero exit status 1 Is there any fix at all?

    Read the article

  • Is there a way to use a SSH connection to access SMB or UPnP files without setting up a VPN?

    - by Michael Chapman
    What I'm trying to do is set up a SSH key that only gives access to certain directories, for security reasons I don't want it to have full access to my SSH server. I already have the ability to access the directories I need over my local network (right now using SMB, although I also used UPnP for awhile). I need, however, to be able to access those files securely over the internet from both Ubuntu and Windows machines. I'm somewhat new to SSH and not sure what the best approach to solving my problem is. If anyone knows how I can do this or where I can find a detailed tutorial I'd be grateful. And as always if anything is confusing or if there are any comments or corrections please let me know.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78  | Next Page >