Search Results

Search found 12705 results on 509 pages for 'ip routing'.

Page 71/509 | < Previous Page | 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78  | Next Page >

• Disable Network settings (TCP/IP & DNS) on Windows 7 Ultimate

  - by TiD91

  i also read this discussion here How to disable Tcp/Ip settings in windows 7 via GPO? about what i want to do but i still have problems. So here i am: i have a desktop pc with two accounts, both with Administrative rights. One is used by the entire my family, in particular by my brother. The problem is that i set some DNS and IP configurations to let be possible the VNC connection from remote. Now i would like to disable the network settings (TCP/IP and DNS) to prohibit my brother to change it preventing me to connect to it. So how can i do this? I set the policies from GPO but i still can change these settings from his account. Here's a pic of Registry Keys: http://imageshack.us/a/img339/3310/famigliapc2012092017274.png what didn't i do? Thanks in advance for your help. Rub|TiD

  Read the article

• Setting primary IP for VPS (out of 2 available)

  - by Flyer

  I've got a little problem. My VPS (Debian box) has 1 primary IP address, but now my hosting provider decided to assign me another one due to problems with first one. Let's say new IP is 91.222.152.20 and old one 91.221.190.170. How should I make 91.222.152.20 primary one, so that everything works on this address instead of 91.221.190.170 (like ftp, mysql etc) I tried editing /etc/newtwork/interfaces setting iface eth1 inet static address 91.222.152.20 netmask 255.255.252.0 network 91.222.152.0 broadcast 91.222.155.255 gateway 91.222.152.1 I know that network is 91.222.152.0/22 so I assume that above configuration should be right. Saved, rebooted and that ended pretty bad. Couldn't even ping box on old or new IP. Had to revert to working one. So question is. What am I doing wrong and how to do it right?

  Read the article

• linux static ip problem

  - by out_sider

  I have a serve running centOS and I'd like to have the following setup: The server needs to have a static ip and be accessible by name. What I want is independently of the network being able to connect the server to the network and access it by name on Firefox as it will be running a web page. I tried setting the ip manually but while the inet addr is set as I want it the Bcast isn't. And I only can ping the server on the Bcast ip and because it is 192.168.2.255 ssh says it's not valid.

  Read the article

• Limit access on login and IP in .htaccess

  - by Rob

  There are many examples showing how to use .htaccess to restrict users by login or on their IP address (i.e they are ok from the ones given without authorisation). For some reason the following is never mentioned, yet it seems quite useful. How do I restrict using groups and ip, e.g. group1 can access the page from anywhere group2 can access the page only from certain IP addresses if you are not logged on, you cant see the page, regardless where you are I would like to have all 3 of these working at the same time.

  Read the article

• Cannot Access Server from External IP (Router)

  - by mindoftea

  We have an Ubuntu 10.04 LAMP server running on site (Apache is on port 80). It is running fine through the LAN, but I cannot access it using its external IP address through the Netopia 3000 Series modem by which it is connected to the internet. I have tried using what Netopia calls "Pinholes" (Port Forwarding) to make the server accessible, but a telnet to the external address just gives me "connect to address x.x.x.x: Operation timed out." I have also tried enabling "Services" and "IP Passthrough" on the router, but it gives the same result as above. How can I enable the server to be accessed through its external IP address? Because it connects fine locally, it would seem to be a problem with the Netopia router. Update: Booting the server in GUI mode instead of text mode solved the problem instantly. Any ideas why?

  Read the article

• Server 2008 DHCP some clients not getting IP

  - by AdminAlive

  Today (after turning on the server from an extended power outage) some clients are not able to get IP addresses. Some clients work just fine. Win 7 and XP doesnt seem to matter. I have tried flushing dns, renew, disabling APIPA and even assigned a static IP. Even with the static IP it acts as if it isn't on a network. You can't ping anything. I have also tried resetting the TCPIP stack. The clients that work can ping the DNS and DHCP servers fine. Any suggestions? Thanks

  Read the article

• use local ip and maintain ssl warning free [duplicate]

  - by Timothy Clemans

  This question already has an answer here: Loopback to forwarded Public IP address from local network - Hairpin NAT 6 answers I have a public facing website for a doctor's office for accessing the medical record. I'm using SSL. The server is at the doctor's office. When I access the website on the same network as the server I want the DNS to point to the local IP address. I don't want to do a HTTP redirect to the local ip because of the scary SSL warning. What's the recommended way of doing this?

  Read the article

• How to get ip-address out of SPAMHAUS blacklist?

  - by vgv8

  I frequently read that it is possible to remove individual ip-addresses from SPAMHAUS blacklisting. OK. Here is 91.205.43.252 (91.205.43.251 - 91.205.43.253) used by back3.stopspamers.com (back2.stopspamers.com, back1.stopspamers.com) in geo-cluster on dedicated servers in Switzerland. The queries: http://www.spamhaus.org/query/bl?ip=91.205.43.251 http://www.spamhaus.org/query/bl?ip=91.205.43.252 http://www.spamhaus.org/query/bl?ip=91.205.43.253 tell that: 91.205.43.251 - 91.205.43.253 are all listed in the SBL80808 blacklist And SBL80808 blacklist tells: "Ref: SBL80808 91.205.40.0/22 is listed on the Spamhaus Block List (SBL) 01-Apr-2010 05:52 GMT | SR04 Spamming and now seems this place is involved in other fraud" 91.205.43.251-91.205.43.253 are not listed amongst criminal ip-addresses individually but there is no way to remove it individually from black listing. How to remove this individual (91.205.43.251-91.205.43.253) addresses from SPAMHAUS blacklist? And why the heck SPAMHAUS is blacklisting spam-stopping service? This is only one example of a bunch. My related posts: Blacklist IP database Update: From the answer provided I realized that my question was not even understood. This ip-addresses 91.205.43.251 - 91.205.43.253 are not blacklisted individually, they are blacklisted through its supernet 91.205.40.0/22. Also note that dedicated server, ISP and customer are in much different distant countries. Update2: http://www.spamhaus.org/sbl/sbl.lasso?query=SBL80808#removal tells: "To have record SBL80808 (91.205.40.0/22) removed from the SBL, the Abuse/Security representative of RIPE (or the Internet Service Provider responsible for supplying connectivity to 91.205.40.0/22) needs to contact the SBL Team" There are dozens of "abusers" in that blacklist SBL80808. The company using that dedicated server is not an ISP or RIPE representative to treat these issues. Even if to treat it, it is just a matter of pressing "Report spam" on internet to be again blacklisted, this is fruitless approach. These techniques are broadly used by criminals and spammers, See also this my post on blacklisting. This is just one specific example but there are many-many more.

  Read the article

• How to get ip-address out of SPAMHAUS blacklist?

  - by ???????? ????? ???????????

  I frequently read that it is possible to remove individual ip-addresses from SPAMHAUS blacklisting. OK. Here is 91.205.43.252 (91.205.43.251 - 91.205.43.253) used by back3.stopspamers.com (back2.stopspamers.com, back1.stopspamers.com) in geo-cluster on dedicated servers in Switzerland. The queries: http://www.spamhaus.org/query/bl?ip=91.205.43.251 http://www.spamhaus.org/query/bl?ip=91.205.43.252 http://www.spamhaus.org/query/bl?ip=91.205.43.253 tell that: 91.205.43.251 - 91.205.43.253 are all listed in the SBL80808 blacklist And SBL80808 blacklist tells: "Ref: SBL80808 91.205.40.0/22 is listed on the Spamhaus Block List (SBL) 01-Apr-2010 05:52 GMT | SR04 Spamming and now seems this place is involved in other fraud" 91.205.43.251-91.205.43.253 are not listed amongst criminal ip-addresses individually but there is no way to remove it individually from black listing. How to remove this individual (91.205.43.251-91.205.43.253) addresses from SPAMHAUS blacklist? And why the heck SPAMHAUS is blacklisting spam-stopping service? This is only one example of a bunch. My related posts: Blacklist IP database Update: From the answer provided I realized that my question was not even understood. This ip-addresses 91.205.43.251 - 91.205.43.253 are not blacklisted individually, they are blacklisted through its supernet 91.205.40.0/22. Also note that dedicated server, ISP and customer are in much different distant countries. Update2: http://www.spamhaus.org/sbl/sbl.lasso?query=SBL80808#removal tells: "To have record SBL80808 (91.205.40.0/22) removed from the SBL, the Abuse/Security representative of RIPE (or the Internet Service Provider responsible for supplying connectivity to 91.205.40.0/22) needs to contact the SBL Team" There are dozens of "abusers" in that blacklist SBL80808. The company using that dedicated server is not an ISP or RIPE representative to treat these issues. Even if to treat it, it is just a matter of pressing "Report spam" on internet to be again blacklisted, this is fruitless approach. These techniques are broadly used by criminals and spammers, See also this my post on blacklisting. This is just one specific example but there are many-many more.

  Read the article

• MVCContrib Testing Route with Areas

  - by xkevin

  Hi, I am using MVC 2 with Area. To test routing, I am using MvcContrib. This is the testing code: [Test] public void Home() { MvcApplication.RegisterRoutes(RouteTable.Routes); "~/".ShouldMapTo(x = x.Login("Nps")); } I am not sure how to call routing definition that are stored in Areas. Calling AreaRegistration.RegisterAllAreas() is not an option as it gives an exception. Thanks Revin

  Read the article

• Path parsing in rails

  - by fl00r

  Hi! I am looking for method for parsing route path like this: ActionController::Routing.new("post_path").parse #=> {:controller => "posts", :action => "index"} It should be opposite to url_for Upd I've found out: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/2222522/what-is-the-opposite-of-url-for-in-rails-a-function-that-takes-a-path-and-genera ActionController::Routing::Routes.recognize_path("/posts") So now I need to convert posts_path into "/posts"

  Read the article

• Is it possible to parse a URL into it's composite components?

  - by Paul Alexander

  I'd like to parse an incoming URL into it's component parts for some pre-processing before passing it into the standard MVC routing logic. For example given your standard route {controller}/{action}/{id} and the URL /user/show/10 Is there a way to have the Routing system return a dictionary containing controller, action and id keys with their corresponding values?

  Read the article

• Compare Quagga to XORP

  - by Sargun Dhillon

  What do you think of Quagga compared to XORP as a dynamic software routing engine? What are the technical merits of each engine comparatively? Additionally, what do most people think of them from a programming view. Who has manipulated networks using these enginers? I was wondering from an OSPF, routing, BGP protocol user's perpspective.

  Read the article

• Changing subnet-mask of class-c network host to 255.255.0.0

  - by Prashant Mandhare

  We have a existing class-c network with IP address range 11.22.33.44/24 (just for example). My domain controller has been configured within this subnet. So all servers within this subnet have subnet mask configured to 255.255.255.0. Now we have got a new subnet with IP address 11.22.88.99/24 (note that only last 2 octets have changed). I want all new hosts in this new subnet to join my existing DC. For this we have configured firewall properly so allow this. (so there is no issue with firewall). But initially I was not able to join hosts in new subnet in existing domain. Later I doubted on subnet mask used in domain controller (255.255.255.0) and for testing purpose I changed it to 255.255.0.0, it worked like charm, i was able to join subnet-2 hosts in subnet-1 domain. Now i am wondering whether it will be good practice to change subnet mask of a class-c network to 255.255.0.0? Can any issues arise due to this? Experts please provide your opinion.

  Read the article

• Passing OpenVPN road-warrior traffic through tunnel pfsense

  - by Chris

  I have a local LAN (10.100.100.0/24) and OpenVPN road-warriors (10.99.99.0/24). pfSense is regulating all this as follows: LAN: 10.100.100.105 WAN: 10.100.99.1 (connected to DSL Router which connects to internet). OPT1: 10.99.99.0 (OpenVPN tun0). There is an IPSec connection between my office and another office where my LAN can work on a specific IP address (sql server to be exact) on 192.168.30.41. My problem is that I wish my OpenVPN road-warrior clients to be able to use the IPSec service on 192.168.30.41 as well (which at present they cannot despite the fact that I am pushing the route 192.168.30.0 255.255.255.0). The other site's administrator cannot add the extra route for my openvpn clients for a lot of reasons which I am not going to enter at this stage. Is there a possibility that I could NAT all of my openVPN road-warriors requests through a local LAN IP address (something like 10.100.100.250 which is not used by anything on my LAN). The problem is that I am a newbie with pfSense so as much step-by-step help as possible would be very much appreciated! Thank you. C.

  Read the article

• Forward differing hostnames to different internal IPs through NAT router

  - by abrereton

  Hi, I have one public IP address, one router and multiple servers behind the router. I would like to forward differing domains (All using HTTP) through the router to different servers. For example: example1.com => 192.168.0.110 example2.com => 192.168.0.120 foo.example2.com => 192.168.0.130 bar.example2.com => 192.168.0.140 I understand that this could be accomplished using Port Forwarding, but I need all hosts running on port 80. I found some information about IP Masquerading, but I found this difficult to understand, and I am not sure if it is what I am after. Another solution I have found is to direct all traffic to Reverse Proxy server, which forwards the requests onto the appropriate server. What about iptables? I am using a Billion 7404 VNPX router. Is there a feature that this router has that can accomplish this? Are these my only options? Have I missed something completely? Is one recommended over the others? I have searched around but I don't think I am hitting the correct keywords. Thanks in advance.

  Read the article

• Default route not on LAN

  - by jarmund

  I have a network that in principle looks like this: H1---\ /----Inet1 H2---->---GW1---< H3---/ \----GW2-----Inet2 H1 and H2 = Hosts that need access to internet with GW1 Inet1 = Internet link over 3G connection Inet2 = 5GHz link to Internet (not always up) GW1 = Works as a router, automatically picking the "best" connection between Inet1 and Inet2 (the latter via GW2). GW2 = 5GHz wifi router And here's the problem: H3 only needs internet access when Inet2 is up. What i was thinking of doing was a routing table that looks like this: route to GW2 via GW1 default route is via GW2 I first set the route to GW2 via GW1 without a problem. But when i try route add default gw 1.2.3.4 (1.2.3.4 being the IP of GW2), it complains "SIOCADDRT: No such device" Is the problem that the default gw i'm trying to set is not reachable directly? Is there a different approach that would allow me to achieve this? An alternative (and hypothetical) approach: Since H3 will be using a static IP, is it possible to do some magic with iptables on GW1 to forward any packets from H3 to GW3, thereby "tricking" H3 into using GW2 as its default router?

  Read the article

• Correct way to set up office network - 8 workstations, a file server and a staging server

  - by naunu

  Our office had this old school windows 2003 domain setup, our server caught fire, and now we are looking to do it right from scratch. Here is what we need: 5 PC and 3 Mac workstations for web development, they will each have WAMP/MAMP setup on them, managed by their developers. We will have a file server for assets, and a LAMP server with an external IP for staging. Here is what we have to work with: 5 IP addresses, brand new PC file server with windows 2008 SE, D-Link DSS-16+ 16 port switch, belkin 5 port wireless router, cable modem with 4 ports. How I have it set up now (this is a temporary makeshift setup): Cable modem = LAMP server, wireless router Wireless router = Switch = All of the workstations and file server (setup as a workgroup). We have noticed our internet is very slow with us all plugged in to the switch, and the switch plugged in to the router. I am not positive, but I think it is because our router does not have NAT. We are also having problems with the MACs connection to the network drive - it keeps disconnecting. I want this done right, and we have a ~$600 budget to buy anything else we need. Does anybody have any advice for me? Should I set up a domain or workgroup?

  Read the article

• Route traffic from one VPN to a second VPN

  - by Dominic

  I have set up an OpenVPN server on my windows 7 64-bit PC. I also have a subscription to a VPN service. My aim is to be able to connect my android phone to the VPN server on my PC, and then route all traffic through the VPN service. I have a NetGear WPN824 router. I can get it working if I my phone is on my local network. Then I can connect my phone to the VPN server using the local IP address of my PC. In Network Connection in the control panel, I share the connection used by the VPN service with the connection used by the VPN server. Then when I browse the internet on my phone, all traffic goes through the VPN service. Very nice. But if my phone is outside my local network, so I have to connect my phone to the local VPN using my PC's external IP address, then this method doesn't work. If I connect my PC to the VPN service and then try to connect my phone to my own VPN, it just doesn't connect (the initial TLS handshake times out). If I connect my phone to the local VPN first, then this connection is lost as soon as I connect my PC to the VPN service. Does anybody know how I can get this working? Many thanks Dominic

  Read the article

• Add IPv6 support to DirectAdmin server

  - by George Boot

  I just set up an new DirectAdmin, and I want to prepare it for IPv6 use. My ISP have gave me an range of IPv6 addresses that I can use. Lets say that address is 2a01:7c8:**:1f::. My neworkadapter user DHCP to resolves its IP-addresses. When i type ifoncig eth0 I get the following result: eth0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 52:**:**:**:ce:f3 inet addr:37.**.**.44 Bcast:37.**.**.255 Mask:255.255.255.0 inet6 addr: 2a01:7c8:****:1f::/64 Scope:Global inet6 addr: fe80::5054:ff:fe87:cef3/64 Scope:Link UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 RX packets:38941 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:29439 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:1000 RX bytes:3779534 (3.6 MiB) TX bytes:5089379 (4.8 MiB) As you can see, I have an IPv6 address set, but I can't ping6 an IPv6 host. I get the error: connect: Network is unreachable. I decided that I needed an gateway, so I tryed to add one: ip -6 route add default via 2a01:7c8:****::1 dev eth0 (2a01:7c8:**::1 is the gateway of my ISP). But it trows an error: RTNETLINK answers: No route to host. Does somebody know what to do, and how to solve this issue? Thanks a lot!

  Read the article

• Two DHCP servers on the same network

  - by CesarGon

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

  Read the article

• Two DHCP servers on the same network

  - by CesarGon

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

  Read the article

• filter / directing URLs coming onto a network

  - by Jon

  Hi all, I an not sure if this is possible or not but what i would like to do is as follows: I have one IP address (dynamic using zoneedit.com to keep it upto date). I have one webserver running my main site which is an Ubuntu machine running Apache. I also have a windows 2008 server running another site. Just to confuse things I also run part of my Apache site on the windows server, currently using proxypassreverse to get the information from it. So it looks something like this: IP 1.2.3.4 maps to mydomain.com as well as myotherdomain.com All requests that come into port 80 are forwarded to the Apache box and I use Virtualhost settings to proxy the windows sites where needed. so mydomain.com is an Apache site mydomain.com/mywindowssection is the Apache server using proxypassreverse to get part of the site from the Windows server myotherdomain.com uses Apache and proxypassreverse to get the whole site. What I would like to be able to do is forward all http requests that come into my network to one machine that figures out who should be serving that content. so: mydomain.com would go to the Apache machine myotherdomain.com would go the windows machine. I am just in the process of setting up an Astaro gateway (never done this before so taking a while to configure) as my firewall, dns, dhcp etc, don't know if this can handle it. I have the capacity to run a VM on the network if a seperate box would be needed for this process as well. Thanks for any and all feedback. Jon

  Read the article

• Isolate clients on same subnet?

  - by stefan.at.wpf

  Given n (e.g. 200) clients in a /24 subnet and the following network structure: client 1 \ . \ . switch -- firewall . / client n / (in words: all clients connected to one switch and the switch connected to the firewall) Now by default, e.g. client 1 and client n can communicate directly using the switch, without any packets ever arriving the firewall. Therefore none of those packets could be filtered. However I would like to filter the packets between the clients, therefore I want to disallow any direct communication between the clients. I know this is possible using vlans, but then - according to my understanding - I would have to put all clients in their own network. However I don't even have that much IP addresses: I have about 200 clients, only a /24 subnet and all clients shall have public ip addresses, therefore I can't just create a private network for each of them (well, maybe using some NAT, but I'd like to avoid that). So, is there any way to tell the switch: Forward all packets to the firewall, don't allow direct communication between clients? Thanks for any hint!

  Read the article

• How to route broadcast packets from machine with two network interfaces on same subnet

  - by Syam

  I run RHEL 5 and have two NICs on one machine connected to the same subnet: eth0 192.168.100.10 eth1 192.168.100.11 My application needs to receive and transmit UDP packets (both unicast & broadcast) via these interfaces. I've found the way to handle the ARP problem and I've added routes to handle the routing problem: ip rule add from 192.168.100.10 lookup 10 ip route add table 10 default src 192.168.100.10 dev eth0 (and similarly, table 11 for eth1) The problem is that only unicast packets gets routed properly. Broadcast packets always go out through eth0. I tried removing the rule for 192.168.100.0 & 192.168.100.255 from table 255 and adding them to my tables. But then I see ARP requests being given out for packets to 192.168.100.255 (obviously, no nodes respond and nobody gets any data). Due to several techno-political issues, I'm stuck with this configuration and can't change subnets or try something different. I've tried SO_BINDTODEVICE and it works, but I'd prefer a solution that doesn't need my application to run as root. Is there a way to get this working? Any help is highly appreciated.

  Read the article

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