Search Results

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

Page 79/509 | < Previous Page | 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86  | Next Page >

• Why can't I route to some sites from my MacBook Pro that I can see from my iPad? [closed]

  - by Robert Atkins

  I am on M1 Cable (residential) broadband in Singapore. I have an intermittent problem routing to some sites from my MacBook Pro—often Google-related sites (arduino.googlecode.com and ajax.googleapis.com right now, but sometimes even gmail.com.) This prevents StackExchange chat from working, for instance. Funny thing is, my iPad can route to those sites and they're on the same wireless network! I can ping the sites, but not traceroute to them which I find odd. That I can get through via the iPad implies the problem is with the MBP. In any case, calling M1 support is... not helpful. I get the same behaviour when I bypass the Airport Express entirely and plug the MBP directly into the cable modem. Can anybody explain a) how this is even possible and b) how to fix it? mella:~ ratkins$ ping ajax.googleapis.com PING googleapis.l.google.com (209.85.132.95): 56 data bytes 64 bytes from 209.85.132.95: icmp_seq=0 ttl=50 time=11.488 ms 64 bytes from 209.85.132.95: icmp_seq=1 ttl=53 time=13.012 ms 64 bytes from 209.85.132.95: icmp_seq=2 ttl=53 time=13.048 ms ^C --- googleapis.l.google.com ping statistics --- 3 packets transmitted, 3 packets received, 0.0% packet loss round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 11.488/12.516/13.048/0.727 ms mella:~ ratkins$ traceroute ajax.googleapis.com traceroute to googleapis.l.google.com (209.85.132.95), 64 hops max, 52 byte packets traceroute: sendto: No route to host 1 traceroute: wrote googleapis.l.google.com 52 chars, ret=-1 *traceroute: sendto: No route to host traceroute: wrote googleapis.l.google.com 52 chars, ret=-1 ^C mella:~ ratkins$ The traceroute from the iPad goes (and I'm copying this by hand): 10.0.1.1 119.56.34.1 172.20.8.222 172.31.253.11 202.65.245.1 202.65.245.142 209.85.243.156 72.14.233.145 209.85.132.82 From the MBP, I can't traceroute to any of the IPs from 172.20.8.222 onwards. [For extra flavour, not being able to access the above appears to stop me logging in to Server Fault via OpenID and formatting the above traceroutes correctly. Anyone with sufficient rep here to do so, I'd be much obliged.]

  Read the article

• RRAS with DHCP when the IP pool is on a different subnet

  - by John B

  I run a small business network and the last couple of days I have been setting up some equipment to add VPN capabilities to our network. I've got the following set up: Windows 2008 R2 with RRAS - 172.22.200.50 Cisco RV082 router - 172.22.100.1 / 172.22.200.1 The Cisco router only support DHCP on a single class C network; 172.22.100.0/24. On the Cisco router I have set up an additional subnet; 172.22.200.0/24. The DHCP range is 172.22.100.200-254 When a PPTP connection comes in to the router, it is forwarded to my RRAS at 172.22.200.50. If I configure RRAS to assign IPs from a static pool on the 172.22.200.0/24 subnet everything works fine except the DNS suffix / search domain. However, if I set RRAS to use DHCP I am no longer able to contact any devices on the network. The IP I receive is on a different subnet (172.22.100.0/24). Is it possible to still use DHCP as the method of ip assignment in RRAS, even when the IP adresses assigned are in a different subnet? If yes, what piece of configuration am I missing to fix the VPN connection issues mentioned in the paragraph above. The reason I want RRAS with DHCP to work is because from what I have understood, this is the "only" way to hand out a DNS suffix to VPN clients. Any help on this matter is greatly appreciated!

  Read the article

• iptables, blocking large numbers of IP Addresses

  - by Twirrim

  I'm looking to block IP addresses in a relatively automated fashion if they look to be 'screen scraping' content from websites that we host. In the past this was achieved by some ingenious perl scripts and OpenBSD's pf. pf is great in that you can provide it nice tables of IP addresses and it will efficiently handle blocking based on them. However for various reasons (before my time) they made the decision to switch to CentOS. iptables doesn't natively provide the ability to block large numbers of addresses (I'm told it wasn't unusual to be blocking 5000+), and I'm a bit cautious over adding that many rules into an iptable. ipt_recent would be awesome for doing this, plus it provides a lot of flexibility for just severely slowing down access, but there is a bug in the CentOS kernel that is stopping me from using it (reported, but awaiting fix). Using ipset would entail compiling a more up-to-date version of iptables than comes with CentOS which whilst I'm perfectly capable of doing it, I'd rather not do from a patching, security and consistency perspective. Other than those two it looks like nfblock is a reasonable alternative. Is anyone aware of other ways of achieving this? Are my concerns about several thousand IP addresses in iptables as individual rules unfounded?

  Read the article

• certificate working on IP but not on URL

  - by Stephan

  I asked this question on stackoverflow, and I've been suggested to repost it here. I have a problem accessing my site (on https) with IEMobile 9 (WP 7.5). It says it's got problem with the certificate, as if it wasn't valid. Everything works on any other browser or platform I tested (android (several phones and a galaxy tab with stock browser, firefox, opera, dolphin), iOS (iphone and ipad with safari and chrome), an old nokia with symbian, windows 7, linux and mac). To try to solve this I saved the certificate (.cer) on the server and accessed it from the phone browser. It always complained except when I accessed it through the server IP (192.168.xx.xx). At that point it (said it) installed correctly the certificate. If then I try to access the index.html still using the IP all works fine and it doesn't complain about the certificate. If, though, I try to access the index using the actual URL (blah.myblah.com), it complains again about the certificate, as if it wasn't installed! It isn't a problem of DNS, cause that's up and serving the right ip, and the phone is correctly setup to use it. The certificate is signed by geotrust/rapidssl for *.myblah.com.

  Read the article

• Private staff network within public network

  - by pianohacker

  I'm the sysadmin at a small public library. Since I got here a few years ago, I've been trying to set up the network in a secure and simple way. Security is a little tricky; the staff and patron networks need to be separated, for security reasons. Even if I further isolated the public wireless, I'd still rather not trust the security of our public computers. However, the two networks also need to communicate; even if I set up enough VMs so they didn't share any servers, they need to use the same two printers at the very least. Currently, I'm solving this with some jerry-rigged commodity equipment. The patron network, linked together by switches, has a Windows server connected to it for DNS and DHCP and a DSL modem for a gateway. Also on the patron network is the WAN side of a Linksys router. This router is the "top" of the staff network, and has the same Windows server connected on a different port, providing DNS and DHCP, and another, faster DSL modem (separate connections are very useful, especially as we heavily depend on some cloud-hosted software). tl;dr: We have a public network, and a NATed staff network within it. My question is; is this really the best way to do this? The right equipment would likely make my job easier, but anything with more than four ports and even rudimentary management quickly becomes a heavy hit on our budget. (My original question was about an ungodly frustrating DHCP routing issue, but I thought I'd ask whether my network was broken rather than asking about the DHCP problem and being told my network was broken.)

  Read the article

• Home network with two isolated separate subnets, running on cablemodem/router and WRT-router.

  - by Johan Allgoth

  I have a new connection with a nice new router/cable-modem. I'd like to setup it up optimally and needs some pointers. I am a complete n00b when it comes to routing. I want to end up with two separate subnets, 10.1.2.0/24 and 192.168.1.0/24 each available on their own wireless channel/SSID. Both firewalled. I want my wired computers on the gigabit switch, optimally with public ips. I want to be able to reach 192.168.1.0/24 from 10.1.2.0/24, but not vice versa. Everyone should have internet access. Hardware and capabilities: Netgear CG3100. Handles cable connection. Gigabit switch. 802.11n. Can do DHCP, firewall, NAT etc. Can choose subnet. Can turn of NAT and if so hand out up to 4 public ips. Somewhat challenged when it comes to configuration. WRT-router. Runs DD/Open-WRT very stable. 100 Mbit switch. 802.11.g Can do DHCP, firewall, NAT etc. Can choose subnet. Highly configurable. I hope to be able to keep 10.1.2.0/24 on the CG3100, for speed reasons and 192.168.0.0/24 on the WRT-router for quota and user control reasons. On my 10.1.2.0/24 network I plan on running servers for various services. Should I turn of NAT on the WRT-router? Or on the cable modem? Activate what in that case? Is double NAT always f-ed up?

  Read the article

• Forward real IP through Haproxy => Nginx => Unicorn

  - by Hendrik

  How do I forward the real visitors ip adress to Unicorn? The current setup is: Haproxy => Nginx => Unicorn How can I forward the real IP address from Haproxy, to Nginx, to Unicorn? Currently it is always only 127.0.0.1 I read that the X headers are going to be depreceated. http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6648 - how will this impact us? Haproxy Config: # haproxy config defaults log global mode http option httplog option dontlognull option httpclose retries 3 option redispatch maxconn 2000 contimeout 5000 clitimeout 50000 srvtimeout 50000 # Rails Backend backend deployer-production reqrep ^([^\ ]*)\ /api/(.*) \1\ /\2 balance roundrobin server deployer-production localhost:9000 check Nginx Config: upstream unicorn-production { server unix:/tmp/unicorn.ordify-backend-production.sock fail_timeout=0; } server { listen 9000 default; server_name manager.ordify.localhost; root /home/deployer/apps/ordify-backend-production/current/public; access_log /var/log/nginx/ordify-backend-production_access.log; rewrite_log on; try_files $uri/index.html $uri @unicorn; location @unicorn { proxy_set_header X-Forwarded-For $proxy_add_x_forwarded_for; proxy_set_header Host $http_host; proxy_set_header X-Real-IP $remote_addr; proxy_redirect off; proxy_pass http://unicorn-production; proxy_connect_timeout 90; proxy_send_timeout 90; proxy_read_timeout 90; } error_page 500 502 503 504 /500.html; client_max_body_size 4G; keepalive_timeout 10; }

  Read the article

• IP Blacklists and suspicious inbound and outbound traffic

  - by Pantelis Sopasakis

  I administer a web server and recently we had our IP banned (!) from our host after they received a notification e-mail for abuse. In particular our server is allegedly involved in spam attacks over HTTP. The content of the abuse report email we received was not much informative - for example the IP addresses our server is supposed to have attacked against are not included - so I started a wireshark session checking for suspicious traffic over TCP/HTTP while trying to locate possible security holes on the system. (Let me note that the machine runs a Debian OS). Here is an example of such a request... Source: 89.74.188.233 Destination: 12.34.56.78 // my ip Protocol: HTTP Info: GET 'http://www.media.apniworld.com/image.php?type=hv' HTTP/1.0 I manually blacklisted this host (as well as some other ones) blocking them with iptables, but I can't keep on doing manually all day long... I'm looking for an automated way to block such IPs based on: Statistical analysis, pattern recognition or other AI-based analysis (Though, I'm reluctant to trust such a solution, if exists) Public blacklists Using DNSBL I actually found out that 89.74.188.233 is blacklisted. However other IPs which are strongly suspicious like 93.199.112.126 (i.e. http://www.pornstarnetwork.com/account/signin), unfortunately were not blacklisted! What I would like to do is to automatically connect my firewall with DNSBL (or some other blacklist database) and block all traffic towards blacklisted IPs or somehow have my local blacklist automatically updated.

  Read the article

• Cisco BVI: Claiming IP addresses

  - by cjavapro

  I would like to make sure I understand this correctly. Given a Cisco ISO router that is set up with a BVI (a variation of a bridge route).. and the following layout "ISP router" \ "Network switch" # nothing special here. | \ | \ | \ | \ "Router 1 with NAT" "Router 2 with BVI" If I understand correctly.. the outside of a BVI will only respond to IP addresses that have already been claimed on the inside of the BVI... example subnet is 123.123.123.??? and servers inside the BVI on 123.123.123.10 and 123.123.123.11, and the NAT router is holding a public IP address of 123.123.123.50. If a connection comes in to 123.123.123.10 it will be received by router 2 but if it is received on 123.123.123.50, it will be received by router 1 and not received by router 2. and if a connection comes in to 123.123.123.90 (does not exist) it will not be received by either router. Am I correct? Is it true that the BVI router will not even receive packets to IP addresses that it does not see as existing on the inside?

  Read the article

• Route specific network traffic through vpn in virtualbox guest

  - by Sander

  I am running OSX with a windows server 2008 guest in Virtualbox. My goal is to route some of the network traffic in the host through the server guest. This is because the win2008 server has a VPN connection to my workplace using a Smartcard solution which can not operate on OSX. My current set-up is like this: OSX (Host): connected to the internet via en01 Win2008 (Guest): connected to the internet using NAT (lan1 in guest) has a SSTP VPN connection to my workplace is connected to the guest using an Host Only Adapter vboxnet0 (LAN2 in guest) The important part is about the host (OSX). Primarily I want all network traffic to just go through en01. However, all traffic which can only be accessed through the VPN must go through the guest and through the VPN. I have one specific FQDN which can only be accessed through the VPN (say corp.mycompany.com). I do not know much about networking. I thought I would be able to get it to work by bridging together LAN2 and LAN1 but this didn't seem to work this: http://archives.aidanfindlater.com/blog/2010/02/03/use-vpn-for-specific-sites-on-mac-os-x/ using a loopback adapter on WinXP (when I did not have win2008 yet, but this doesn't work because I can't create a PPTP connection) And I've also read about Routing and Remote Access but I have no idea on how to use this. Can someone help me in the right direction?

  Read the article

• Windows 2003 DC to Windows 2008 R2 DC with same name and same IP

  - by TheCleaner

  Environment = Windows 2003 native domain with 8 DCs I've got an old domain controller that is running 2003, CA Enterprise role, DHCP, DNS, a few GPO scripts that point to shares on it, and some other minor functions. All our servers point to it as their primary DNS, and there's lots of references to its IP or name throughout the domain at this point (8+ years later). I really don't feel like manually changing all of this, it would be a pretty massive undertaking. I want to follow this guide: http://msmvps.com/blogs/acefekay/archive/2010/10/09/remove-an-old-dc-and-introduce-a-new-dc-with-the-same-name-and-ip-address.aspx to hopefully end up with basically an "in-place upgrade" so to say. I considered just doing a P2V of the box, but we don't really want to keep it around running 2003 to be honest. I also considered using a CNAME and adding a 2nd IP (the old one) but again, it seemed like it would be cleaner using the attached link. My actual question: Any gotchas or big caution signs when doing what the link suggests? Anyone gone down this road and have advice on how to proceed?

  Read the article

• Host ::1 resolves to remote IP

  - by thebuckst0p

  /etc/hosts files usually have this line, ::1 localhost. I thought ::1 was the equivalent of 127.0.0.1/localhost, and from my reading it seems to be the IPv6 version. So I was using it in Apache for firewalling, "Allow from ::1" and it only allowed local. Then suddenly that stopped working, so I pinged ::1 and got a remote IP address. I tracerouted it and it went through my ISP, through some Microsoft server, then another half dozen steps of asterisks... I'm not sure why this would be (the remote IP), but it doesn't seem good. I grep'd my hard drive for the remote IP and it doesn't appear anywhere. Is this some indicator that I'm being hacked, or normal behavior? Maybe my IPv6 settings are wrong? (This is a brand new MacBookPro with Snow Leopard.) Any ideas about this would be great - what is ::1 supposed to be, why would it be remote, should I be worried, how do I get it back to localhost? Thank you!

  Read the article

• Intermittently uncommunicative subnets

  - by mhd

  Last week proved me a veritable Cassandra: I've always said that it's a bad idea to have only one firewall/router, without a backup or failover. And thus our Cisco PIX went haywire, refusing to route properly. And of course, the only one available here on short notice is me, and while I'm quite grounded in Linux, I'm really a developer not a sysadmin (the fact that this hit me on sysadmin appreciation day is a bit ironic). Anyway, this weekend I tried to hack up a temporary solution: I used an old server with enough NICs (two built-in, four on a card) to serve as a gateway and firewall. Due to some problems with the raid controller, I got only two router distros running, and between Untangle and Ebox I decided for the latter. Now everything is quite okay. I've got all the different subnets we've got here (all with separate switches) talking to each other and even to the internet (Cisco 2800 router, T1 lines). But from time to time (20-60 minute intervals), I get a total routing failure. Our main, office subnet can't talk to our server subnet and can't connect to the internet. This is not the end of a gradual slowdown, either everything's working perfectly or I get a total lack of communication for about two minutes each time. Now I'm a bit at wits end what to check. At least with the default EBox setup, nothing in /var/log shows anything weird and it doesn't exactly have lots of built-in monitoring tools. So I'm hoping someone here could give me some pointers about what to look out for. I did change the ethernet cable from the office switch to the firewall, with no results. I might change switches, although within the switch it seems to work ok enough. Edit: I'm not sure whether this is the sole cause of the problem, but after I noticed a few DHCP entries just before the last drop of connectivity, I tried to reproduce that. And alas, whenever I renew a DHCP connection, I can't access other subnets anymore. Running ISC DHCPD 3.0.6.

  Read the article

• Xen Bridge only working when IP Assigned

  - by m.sr

  Hey! Just had an (in my sense) obscure situation. I have a Xen Server with bridged networking. Everything works fine since month. A while ago i configuresd a second bridge. only some DomUs get an channel on this bridge - my Dom0 doesn't need to / should'nt use this bridge. So just 5 minutes ago while rebooting the xen host (because of an other problem with the UPS) i decided to removed the fixed ip from the the interface of the Dom0 which belongs to the second bridge. So after reboot i noticed that none of the interfaces on the second bridge is available. I couldn't find a problem. Everything was just like before the reboot, except the interface of the Dom0 had no IP address. After a while i tried to give the DomO interface of this bridge an IP again and ... BOOM ... everything is up and running again! WTF? Why is it important to have the interface of a bridge configured in the Dom0? Even when confiugured 'wrong' (complitely different netowkr settings as the network really hanging on the bridge) everythjing works fine ... I don't get it. Could please someone explain? Tnaks a lot!

  Read the article

• IPv6 Addresses causing Exchange Relay whitelists to fail

  - by makerofthings7

  Several of our new Exchange servers are failing to relay messages because it is communicating over IPv6 and not matching any receive connector I previously set up. I'm not sure how we are using IP6 since we only have a IPv4 network and we are routing across subnets. I discovered this by typing helo in from the source to the server that is confused by my IP6 address. I saw the IPv6 message and the custom message I gave this receive connector. (connectors with more permission have a different helo) 220 HUB01 client helo asdf 250 HUB01.nfp.com Hello [fe80::cd8:6087:7b1e:99d4%11] More info about my environment: I have two dedicated Exchange forests each with a distinct purpose. They have no trust and only communicate by SMTP. They both share the same DNS infrastructure via stub zones. What are my options? This is my guess, but I'm no IPv6 expert so I don't know which one is the best option Disable IPv6 Add the IPv6 address to the whitelist (isn't that IP dynamic?) Tell Exchange to use IPv4 instead Figure out why we are using IPv6 instead of IP4

  Read the article

• Samba access works with IP address only

  - by Sebastian Rittau

  I added a Debian etch host (hostname: webserver, IP address: 192.168.101.2) running Samba to a Windows network with a Windows 2003 PDC (IP address 192.168.101.3). The Samba server exports a public guest share, called "Intranet". The server shows up fine in the network, but trying to click on it produces an error dialog, stating I don't have the necessary permissions. So does entering \webserver manually and using \webserver\internet states that the path does not exist. Interestingly, accessing the share by IP address (\192.168.101.2 or \192.168.101.2\intranet) works fine. DNS is configured correctly, and "smbclient //webserver/intranet" on another Linux client works fine. One complicating issue is that the webserver is only a VMware virtual machine running on PDC server. Here is our smb.conf: [global] workgroup = Foobar server string = Webserver wins support = yes ; commenting out these wins server = 192.168.101.3 ; two lines has no effect dns proxy = no guest account = nobody [... snipped some unrelated bits, like logging ...] security = share [... snipped some password-related things ...] domain master = no [intranet] comment = Intranet path = /srv/webserver/contents browseable = yes guest ok = yes guest only = yes read only = yes create mask = 0775 directory mask = 0775

  Read the article

• Slow tracepath on local LAN

  - by Simone Falcini

  I am on EXSi and I have 2 instances: Ubuntu and CentOS. These are the network configurations Ubuntu eth0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:50:56:00:1f:68 inet addr:212.83.153.71 Bcast:212.83.153.71 Mask:255.255.255.255 UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 RX packets:76059 errors:0 dropped:26 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:7224 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:1000 RX bytes:6482760 (6.4 MB) TX bytes:2080684 (2.0 MB) eth1 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:0c:29:46:5a:f2 inet addr:192.168.1.1 Bcast:192.168.1.255 Mask:255.255.255.0 UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 RX packets:252 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:608 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:1000 RX bytes:42460 (42.4 KB) TX bytes:82474 (82.4 KB) /etc/iptables.conf *nat :PREROUTING ACCEPT [142:12571] :INPUT ACCEPT [5:1076] :OUTPUT ACCEPT [8:496] :POSTROUTING ACCEPT [8:496] -A POSTROUTING -s 192.168.1.0/24 -o eth0 -j MASQUERADE COMMIT *filter :INPUT ACCEPT [2:72] :FORWARD ACCEPT [4:336] :OUTPUT ACCEPT [6:328] -A INPUT -i eth1 -p tcp -j ACCEPT -A INPUT -i eth1 -p udp -j ACCEPT -A INPUT -i eth0 -p tcp --dport ssh -j ACCEPT COMMIT CentOS eth0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:0C:29:74:1C:55 inet addr:192.168.1.2 Bcast:192.168.1.255 Mask:255.255.255.0 inet6 addr: fe80::20c:29ff:fe74:1c55/64 Scope:Link UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 RX packets:499 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:475 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:1000 RX bytes:68326 (66.7 KiB) TX bytes:82641 (80.7 KiB) The main problem is that if i execute this command from the CentOS instance ssh 192.168.1.2 it takes more than 20s to connect. It seems like it's routing the connection to the wrong network. What could it be? Thanks!

  Read the article

• Route web traffic through a separate iterface

  - by tkane

  I'd like to route web traffic through the wlan0 interface and the rest through eth1. Can you please help me with the iptables commands to achieve this. Below is my configuration. Thank you :) Edit: This is about desktop configuration not a web server set up. Basically I want to use one of my connections to browse the web and the other one for everything else. ifconfig: eth1 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:1d:09:59:80:70 inet addr:192.168.2.164 Bcast:192.168.2.255 Mask:255.255.255.0 inet6 addr: fe80::21d:9ff:fe59:8070/64 Scope:Link UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 RX packets:33 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:41 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:1000 RX bytes:4771 (4.7 KB) TX bytes:7081 (7.0 KB) Interrupt:17 wlan0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:1c:bf:90:8a:6d inet addr:192.168.1.70 Bcast:192.168.1.255 Mask:255.255.255.0 inet6 addr: fe80::21c:bfff:fe90:8a6d/64 Scope:Link UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 RX packets:77 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:102 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:1000 RX bytes:14256 (14.2 KB) TX bytes:14764 (14.7 KB) route: Kernel IP routing table Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref Use Iface 192.168.2.0 * 255.255.255.0 U 1 0 0 eth1 192.168.1.0 * 255.255.255.0 U 2 0 0 wlan0 link-local * 255.255.0.0 U 1000 0 0 wlan0 default adsl 0.0.0.0 UG 0 0 0 eth1

  Read the article

• iptables, blocking large numbers of IP Addresses

  - by Twirrim

  I'm looking to block IP addresses in a relatively automated fashion if they look to be 'screen scraping' content from websites that we host. In the past this was achieved by some ingenious perl scripts and OpenBSD's pf. pf is great in that you can provide it nice tables of IP addresses and it will efficiently handle blocking based on them. However for various reasons (before my time) they made the decision to switch to CentOS. iptables doesn't natively provide the ability to block large numbers of addresses (I'm told it wasn't unusual to be blocking 5000+), and I'm a bit cautious over adding that many rules into an iptable. ipt_recent would be awesome for doing this, plus it provides a lot of flexibility for just severely slowing down access, but there is a bug in the CentOS kernel that is stopping me from using it (reported, but awaiting fix). Using ipset would entail compiling a more up-to-date version of iptables than comes with CentOS which whilst I'm perfectly capable of doing it, I'd rather not do from a patching, security and consistency perspective. Other than those two it looks like nfblock is a reasonable alternative. Is anyone aware of other ways of achieving this? Are my concerns about several thousand IP addresses in iptables as individual rules unfounded?

  Read the article

• Route web browsing through a separate iterface

  - by tkane

  I'd like to route web browsing through the wlan0 interface and the rest through eth1. Can you please help me with the iptables commands to achieve this. Below is my configuration. Thank you :) Edit: This is about desktop configuration not a web server set up. Basically I want to use one of my connections to browse the web and the other one for everything else. ifconfig: eth1 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:1d:09:59:80:70 inet addr:192.168.2.164 Bcast:192.168.2.255 Mask:255.255.255.0 inet6 addr: fe80::21d:9ff:fe59:8070/64 Scope:Link UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 RX packets:33 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:41 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:1000 RX bytes:4771 (4.7 KB) TX bytes:7081 (7.0 KB) Interrupt:17 wlan0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:1c:bf:90:8a:6d inet addr:192.168.1.70 Bcast:192.168.1.255 Mask:255.255.255.0 inet6 addr: fe80::21c:bfff:fe90:8a6d/64 Scope:Link UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 RX packets:77 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:102 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:1000 RX bytes:14256 (14.2 KB) TX bytes:14764 (14.7 KB) route: Kernel IP routing table Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref Use Iface 192.168.2.0 * 255.255.255.0 U 1 0 0 eth1 192.168.1.0 * 255.255.255.0 U 2 0 0 wlan0 link-local * 255.255.0.0 U 1000 0 0 wlan0 default adsl 0.0.0.0 UG 0 0 0 eth1

  Read the article

• Packet flooding while configuring a Debian L2TP/IPSec client?

  - by Joseph B.

  I'm currently at my wits end trying to configure an L2TP over IPSec VPN connection on my Debian using openswan and xl2tp box connecting to a server of unknown configuration. I've managed to successfully establish the connection and everything appears to be working well until I attempt to set the VPN connection as my default route, at which point I see a massive flood of packets simultaneously being transmitted (on the tune of ~1.5 GB in about 2min) until the server drops my connection. Prior to this network traffic on all my interfaces is minimal. According to iftop the majority of this traffic appears to be coming out of port 12, although I can't seem to figure out how to finger a specific process. If I instead just route traffic destined for 74.0.0.0/8 through it I'm able to access Google's servers through the VPN without issue. My xl2tp.conf file is: [lac vpn-nl] lns = example.vpn.com name = myusername pppoptfile = /etc/ppp/options.l2tpd.client My options.l2tpd.client file is: ipcp-accept-local ipcp-accept-remote refuse-eap require-mschap-v2 noccp noauth idle 1800 mtu 1410 mru 1410 usepeerdns lock name myusername password mypassword connect-delay 5000 And my routing table looks like: Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref Use Iface 10.5.2.1 * 255.255.255.255 UH 0 0 0 ppp0 10.0.50.0 * 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth0 10.50.0.0 * 255.255.0.0 U 0 0 0 eth0 10.0.0.0 * 255.255.0.0 U 0 0 0 eth0 192.168.0.0 * 255.255.0.0 U 0 0 0 eth0 loopback * 255.0.0.0 U 0 0 0 lo default * 0.0.0.0 U 0 0 0 ppp0 I'm seeing absolutely nothing in auth.log and syslog during this time and can't seem to find any other log files it might be writing to. Any suggestions would be appreciated!

  Read the article

• Linksys SFE2000 Interface

  - by boburob

  I have a real problem with a layer 3 Linksys switch. First, every time it looses power, it seems to reset back to an older config. Not only this, but when this happens it looses interface settings on one subnet. This would not be a problem but I am completely unable to get to the interface on the working side. It allows me to log on and then just displays a blank screen. I have tried this on: IE6 IE7 IE8 IE9 Firefox 3.5 Opera Chrome All with the same results, except for Opera, which loads half the interface but nothing I can really use. I really need to get onto this switch so I can sort out routing and VLAN tagged ports, so if anyone has any ideas on either of these issues please let me know ASAP! Thanks! Also, due to its location and my lack of laptops with serial connections I cannot putty into it. UPDATE: Looked into this a bit more and it looks like this model of switch does not save the current config to boot unless you make sure to save it yourself, which explains the first issue, however the broken interface is more worrying!

  Read the article

• Samba access works with IP address only

  - by Sebastian Rittau

  I added a Debian etch host (hostname: webserver, IP address: 192.168.101.2) running Samba to a Windows network with a Windows 2003 PDC (IP address 192.168.101.3). The Samba server exports a public guest share, called "Intranet". The server shows up fine in the network, but trying to click on it produces an error dialog, stating I don't have the necessary permissions. So does entering \webserver manually and using \webserver\internet states that the path does not exist. Interestingly, accessing the share by IP address (\192.168.101.2 or \192.168.101.2\intranet) works fine. DNS is configured correctly, and "smbclient //webserver/intranet" on another Linux client works fine. One complicating issue is that the webserver is only a VMware virtual machine running on PDC server. Here is our smb.conf: [global] workgroup = Foobar server string = Webserver wins support = yes ; commenting out these wins server = 192.168.101.3 ; two lines has no effect dns proxy = no guest account = nobody [... snipped some unrelated bits, like logging ...] security = share [... snipped some password-related things ...] domain master = no [intranet] comment = Intranet path = /srv/webserver/contents browseable = yes guest ok = yes guest only = yes read only = yes create mask = 0775 directory mask = 0775

  Read the article

• Service redirection on same network

  - by Unode

  I have a network on which I run multiple servers each dedicated to a given service. Because most services run on distinct ports I'm currently looking for a way of unifying "all" services into a single "proxy" machine. The idea is to abstract which machine is being accessed but still allow direct connection if needed/requested. This "proxy" machine has only one network interface which is part of the same network as all the other service providing machines. I've looked into Routing and NAT but I've so far failed to figure out how to make it work. I tried to achieve this using shorewall but couldn't find clear examples. However I'm not entirely sure this is the best/simplest strategy. With that said, what would be the best way of achieving this result? Example case: Proxy IP - Listening port - Send requests to 192.168.0.50 80 192.168.0.1:80 " 22 192.168.0.2:2222 " 3306 192.168.0.3:3000 " 5432 192.168.0.4:5432 " 5222 192.168.0.5:5222 PS: I'm not concerned with the single-point-of-failure nature of the proxy. Thanks

  Read the article

• Linux: Three default gateways?

  - by Daniel

  My server has three default gateways, how can that be? Shouldn't there be one default gw? I have three NICs, each attached to a separate subnet: server1:~# route Kernel IP routing table Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref Use Iface 10.5.0.0 * 255.255.255.224 U 0 0 0 eth3 localnet * 255.255.255.224 U 0 0 0 eth0 192.168.8.0 * 255.255.255.192 U 0 0 0 eth1 default 10.5.0.1 0.0.0.0 UG 0 0 0 eth3 default 192.168.8.1 0.0.0.0 UG 0 0 0 eth1 default 10.1.0.1 0.0.0.0 UG 0 0 0 eth0 Sometimes, I can't ping a host on the Internet, sometimes I can. What I want is traffic to the Internet (0.0.0.0) routed through a specific NIC. Can I just add a route for 0.0.0.0 and default gw to one of the eth0-3 interfaces? Will it break my connection? I'm using Debian, here is my /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 allow-hotplug eth0 iface eth0 inet static address 10.1.0.4 netmask 255.255.255.224 network 10.1.0.0 broadcast 10.1.0.31 gateway 10.1.0.1 allow-hotplug eth1 iface eth1 inet static address 192.168.8.4 netmask 255.255.255.192 network 192.168.8.0 broadcast 192.168.8.63 gateway 192.168.8.1 allow-hotplug eth3 iface eth3 inet static address 10.5.0.4 netmask 255.255.255.224 network 10.5.0.0 broadcast 10.5.0.31 gateway 10.5.0.1

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86  | Next Page >