Search Results

Search found 4248 results on 170 pages for 'adsl router'.

Page 80/170 | < Previous Page | 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87  | Next Page >

  • File download speed issue over a dedicated fibre link

    - by nixnotwin
    My ISP has installed a fibre based dedicated internet connection at the place where I work. In the beginning the connection terminated at one of the ISP's core routers. It resulted in a strange issue. Eventhough the assigned speed was 5mbps, when tests were done by downloading large files over http and ftp from multiple locations, the speed never went above 2mbps. But bittorrent downloads reached 5mbps. Even file download from the ISP servers were fine. So, at the ISP our link was attached directly to their edge router. After this file downloads from high bandwidth servers, like Google and MS, reached the 5 mbps limit. Sometimes the speed would fall down below 2 mbps and suddenly it will go up to the 5 mbps limit ( it keeps on happening during any single file download). But other downloads like ubuntu apt repositories still struggle to go above 2 mbps. The engineers at the ISP have not been able to sort out the issue. After they moved us to their edge router instead of giving us 8 public ip's, they just gave 4 ip's. When we enquired about it, they told us that giving more ip's would result in arp overload at their edge router. But somehow I was able to convince them to give us the 8 ip's which we wanted. But the file download issue has remained. What might be the reason for files from different location getting downloaded with different speeds, that too with heavy fluctuation in speeds? I have downloaded files from same url's from a connection belonging to another smaller ISP, and the speeds were fine and reached full 5 mbps limit.

    Read the article

  • Can't do more than one activity at a time after switching modems

    - by vallorn
    I had to replace the Motorola 2210 DSL modem that I got when I signed up for AT&T DSL Direct a few years ago. The modem kept randomly restarting and it eventually gave out on me. I am assuming overheating was the cause here because it was almost too hot to touch. In any case, I replaced it with a Netgear DM111PSP. It works fine but I can't do more than one activity at a time with it. If my wife is watching Netflix, there is a noticeable delay/latency when trying to view web sites. It's even worse if I try to play an on-line game while she's streaming; the game is basically unplayable. The odd thing is, the only other activity I can do while she's streaming is stream another Netflix show myself. There is no delay when doing that, no buffering either. I'm not a networking guy so maybe there is an explanation for it but I find that kind of odd. I've tried using QoS through my Buffalo N600 wireless router and it doesn't seem to help. With the old Motorola modem, she could be watching Netflix while I play a game and everything worked just fine. Is there anything I can check or reconfigure possibly on the modem that would account for this? Should I just ditch the Netgear and get another modem instead? I have the Netgear modem connected to the Buffalo router in a bridged mode. Its the same exact setup as I had with the Motorola and as far as I can tell, it's not the router that is the cause.

    Read the article

  • best-practices to block social sites

    - by adopilot
    In our company we have around 100 workstation with internet access, And day by day situation getting more worst and worst from perspective of using internet access for the purpose of doing private jobs, and wasting time on social sites. Open hearted I am not for blocking sites like Facebook, Youtube, and others similar but day by day my colleagues do not finishing his tasks and while I looking at their monitor all time they are ruining IE or Mozilla and chat and things like that. In other way Ill like to block youtube sometime when We have very poor internet access speed, Here is my questions: Do other companies blocking social sites ? Do I need dedicated device for that like hardware firewall, super expensive router Or I can do that whit my existing FreeBSD 6.1 self made router with two lan cards and configured nat to act like router. I was trying do that using ipfw and routerfirewall but without success, My code looks like ipfw add 25 deny tcp from 192.168.0.0/20 to www.facebook.com ipfw add 25 deny udp from 192.168.0.0/20 to www.facebook. ipfw add 25 deny tcp from 192.168.0.0/20 to www.dernek. ipfw add 25 deny udp from 192.168.0.0/20 to www.dernek. ipfw add 25 deny tcp from 192.168.0.0/20 to www.youtube. ipfw add 25 deny udp from 192.168.0.0/20 to www.youtube.com

    Read the article

  • Cisco QoS Guidance

    - by Kyle Brandt
    I have a 10M connection to the internet that is hooked into a 100M port. I am getting started with QoS, and am hopping for a little guidance on setting it up on a Cisco 3825 router. Right now I am going forward with the idea that I have to implement it on my router, and the provider can't provide QoS for me. How I envision it working is that the QoS will drop or queue packets on my router and that will help prevent a situation where the provider has to start dropping a lot of packets. Right now all I am tasked with is making sure that one of the 3 LANs gets a certain slice (say 3M for Gig Lan1) of the 10M internet connection (But ideally this will be more flexible in the Future). 10M Internet on 100M port on HWIC-4ESW +-----------------------+ | | Gig Lan1 | Cisco 3825 | Lan3 on HWIC-4ESW | | +-----------------------+ Gig Lan2 I need to learn more about QoS, but having a target technology and maybe example configuration will help me wrap my head around the reading I am doing a little more. Which Cisco QoS Technology do you recommend for this particular situation? Have a basic sample config of how this might work? Right now the 10M line is not congested, so this more to have something in place in case it starts to become mildly congested in the future. I do have VOIP at one location connected to this one over the Internet that goes through a VPN tunnel. Everything else that is between this location and other offices is on a separate MPLS network.

    Read the article

  • network latency, TCP and UDP packets

    - by user115848
    Hello recently my network has started to cause me lots of problems. I have a cable modem, connected to a tp-link router (with some port forwarding). Everything was working fine then i started to get lots of udp (port 53) "UNREPLIED" logs in the router. Now there are tcp UNREPLIED logs too. This is causing lots of latency and failed connections when trying to connect to different internet sites. Also, we run an openfire server for spark connections, and I believe its causing connectivity issues for some users who are trying to connect using Spark (some people connect fine, others don't). Please see screen shot below for packet logs. It has to be something internally, as I connected straight to the comcast modem and i was able to connect to the internet and various sites as normal. I tried to swap out the router with a different and got the same issue. I scanned both my internal dns servers for viruses or malware and it came up empty. Another anomaly is that when i try to connect to www.cnn.com, i get redirected to the different site. I scanned my own machine for hijacks. Not sure if this is related to the networking issue. Please let me know if you have any ideas for troubleshooting.

    Read the article

  • How to point a subdomain to local server with dynamic IP

    - by jlego
    I see there are many related questions to this one, however the answers given seem to be a little vague for a novice like me. I've got a dedicated LAMP stack running Fedora 16 locally on my home network. Everything works fine internally. I can access the Apache server from other machines on the network using the internal IP in a browser. I'm using the stack for a local file server as well as a development environment for websites. There are a couple of reasons why I would like the development sites hosted on the machine to be available publicly. 1.) I use a CMS that has paid add-ons which allows you to assign the paid license to a domain. I can't develop with paid add-ons on the closed dev server. 2.) I would occasionally like for clients to be able to view the site dev at late stages before it goes live. I have a domain (foo.com, and I want to point a *sub*domain (dev.foo.com) to the local server. I know this is best accomplished with a Static IP, however my IP from my ISP is Dynamic and I don't think there is any way to change that. From what I have read, services like ZoneEdit & DynDNS are supposed to be able to accomplish this, but I have tried both and found it very confusing. Also the server is behind a router and I have also read that you need to set up DDNS(?) in your router, that many routers have presets for these services, and I've found that DynDNS is the only one my router seems to support.

    Read the article

  • Vista laptop 1 connects to network but Vista laptop 2 doesn't

    - by Jaips
    (Sorry if this is a dulipcate. I did a hunt but couldn't find matching question) We recently got a new router for our network (thomson TG585v8). It was already pre-configured by the ISP and was easy to setup. Both Vista laptops in this home network connected without trouble as well a iPod touch, all via wifi. In the last two days one of the laptops has been unable to connect cleanly to the network (connects as unidentified network). The other laptop, and iPod have not had any issues. I can't think of anything that has changed to make this happen now. I have rebooted the laptop and the router. I have updated the laptop wireless driver I have checked the laptop is set to automatically get IP I have logged into the router which correctly identifies all three wireless devices. The problem laptop connects via LAN without issue. Some things that may or may not matter: The problem laptop also sometimes uses a 3G dongle Both laptops use Windows Live Mesh to sync folders Laptop is usually set to go to sleep NB: it seems this is an intermittent issue, after an hour (since i noticed it) it seems to have fixed itself. Would love ideas though to solve this problem for good.

    Read the article

  • How to Load Balance 2 Internet Connections on a Windows 7 machine?

    - by Jimmy Chandra
    It's sort of related to this particular question, but that one is on Mac. I am looking for similar solution on Windows 7. I have 2 network connections: (Connection A) Wireless terminal connecting to ISP A (3G / EVDO internet provider) (Connection B) Broadband wired connection connecting to ISP B (Cable internet provider) Both has access to the internet. When I try connecting to a website and checking the networking tab on my Task Manager, I only see the network traffic being routed to only Connection A. Is there a way to make the computer to utilize both network (in a sense using all the bandwidth available from both the Cable ISP and the 3G / EVDO ISP) at the same time? If so, what do I need to do to set this up ... on Windows 7? Here is a bit more info on my network connections (ipconfig /all): PPP adapter Wireless Terminal: IPv4: aa.bb.ccc.ddd(preferred) Subnet mask: 255.255.255.255 Default Gateway: 0.0.0.0 DNS: aa.ee.f.ggg aa.ee.f.hhh Primary Wins: jjj.ii.k.l Secondary Wins: jjj.ii.k.m Ethernet adapter LAN: IPv4: 192.168.1.100 (connected to a router by wired that itself connect to a cable modem) subnet mask: 255.255.255.0 Default gateway: 192.168.1.1 (the wireless router) DHCP: 192.168.1.1 (the wireless router) DNS: xxx.yy.zz.ww rr.sss.t.uuu For my own privacy, I don't believe the actual number matters, the patterns are representative of the ip numbering scheme...

    Read the article

  • Delete ARP cache on Mac OS when moving from one Wifi network to the other

    - by Puneet
    I am facing wireless connectivity problems when I move from one Wifi network to the other. Here is how it happens: I am at my friends place. I connect to his Wifi. His Wifi router ip address is 192.168.0.1. Everything is fine I close my laptop, come back to my house, open my laptop and I connect to the Wifi Network at my place. Different ESSID, but the Wifi router address is the same 192.168.0.1. At this point I cant get to anything on the internet. To debug I try to see if I can ping the router (192.168.0.1), I cant. I get a no route to host. Meanwhile airport tells me Im connected to Wifi. I see the arp cache and I see a permanent entry for 192.168.0.1 ? (192.168.0.1) at 5c:d9:98:65:73:6c on en1 permanent [ethernet] This permanent bit looks problematic. I go ahead and delete the arp cache entry and all is fine with the world until I go back to my friends place where the same situation plays out. Now my question is, why the hell is this happening? If there is no way around it, can I run a script on Wifi connect/disconnect to clear out the arp cache? Im using Mac OS X $uname -a Darwin 10.8.0 Darwin Kernel Version 10.8.0: Tue Jun 7 16:33:36 PDT 2011; root:xnu-1504.15.3~1/RELEASE_I386 i386

    Read the article

  • Get Internal IP Address From DHCP Hostname

    - by ell
    I would like to try and get an internal ip address of one of the computers on my network. The reason for this is I have a little home server box downstairs but every time I want to SSH into it I have to open my router configuration and go on the DHCP client table and look at the IP address. For example I would like to be able to go ssh ell-sever instead of ssh 192.168.1.105 or whatever it happens to be. My network configuration is like so: Router downstairs that is connected to the Internet and is running a DHCP server My server computer (ell-server) is a headless pc connected to the router via ethernet cable. Running Ubuntu 11.04 Server Edition My laptop upstairs (ell-laptop) that is running Ubuntu 11.10 Desktop Edition connected wirelessly Other (irrelevant) computers - 2 x Windows XP, 1 x Xubuntu - all connected with cables. (It seemed to me the method of connection isn't useful information but I put it in anyway - just in case. If I have missed any information please tell me) Do I have to run a DNS server on one of my computers? If so which one? And does that mean I will have to run a DDNS client on each computer? Thanks in advance, ell.

    Read the article

  • If I partition a drive connected via eSata will it show different partitions when connected via USB?

    - by jeffreypriebe
    I have an odd problem with an external drive. I'm formatting it connected to my laptop prior to connecting it to my router. The HDD enclosure has both an eSata and USB connections. Generally, I connect it via eSata to my laptop. I created my partitions and connected it to the router, but I see partition information that is different than what I created. After chasing leads concerning large HDD size, I mindlessly connected the HDD to my laptop with USB. Lo! I see the same partitions as the router. Attached are screenshots using the same program and the HDD in question. The only difference is the connection. For the first, I connected via eSata and hit "refresh" on the partition program. Then, turned off the HDD, disconnected the eSata cable, and connected via USB. Power and refresh. eSata: reports a total HDD size of 2328 GB, with four partitions (the third being 1.96TB) USB: reports a total HDD size of 280 GB, with three partitions (the third being 279 GB) Any idea why this is happening? It looks like it clearly is an issue of the 4K sector size and not playing nice with the USB enclosure. I tried it eSata and USB in Windows and Linux and it appears consistently that eSata is reporting correctly, USB incorrectly.

    Read the article

  • VPN Client solution

    - by realtek
    I have several VPN's that I need to establish on a daily basis but from multiple workstations. What I would like to do it have either a server or vpn router that can perform this connection itself and that I can then route traffic through this device or server depending on the subnet I am trying to reach. The issue is that I only use VPN Clients to connect, so I am basically trying to achieve almost a site to site VPN but by using basically a VPN Client type connection from my network. The main VPN Client I use is the Sonicwall Global VPN Client where I initially use a Preshared Key and then it always prompts me for a username and password (not RSA key). My question is, is there any type of linux distro or even a hardware vpn router that can do this and connect to a Sonicwall device as if it were a client? I have tried pfSense which is very good but it fails to connect, probably due to a mismatch of settings. I have tried many others. Even dd-wrt on my router but it does not support whatever protocol Sonicwall uses. (I thought L2TP/IPSec) but it appears it may not be that. Any advice would be great! The other other thing I have thought of that I have not tried yet is Windows Server Routing and Remote Access but I have a feeling that won't work either. Thanks

    Read the article

  • Will a 2.4Ghz WAP intefere with a 5.0Ghz WAP if placed directly next to each other

    - by Dan
    This is mostly a curiosity question to people who know more about radio and wi-fi than I. The 2.4Ghz band is massively overpopulated near my house to the point of sometimes getting 1000ms pings to the router from only a few feet away. inSSIDer finds at least 10 broadcasting SSID's within around 15 seconds of starting, so this isn't a real surprise to me! Sometimes I can get good results by changing the channel to something like 3 or 8, but it's usually temporary as the others use Auto Channel and hop around. Now, the router I have is capable of 5.0Ghz, as is the laptop I type this on. Switching to 5.0Ghz gives superb results: I can download at ~90Mbps and get consistent 1ms pings. The problem is that only this laptop supports 5.0Ghz! My question: Would I still get decent 5.0Ghz performance if I place a 2.4Ghz access point directly next to my router? And, indeed, will 2.4Ghz continue working as 'normal'? Testing would be an obvious step, but I threw all my superfluous equipment out in a recent house move. My understanding is that I should get good performance, certainly in comparison to having two devices using the same frequency range, but I do believe there will be some impact by the virtue of them being directly next to each other. (Cabling is not an option due to it being a rented house)

    Read the article

  • Slow Local Network, Windows 7, Snow Leopard, WiFi/Wired

    - by WerkkreW
    Hello - I am experiencing really poor local network performance in my home. I was recently using a Linksys WRT54G Router with DD-WRT on it, and a couple comparable Linksys-G PCI cards for connectivity but decided to upgrade hoping it would help with my performance issues. The computers in my house are connected as follows: Comcast Business Class Commercial 25mbps/10mbps (Verified with SpeakEasy and Speedtest.net) D-Link DGL-4500 Wireless N Router Windows 7x64 - D-Link DWA-552 Wireless-N Windows 7x64 - D-Link DWA-552 Wireless-N Mac Mini 10.6.2 - AirPort Extreme N Playstation 3, Hard Wired Xbox 360, Hard Wired Essentially the problem is very specific. Web browsing and uploading/downloading files from the internet is fine, more than fine. But if I want to say, Stream a video from one of my Windows 7 computers to my PS3, or copy a large video file between either of the PC's or the Mac, I get a consistent 500-900Kbps throughput at the high end. If I open my network browser, or try to browse my homegroup the response time is horrible. Both of my Windows computers are showing Strong wireless signals with a connection speed of 300Mbps. I know I can never expect to achieve anything near those speeds, but 500Kbps? Here is what I have tried so far: Enabled Single mode N-only and N/G Only on router WPA2 with AES Encrpytion Disabled "Remote Differential Compression" in Windows 7 Disabled TCP "Auto-Tuning" Used other software for file copies such as "Teracopy" I am at the end of my rope. Unfortunately I live in a 75 year old home with plaster walls, so hard-wiring my entire house isn't really an option I can handle right now. Any ideas to help me get decent speed when transferring files across my network would be greatly appreciated.

    Read the article

  • How to serve media across home network?

    - by TK Kocheran
    I'm looking to share my media across my home network. Router fully supports running a DLNA server, but I don't know if it'd be better to run the server from my main server computer instead of from the router, as the router would have to operate off of a network share and my server can operate directly off of the files. Here's what I need to serve, in order of importance: ISO 1:1 DVD rips (4-8GB files), MP4/H.264 encoded videos, MKV videos, MP3 files, JPEG/CR2 images. Maybe I'm completely ludicrous for wanting to push full DVD files across my network, but in reality, I would assume that only the parts of the actual file needed (ie: menu, main video payload for main title) would be served at any one time. Plus, encoding takes time and precious disk space, so why not stream it 1:1 ;) Does anyone know of the best way to accomplish this? Main goal is to serve it to Logitech Revue downstairs and secondary goal is to serve it to other computers in the house. For music, I assume I could run a DAAP server, but I don't think that the Revue supports that (and I can't exactly throw together an app that does it just yet).

    Read the article

  • How do I access my samba drive through several layers of network topology?

    - by stephenmm
    I have a new windows 7 Home Premium machine that is in a different room than my main computer area. As such I have to use a bridge and another router. Everything is working wonderfully except I cannot access the SAMBA drive with the new machine. I know that SAMBA is accessible as an older WinXP machine can access it. A picture of my network would probably be helpfull: To ISP | | +---------------------------+ | WAN | | Cable Modem | | (2WIRE678) | | | | | +---------------------------+ | +---------------------------+ | | (|) (|) +-----------+ | Belkin Router | | | | Wireless | | (F5D) |--+ +--| WinXP | | | |SAMBA USER | | | +-----------+ +---------------------------+ | | | | +------------+ | | Ubuntu | | | Apache + | | |SAMBA Server| | +------------+ | | +---------------------------+ | | | Netgear Bridge | | (XET1001) | | | +---------------------------+ # # +---------------------------+ | | | Netgear Bridge | | (XET1001) | | | +---------------------------+ | +---------------------------+ | | | D-Link Router | | (DI-524) | | | | | +---------------------------+ | | | | +-----------+ | | | Win7 | |SAMBA USER?| +-----------+ More interesting data points: 1. I can ping the SAMBA server from the Win7 machine locally (Ie. 192.168.2.2) 2. I can access the webserver from the Win7 machine locally (Ie. 192.168.2.2) 3. I followed the advice to get Win7 and SAMBA to play nice: http://www.tannerwilliamson.com/2009/09/windows-7-seven-network-file-sharing-fix-samba-smb/ Sorry for being so long winded but it is kind of complex and I am really at a loss as to how to fix it. If any of you have some suggestions I would love to hear it!

    Read the article

  • Nagios check_host_alive and check_ping not showing host as down

    - by Kyle
    I am using the check_host_alive command to send 5 packets every minute to all my routers at remote locations. I noticed today I received a notification from The AT&T Global Client Support Center that a router was down (which can take 5-30 minutes to send these notices out) and never received a notice from Nagios. I went onto Nagios and it is was showing the host as alive with a latency of 0ms. This tells me it is seeing the automated response from my router in the data center that, "TTL expired in transit" as a reply from the remote router. Is there anyway for me to tell nagios to check where the reply is comming from? I feel like other people have to of had this issue... I tested it with the check_ping command and it produced the same results. I have the command defined has %hostname% and the proper IP in the host definition, and it works fine for telling me the latency is high. Any ideas are welcome, I have already exercised my Google skills with no results. EDIT: root@IM-UBTU:/# /usr/local/nagios/libexec/check_ping -H 192.168.250.1 -w 100.0,10% -c 200.0,20% -vvv CMD: /bin/ping -n -U -w 10 -c 5 192.168.250.1 Output: PING 192.168.250.1 (192.168.250.1) 56(84) bytes of data. Output: From 10.69.10.2 icmp_seq=1 Time to live exceeded It knows something is wrong why doesn't it give me a warning?

    Read the article

  • Route through site-to-site VPN not working

    - by Jonathan
    I'm trying to set up a site-to-site VPN using RRAS on two 2K8r2 servers since yesterday. The connection is working at this point, but I can't get it to send traffic from one site to the other one. Set up: the set up is the same on both sites: the server is connected to a router that's connected to a modem. The routers act like a DHCP-server and assign IP addresses from the range subnet.21-subnet-.100. Both servers use a static IP address, subnet.11, and are set up as DMZ. Configuration: the servers are configured using the wizard to set up a site-to-site connection. This works with a demand-dial interface and a PPTP VPN connection. As mentioned, the VPN connection work properly. Problem: I can't get the servers to send the traffic for the other site, to be sent through the VPN connection. I added a static route on both server (home, office 1) and I can see the result in the IP routing table (home, office 1). I did this because the route didn't show up automatically. My guess is that this last step isn't right, for example because the routing table states "non demand-dial", which seems not correct. Home: Subnet: 10.0.1.0/24 Router: 10.0.1.1 Server: 10.0.1.11 (DMZ) DHCP: 10.0.1.21-10.0.1.100 RRAS DHCP: 10.0.1.101-10.0.1.150 Office 1: Subnet: 10.0.2.0/24 Router: 10.0.2.1 Server: 10.0.2.11 (DMZ) DHCP: 10.0.2.21-10.0.2.100 RRAS DHCP: 10.0.2.101-10.0.2.150 I hope someone has an idea to get this route working!

    Read the article

  • Slow Local Network, Windows 7, Snow Leopard, WiFi/Wired

    - by WerkkreW
    I am experiencing really poor local network performance in my home. I was recently using a Linksys WRT54G Router with DD-WRT on it, and a couple comparable Linksys-G PCI cards for connectivity but decided to upgrade hoping it would help with my performance issues. The computers in my house are connected as follows: Comcast Business Class Commercial 25mbps/10mbps (Verified) D-Link DGL-4500 Wireless N Router Windows 7x64 - D-Link DWA-552 Wireless-N Windows 7x64 - D-Link DWA-552 Wireless-N Mac Mini 10.6.2 - AirPort Extreme N Playstation 3, Hard Wired Xbox 360, Hard Wired Essentially the problem is very specific. Web browsing and uploading/downloading files from the internet is fine, more than fine. But if I want to say, Stream a video from one of my Windows 7 computers to my PS3, or copy a large video file between either of the PC's or the Mac, I get a consistent 500-900Kbps throughput at the high end. If I open my network browser, or try to browse my homegroup the response time is horrible. Both of my Windows computers are showing Strong wireless signals with a connection speed of 300Mbps. I know I can never expect to achieve anything near those speeds, but 500Kbps? Here is what I have tried so far: Enabled Single mode N-only and N/G Only on router WPA2 with AES Encrpytion Disabled "Remote Differential Compression" in Windows 7 Disabled TCP "Auto-Tuning" Used other software for file copies such as "Teracopy" I am at the end of my rope. Unfortunately I live in a 75 year old home with plaster walls, so hard-wiring my entire house isn't really an option I can handle right now. Any ideas to help me get decent speed when transferring files across my network would be greatly appreciated.

    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

  • Routing for remote gateway over VPN in Vista/7 broken?

    - by Raymond
    Hi, Situation is as follows. Home computer running Windows 7, sets up VPN connection (LT2P + IPSec, "use remote gateway" disabled) to office. Subnet is 192.168.64.x Office has Draytek Vigor 2920 router, subnet is 192.168.32.x What happens? - VPN connection itself works fine - Can ping any machine on the remote network - When trying to open a webpage from a host in the remote network, the remote server logs the incoming request, but the browser hangs on "waiting for..." and eventually times out. I have observed this problem on Windows Vista and Windows 7. On Windows XP however there is no problem like described above. The only clue I have is that there is a difference in the routing between XP and Vista/7. The output of "route print" on Windows XP looks like this: (See www.latunyi.com/routing_xp.png) So here the gateway for the 192.168.32.x subnet is the IP address that the local computer has in the remote network. The output of "route print" on Windows 7 (and Windows Vista) looks like this: (See www.latunyi.com/routing_win7.png") Now the gateway for the 192.168.32.x subnet is the IP address of the VPN router (32.1). I don't know if that causes this trouble, but it seems a bit strange. Enabling "use default gateway on remote network" doesn't make a difference. Using the new option "Disable class based route addition" in Windows 7 only makes the route to the VPN router disappear. I am really puzzled here. I assume the VPN routing can't be broken in both Vista and Windows 7, and this should just work without manually adding routes. I hope someone has a solution for this problem :-). Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Switch to IPv6 and get rid of NAT? Are you kidding?

    - by Ernie
    So our ISP has set up IPv6 recently, and I've been studying what the transition should entail before jumping into the fray. I've noticed three very important issues: Our office NAT router (an old Linksys BEFSR41) does not support IPv6. Nor does any newer router, AFAICT. The book I'm reading about IPv6 tells me that it makes NAT "unnecessary" anyway. If we're supposed to just get rid of this router and plug everything directly to the Internet, I start to panic. There's no way in hell I'll put our billing database (With lots of credit card information!) on the internet for everyone to see. Even if I were to propose setting up Windows' firewall on it to allow only 6 addresses to have any access to it at all, I still break out in a cold sweat. I don't trust Windows, Windows' firewall, or the network at large enough to even be remotely comfortable with that. There's a few old hardware devices (ie, printers) that have absolutely no IPv6 capability at all. And likely a laundry list of security issues that date back to around 1998. And likely no way to actually patch them in any way. And no funding for new printers. I hear that IPv6 and IPSEC are supposed to make all this secure somehow, but without physically separated networks that make these devices invisible to the Internet, I really can't see how. I can likewise really see how any defences I create will be overrun in short order. I've been running servers on the Internet for years now and I'm quite familiar with the sort of things necessary to secure those, but putting something Private on the network like our billing database has always been completely out of the question. What should I be replacing NAT with, if we don't have physically separate networks?

    Read the article

  • Wifi antenna extension with F-connector/RG-6(RG-59) cable?

    - by rjz2000
    In an older house, the wire mesh in walls surrounding the furnace behave like a Faraday cage and block wifi signals. It is also difficult to lay new cable, however there is television cable to multiple locations due to there once having been a roof-installed, television antenna. It would be relatively trivial to install the wifi router at the center distribution point, then have the antenna broadcasting/receiving the signal plugged in at each of the old television outlets. I assume that it would not be too difficult to find an adapter for SMA <- F-type connectors. The cable is actually RG-59 rather than RG-6, but I assume that it still has relatively good RF isolation along its length, which is no more than a couple hundred feet in any direction. Does anyone know a problem with the idea? Will a router get confused if there is /too little/ interference between the two antenna? Is that length of cable (~100ft) too long for the signal a router broadcasts? I have seen that it is also possible to use old ~$30/each FiOS cable modems available on eBay to extend a network over television cable. However, that seems like a less elegant solution, and might interfere with upnp and dlna services I'd like to have work on a single network. Thanks if anyone has answers or suggestions before I try this project!

    Read the article

  • Wifi antenna extension with F-connector/RG-6(RG-59) cable?

    - by rjz2000
    In an older house, the wire mesh in walls surrounding the furnace behave like a Faraday cage and block wifi signals. It is also difficult to lay new cable, however there is television cable to multiple locations due to there once having been a roof-installed, television antenna. It would be relatively trivial to install the wifi router at the center distribution point, then have the antenna broadcasting/receiving the signal plugged in at each of the old television outlets. I assume that it would not be too difficult to find an adapter for SMA <- F-type connectors. The cable is actually RG-59 rather than RG-6, but I assume that it still has relatively good RF isolation along its length, which is no more than a couple hundred feet in any direction. Does anyone know a problem with the idea? Will a router get confused if there is /too little/ interference between the two antenna? Is that length of cable (~100ft) too long for the signal a router broadcasts? I have seen that it is also possible to use old ~$30/each FiOS cable modems available on eBay to extend a network over television cable. However, that seems like a less elegant solution, and might interfere with upnp and dlna services I'd like to have work on a single network. Thanks if anyone has answers or suggestions before I try this project!

    Read the article

  • Variable TTL inside a LAN

    - by user140783
    I recently discovered that ping my local router, returns different TTL values??. The ping 3 switch must pass through before reaching the router, there may be the problem? 192.168.1.99 is the IP of my router , a Cisco WRT120N Thank you! Respuesta desde 192.168.1.99: bytes=32 tiempo<1m TTL=190 Respuesta desde 192.168.1.99: bytes=32 tiempo=29ms TTL=3 Respuesta desde 192.168.1.99: bytes=32 tiempo<1m TTL=117 Respuesta desde 192.168.1.99: bytes=32 tiempo<1m TTL=131 Respuesta desde 192.168.1.99: bytes=32 tiempo<1m TTL=66 Respuesta desde 192.168.1.99: bytes=32 tiempo<1m TTL=66 Respuesta desde 192.168.1.99: bytes=32 tiempo<1m TTL=66 Respuesta desde 192.168.1.99: bytes=32 tiempo<1m TTL=111 Respuesta desde 192.168.1.99: bytes=32 tiempo<1m TTL=240 Respuesta desde 192.168.1.99: bytes=32 tiempo<1m TTL=66 Respuesta desde 192.168.1.99: bytes=32 tiempo<1m TTL=66 Respuesta desde 192.168.1.99: bytes=32 tiempo<1m TTL=66 Respuesta desde 192.168.1.99: bytes=32 tiempo<1m TTL=51 Respuesta desde 192.168.1.99: bytes=32 tiempo<1m TTL=190 Respuesta desde 192.168.1.99: bytes=32 tiempo<1m TTL=66 Traceroute G:\Documents and Settings\Administrador>tracert 192.168.1.99 Traza a la dirección maxi2011 [192.168.1.99] sobre un máximo de 30 saltos: 1 <1 ms <1 ms <1 ms maxi2011 [192.168.1.99] Traza completa. G:\Documents and Settings\Administradorping 192.168.1.99 Haciendo ping a 192.168.1.99 con 32 bytes de datos: Respuesta desde 192.168.1.99: bytes=32 tiempo<1m TTL=190 Respuesta desde 192.168.1.99: bytes=32 tiempo<1m TTL=190 Respuesta desde 192.168.1.99: bytes=32 tiempo<1m TTL=117 Respuesta desde 192.168.1.99: bytes=32 tiempo<1m TTL=117 Estadísticas de ping para 192.168.1.99: Paquetes: enviados = 4, recibidos = 4, perdidos = 0 (0% perdidos), Tiempos aproximados de ida y vuelta en milisegundos: Mínimo = 0ms, Máximo = 0ms, Media = 0ms G:\Documents and Settings\Administrador

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87  | Next Page >