Search Results

Search found 13968 results on 559 pages for 'device dependent routing'.

Page 9/559 | < Previous Page | 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 | Next Page >

Web Server Routing Based On Location

- by Eric

I have a website that has users from both Hong Kong and Australia. Unfortunately, since the server is located in Australia, users from Hong Kong are going to suffer latency problems. Traffic has to go through US before travelling back to Australia. So I've setup a server in Hong Kong as well, and users using the .hk TLD are going to be redirected to the Hong Kong web server. It shares the same database server with the Australian server but due to aggressive SQL query caching, impact on performance from latency from SQL queries are negligible. But for users accustomed to the Hong Kong website but have since traveled to Australia, they suffer from additional latency because they go to the .hk site which redirects to the HK server even when they're in Australia. The website is targeted at international students from Hong Kong so this is an significant issue for me. Instead of redirecting users to the closest web server based on the TLD, how do I redirect users based on their location? Currently I am using nginx, postgres and Django. Say I know how to estimate users' location based on users' IP addresses, what is my next step? At what level would I work on? What topic should I read up?

Read the article
default gateway of a host

- by varun

if my understanding is correct, the following is what happens when a host A wants to communicate with a machine X outside its network. 1) The host ,checks it routing table to find out if there is any direct routes to the machine. 2) It finds out that the machine is outside its network and has to sent the packets to the default gateway(router) R. 3) The host sents an ARP broadcast to get the mac of the router R. 4) After getting the MAC, the host creates a packet with src IP and MAC as that of the host A, dest IP of the remote machine X and dest MAC of the router R. 5)The router R receives the packet, either drops its or sents its to its next hope, which can be another router or the remote machine X itself. Can anyone explain, how the steps would be, if i set the default gateway of the host A as host A itself...?

Read the article
PFSense VPN Routing

- by SvrGuy

We use PFSense firewalls at three installations with the following LAN networks: 1.) Datacenter #1: 10.0.0.0/16 2.) Datacenter #2: 10.1.0.0/16 3.) HQ: 10.2.0.0/16 All of these locations are linked via an IPSEC tunnel that works properly. Hosts in any of the above networks can communicate with hosts in any other of the above networks. Now, for our laptops etc. we established a road warrior network 10.3.0.0/16 and have implemented OpenVPN to link the laptops etc. to Datacenter #1. This works great too, so our laptops can connect and communicate with any host in Datacenter #1 (anything on 10.0.0.0/16) The problem is the laptops can't communicate with any hosts that Datacenter #1 can reach by its IPSEC tunnel to Datacenter #2 (and/or the HQ for that matter). Does anyone know what to do configuration wise on the PFSense box in Datacenter #1 to configure to route packets received on the OpenVPN tunnel to Datacenter #2 over the IPSEC tunnel? It could be a setting on the OpenVPN or some sort of static route or some such. Any ideas?

Read the article
Dynamic subdomain routing

- by Nader

Hi everyone, I asked this question over at stackoverflow, but got very few views: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/2284917/route-web-requests-to-different-servers-based-on-subdomain Perhaps it's more applicable to this crowd. Here it is again for convenience: I have a platform where a user can create a new website using a subdomain. There will be thousands of these, eg abc.mydomain.com, def.mydomain.com . Hopefully if we are successful hundreds of thousands. I need to be able to route these domains to a different IPs to point at a particular app server. I have this mapping in a database right now. What are the best practices and recommended technologies here? I see a couple options: Have DNS setup with a wildcard CNAME entry so that all requests go to a single IP where perhaps two machines using heartbeat (for failover) know how to look up the IP in the database and then do an http redirect to the appropriate app server. This seems clunky and slow to me. Run my own DNS server that can be programatically managed such that when a new site is created a DNS entry is added. We also move sites around to different app servers, so I would need to be able to update DNS entries in close to real time. Thoughts anyone? Thanks. Update2: I've setup external wildcard DNS pointing at an HAProxy web server whose job it is to route requests to backend servers. The mapping is stored in our internal PowerDNS server. Question now is how to get the HAProxy server (or another) to use the value of the internal DNS and not some config file or access list? – Update: Based on some suggestions below, it seems like reverse-proxy server(s) is the way to go. As I'll be rebalancing the domain-server mapping, these need to work instantly and the TTL on a DNS solution could be a problem. Any recommendations on software to use considering this domain-IP data is stored in a DB, and I'll need this to be performant?

Read the article
IP Forwarding and Routing in Windows 2008

- by Danialzo

I have Hyper-V running on a windows 2008. I got a new ip stack from the data center to be set on my virtual machines. But I have difficulties to set these IPs on my VMs because they are on different network. my current server ip is xxx.xxx.18.6 with MASK : 255.255.255.224 and the GW is xxx.xxx.18.1 my new ip stack is xxx.xxx.168.176/29 I can use RRAS to achieve this. Do I need to create another NIC? How do I make these VMs reachable from outside?

Read the article
VPN, routing, specified application

- by Adrian

Details: eth0 = current internet port pptp1 = VPN connection, if I connect to my provider, he give me an IP address, which is accessible from the internet. This is what I need. I want to connect through this IP back to my PC. I want to keep my primary internet connection (eth0) on my PC for all traffic, but route traffic to VPN for specified application/or port, to access application/port from the IP, which I given from the pptp provider. Huhh? Difficult but, it is possible? If yes, how? Incoming port will be always: 33340 Outgoing port can be change, but usually it is 33330

Read the article
iptables advanced routing

- by Shamanu4

I have a Centos server acting as a NAT in my network. This server has one external (later ext1) interface and three internal (later int1, int2 and int3). Egress traffic comes from users via int1 and after MASQUERADE goes via ext1. Ingress traffic comes from ext1, MASQUERADE, and goes via int2 or int3 according to static routes. | ext1 | x.x.x.x/24 +---------|----------------------+ | | | Centos server (NAT) | | | +---|------|---------------|-----+ | | | int1 | | int2 | int3 10.30.1.10/24 | | 10.30.2.10/24 | 10.30.3.10/24 ^ v v 10.30.1.1/24 | | 10.30.2.1/24 | 10.30.3.1/24 +---|------|---------------|-----+ | | | | | | | v v | | ^ -Traffic policer- | | |_____________ | | | | | +------------------|-------------+ | 192.168.0.1/16 | | Clients 192.168.0.0/16 The problem: Egress traffic seems to be dropped after PREROUTING table. Packet counters are not changing on MASQUERADE rule in POSTROUTING. If I change the routes to clients causing the traffic go back via int1 - everything works perfectly. current iptable configuration is very simple: # cat /etc/sysconfig/iptables *filter :INPUT ACCEPT [0:0] :FORWARD ACCEPT [0:0] :OUTPUT ACCEPT [0:0] -I INPUT 1 -i int1 -j ACCEPT -A FORWARD -j ACCEPT COMMIT *nat -A POSTROUTING -o ext1 -j MASQUERADE # COMMIT Can anyone point me what I'm missing? Thanks. UPDATE: 192.168.100.60 via 10.30.2.1 dev int2 proto zebra # routes to clients ... 192.168.100.61 via 10.30.3.1 dev int3 proto zebra # ... I have a lot of them x.x.x.0/24 dev ext1 proto kernel scope link src x.x.x.x 10.30.1.0/24 dev int1 proto kernel scope link src 10.30.1.10 10.30.2.0/24 dev int2 proto kernel scope link src 10.30.2.10 10.30.3.0/24 dev int3 proto kernel scope link src 10.30.3.10 169.254.0.0/16 dev ext1 scope link metric 1003 169.254.0.0/16 dev int1 scope link metric 1004 169.254.0.0/16 dev int2 scope link metric 1005 169.254.0.0/16 dev int3 scope link metric 1006 blackhole 192.168.0.0/16 default via x.x.x.y dev ext1 Clients have 192.168.0.1 as gateway, which is redirecting them to 10.30.1.1

Read the article
router propogation usng OSPF

- by liv2hak

I am using Juniper J-series routers to emulate a small telco and VPN customer.I need to use OSPF so that the path to each internal subnet is propogated to all PE nodes.The network topology is given below. To achieve this I am planning to run the following commands in UOW-TAU and UOW-HAM. set protocols ospf area 0.0.0.0 interface ge-0/0/0 set protocols ospf area 0.0.0.0 interface lo0.0 Do I need to do any additional configuration in TAU-PE1 and HAM-PE1 routers for it to receive the OSPF paths.? I am a beginner at the routing.Any help is appreciated.

Read the article
Routing from the DMZ to the interior network only

- by Allan

I have a home network connected to Verizon's FIOS service. Verizon's ActionTec router is connected to the ONT via coax to establish the MOCA network. My DD-WRT router's WAN port is connected to one of the ActionTec's LAN ports. The DD-WRT router is configured with a static IP address and assigned to the DMZ (this is done so I only have to configure port forwarding once). My issue is that this does not allow computers connected to the DD-WRT to serve streaming audio/video to the MOCA network using Verizon's Media Manager. I know that Media Manager uses ports 18001, 5050, and 5060, but I don't know how to forward those ports so that they are only available to the ActionTec's network and not the rest of the internet.

Read the article
Cisco ASA 5520 - differential routing policies based on userid

- by devviedev

Hi, excuse me if my terminology is not correct. We are using WebVPN to VPN into an Cisco ASA 5520. We want to have different rules that allow the user that VPNs into the network to access certain things based on their RSA SecurID authentication userid. Is this possible? If so, are there some good examples of how to achieve this?

Read the article
Internet Sharing on Lion breaks my routing table

- by seaders

When in the office, I'm connected to a 192.168.1.0/24 network. When Internet Sharing is off, when I run netstat -nr the first entry shows default 192.168.1.254 UGSc 10 62 en0 If I turn Internet sharing on, it shows default link#5 UCS 2 0 en1 This is obviously incorrect and breaks all connectivity of my machine. en1 is my wireless, whereas en0 is my ethernet. If I then disable Internet Sharing, it even deletes that incorrect route, so I'm left with no default route at all. Currently I have one script that I run when I share, or after, when I disable that does route delete default route add default 192.168.1.254 That fixes everything, but I'd love to know what's actually making this happen and how to properly fix it. And just to say that at some point a few months ago, this was working absolutely perfectly, with no hitches, then one day when I brought the laptop home, I couldn't disable the internet sharing, so I couldn't connect to my home wifi. I eventually had to restart the machine and since then this problem has been happening. Any help would be greatly appreciated, thank you.

Read the article
Routing application traffic through specific interface

- by UnicornsAndRainbows

Hello All! First question here, so please go easy: I have a debian linux 5.0 server with two public interfaces. I would like to route outbound traffic from one instance of an application via one interface and the second instance through the second interface. There are some challenges: both instances of the application use the same protocol both instances of the application can access the entire internet (can't route based on dest network) I can't change the code of the application I don't think a typical approach to load balancing all traffic is going to work well, because there are relatively few destination servers being accessed in the outbound traffic, and all traffic would really need to be distributed pretty evenly across these relatively few servers. I could probably run two virtualized servers on the box and bind each of them to a different external ip, but I'm looking for a simpler solution, maybe using iproute or iptables? Any ideas for me? Thanks in advance - and I'm happy to answer any questions.

Read the article
Routing Traffic on Ubuntu to give Raspberry PI Internet Access

- by Scruffers

I'm hoping someone can point me in the right direction for setting up my Linux (Ubuntu 12.04) box to route traffic from eth0 to wlan0. I'll try and explain the problem I am trying to solve: I currently have two separate networks: [RaspberryPi/eth0] 192.168.2.2 / 255.255.255.0 ^ | v [Ubuntu/eth0] 192.168.2.1 / 255.255.255.0 And: [Ubuntu/wlan0] 192.168.1.100 / 255.255.255.0 ^ | v [ADSL router] 192.168.1.1 / 255.255.255.0 So currently if I want to access the RaspberryPI I can SSH from the Ubuntu box to the PI. And if I want to use the Internet, I have full access from the Ubuntu box, but nothing from the RaspberryPI - the two networks are partitioned. What I would like to do is configure things so that the RaspberryPI has Internet access via the Ubuntu box and out to the Internet. I tried to create a bridge, but got the message "wlan0: operation not supported" (wireless chipset is Ralink RT3062). I'm sure giving the Raspberry PI Internet access should be easy to do in this configuration, but I am a bit lost - can someone point me in the right direction please?

Read the article
why this routing configuration does not work?

- by avs099

I have 2 VMs in HyperV role: first is RRAS - it has 2 interfaces (both manually configured, no DHCP): 192.168.1.110 - "external" one, connected to the router 192.168.10.2 - that's internal interface which other VMs will be using as well also I added VPN connection to our main server - and it gets 192.168.2.136 IP address in 192.168.2.XXX network. And IP route is create on the server as well for this interface. second VM is called KITCHENER. It only has 1 interface 192.168.10.99 / 255.255.255.0, with default gateway set to RRAS server - 192.168.10.2 QUESTION: how can I ping "main server" - 192.168.2.1 - from the KITCHENER server when RRAS server is connected to VPN? please see screenshots with ipconfig /all, route print and ping 192.168.2.1 commands. What needs to be done to get this working? all servers are Windows 2008 R2 if that matters.

Read the article
Windows network routing

- by fabianvilers

Hi! I'm working by my customer premises and they let me connect my private laptop on a dedicated Wi-Fi for internet access. It's nice for external consultants. The only issue is that we can't connect on a remote server on port 25. I suppose this policy is set up to avoid infected computers sending spam from their network. As you can have guessed, this is something weird that I can't send mail at all. Fortunately, I've a 3G cell phone that I can connect by Bluetooth on my laptop. So when I want to send an e-mail, I have to disconnect from Wi-Fi, connect my phone, send the e-mail, disconnect phone and reconnect Wi-Fi. Kinda overhead. My question is: how can I tell Windows 7 to use the Wi-Fi for every out connection, but if it's a connection on port 25, use the cell phone network? With this solution, I could let my phone connected all day without having to switch again and again. Thanks a lot for your anwwers. Fabian

Read the article
Fortigate VPN Routing issue

- by user1571299

I have 200B Fortigate unit with 2 internet WAN connections. I also have a remote site which I'm connected to via IPSEC VPN through WAN1. This site has only one GW IP address. I'd also like to setup a VPN ontop of WAN2 with that specific site as it's destination. The default route for my end is WAN1. My problem is I cant figure out how to have both tunnels up at the same time. What's the best practice for achieving this? Thanks

Read the article
Cisco Routing through VPN

- by Superman

I am looking for a way to allow a client Win7 computer, which connects to our California office's Cisco ASA 5510 over an IPSec VPN connection to then be able to connect to a computer in our chicago office which is itself connected through another Cisco ASA router to california. It appears that we are unable to route client vpn connections between each other, and I cannot find any guidance on how to enable this. Let me know if this is possible / what needs to be done.

Read the article
Routing between two VLANs on Single Dell 6200 Switch

- by jenglee

I want to be able to route between two vlans that I have created and I am not sure how to go about it. So I have created, VLAN 5 with IP Address 192.168.5.1/24 and VLAN 10 with IP Address 192.168.0.1/24 //main IP addresses that I use. How would I be able to get (for example) the IP Address 192.168.0.144 to see any ip addresses in 192.168.5.1/24? Also do you have to set a default gateway for each VLAN or do you set the default gateway for the switch.

Read the article
pptp VPN, routing

- by Adrian

Details: eth0 = current internet port pptp1 = VPN connection, if I connect to my provider, he give me an IP address, which is accessible from the internet. This is what I need. I want to connect through this IP back to my PC. I want to keep my primary internet connection (eth0) on my PC for all traffic, but route traffic to VPN for specified application/or port, to access application/port from the IP, which I given from the pptp provider. Huhh? Difficult but, it is possible? If yes, how? Incoming port will be always: 33340 Outgoing port can be change, but usually it is 33330

Read the article
IPv6 works only after ping to routing box

- by Ficik

Situation: There is ipv4 only router in network and every computer is connected to it (wifi or cable). Server with ipv4 and ipv6 is connected to this router as well. Server has configured tunnelbrokers 6to4 tunnel and radvd. Clients in network has right prefix and can ping each other. But they can't ping to internet until they ping Server (the one with tunnel). I found somewhere that it's icmp problem, but I couldn't find solution. Is it problem that there is ipv4 only router? server and client runs linux router runs dd-wrt without ipv6 support :( Ping try: standa@standa-laptop:~$ ping6 ipv6.google.com PING ipv6.google.com(2a00:1450:8007::69) 56 data bytes ^C --- ipv6.google.com ping statistics --- 29 packets transmitted, 0 received, 100% packet loss, time 28223ms standa@standa-laptop:~$ ping6 2001:470:XXXX:XXXX:21c:c0ff:fe2b:6478 PING 2001:470:XXXX:XXXX:21c:c0ff:fe2b:6478(2001:470:XXXX:XXXX:21c:c0ff:fe2b:6478) 56 data bytes 64 bytes from 2001:470:XXXX:XXXX:21c:c0ff:fe2b:6478: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=3.55 ms 64 bytes from 2001:470:XXXX:XXXX:21c:c0ff:fe2b:6478: icmp_seq=2 ttl=64 time=0.311 ms 64 bytes from 2001:470:XXXX:XXXX:21c:c0ff:fe2b:6478: icmp_seq=3 ttl=64 time=0.269 ms 64 bytes from 2001:470:XXXX:XXXX:21c:c0ff:fe2b:6478: icmp_seq=4 ttl=64 time=0.292 ms ^C --- 2001:470:XXXX:XXXX:21c:c0ff:fe2b:6478 ping statistics --- 4 packets transmitted, 4 received, 0% packet loss, time 3000ms rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 0.269/1.107/3.559/1.415 ms standa@standa-laptop:~$ ping6 ipv6.google.com PING ipv6.google.com(2a00:1450:8007::69) 56 data bytes 64 bytes from 2a00:1450:8007::69: icmp_seq=1 ttl=57 time=20.7 ms 64 bytes from 2a00:1450:8007::69: icmp_seq=2 ttl=57 time=20.2 ms 64 bytes from 2a00:1450:8007::69: icmp_seq=3 ttl=57 time=23.4 ms ^C --- ipv6.google.com ping statistics --- 3 packets transmitted, 3 received, 0% packet loss, time 2001ms rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 20.267/21.479/23.413/1.392 ms

Read the article
Routing public IPs (each a /32) through a VPN to another server

- by Lee S

Hopefully the title makes sense; I have a server currently in a colo facility, with many IP addresses routed to it. They are individual IPs and not in a contiguous block. Due to vastly improved connectivity (fibre) at home I am slowly bringing my infrastructure in-house for managability and eventually, cost savings. What I would like to do though is use the IP addresses allocated to my existing server, at home. I have an IP block allocated to me on my new ISP connection, but for a couple of reasons I'd like to make use of the colo ones for now: Ease of transition - lots of domains, dns, hard-coded IPs in programs, etc. Connectivity fallback. If my primary line goes down and switches to fallback 1 (dsl) or fallback 2 (4G), I lose access to the ISP-allocated IP block of IPs that are only presented on the primary WAN interface. What I'd like to achieve is my home virtualisation server (Proxmox/Debian-based) "dials in" to the colo server in the colo facility (also Proxmox/Debian) via VPN or similar, and gets to make use of the IP addresses that currently terminate on the colo box. If the primary connection to my ISP goes down and one of the fallback routes kicks in, the VPN tunnel will just time out and then be re-established on the backup connection instead. I'm sure this is doable, but I have no idea how. I'm not afraid to get my hands dirty, I just don't really know where to start?

Read the article
Windows RRAS multi-network routing

- by Brent Pabst

I am looking for advice, comments and suggestions from anyone who has used Windows RRAS (2008 R2 Pref.) as the primary routers for our multiple offices. We have multiple physical office locations and are looking into utilizing Windows Server 2008 R2 Core as redundant Active/Active routers/gateways for our network as opposed to a physical router from Cisco or Juniper, it costs a lot less! Any problems, issues or documentation anyone would recommend? We will still most likely have a firewall on the edge but the majority of our traffic will be inter-office with some external services. We will be using multiple Class B networks across our two offices.

Read the article
Load balancers, multiple data centers and url based routing

- by kunkunur

There is one data center - dc1. There is a business need to setup another data center - dc2 in another geography and there might be more in the future say dc3. Within the data center dc1: There are two web servers say WS1 and WS2. These two webservers do not share anything currently. There isnt any necessity foreseen to have more webservers within each dc. dc1 also has a local load balancer which has been setup with session stickiness. So if a user say u1 lands on dc1 and if the load balancer decides to route his first request to WS1 then from there on all u1's requests will get routed to WS1. Local load balancer and webservers are invisible to the user. Local load balancer listens to the traffic on a virtual ip which is assigned to the virtual cluster of webservers ws1 and ws2. Virtual ip is the ip to which the host name is resolved to in the DNS. There are no client specific subdomains as of now instead there is a client specific url(context). ex: www.example.com/client1 and www.example.com/client2. Given above when dc2 is onboarded I want to route the traffic between dc1 and dc2 based on the client. The options that I have found so far are. Have client specific subdomains e.g. client1.example.com and client2.example.com and assign each of them with the virtual ip of the data center to which I want to route them. or Assign www.example.com and www1.example.com to first dc i.e. dc1 and assign www2.example.com to dc2. All requests will first get routed to dc1 where WS1 and WS2 will redirect the user to www1.example.com or www2.example.com based on whether the url ends with /client1 or /client2. I need help in the following If I setup a global load balancer between dc1 and dc2 do I have any alternative solutions. That is, can a global load balancer route the traffic based on the url ? Are there drawbacks to subdomain based solutions compared to www1 solution? With www1 solution I am worried that it creates a dependency on dc1 atleast for the first request and the user will see that he is getting redirected to a different url.

Read the article
pfSense routing between two routers with shared network

- by JohnCC

I have a network set-up using two pfSense routers arranged like this:- DMZ1 WAN1 WAN2 DMZ2 | | | | | | | | \___ PF1 PF2___/ | | | | \___TRUSTED___/ Each pfSense router has its own separate WAN connection, and a separate DMZ network attached to it. They share a common TRUSTED LAN between them. The machines on the trusted network have PF1 as their default gateway. PF1 has a static route defined to DMZ2 via PF2, and PF2 has a static route to DMZ1 via PF1. There is NAT to the WAN but internal networks (DMZ1/2 and TRUSTED) use different RFC1918 subnets. I inherited this arrangement, and all used to work fine. I made a config change to PF1 (relating to multicast), and machines on DMZ2 suddenly could not talk to TRUSTED. I rolled the change back, but the problem persisted. What I guess you'd hope would happen is that TCP packets would go DMZ2 - PF2 - TRUSTED and on return TRUSTED - PF1 - PF2 - DMZ2. That's the only way I can see it would have worked. However, PF1 drops the returning packets. I've verified this using tcpdump. I've worked around this by adding static routes to DMZ2 via PF2 to the servers on TRUSTED, but some devices on there do not support static routes so this is not ideal. Is there way to make this arrangement work decently, or is the design inherently flawed? Thanks!

Read the article
Combat server downtime by duplicating server and re-routing when main server is down

- by Wasim

I have a CentOS server which at times either crashes or gets attacked with DDOS. At the moment I have an off site backup which is filled up with 1.7TB of data. I'm currently paying as much for the backup as I am for the server and I was looking for advice from experienced people as to what option is best to proceed from here. Would it be a viable solution to ditch the offsite backup, and instead purchase an additional server which is an exact duplication of the first server. So if the first server is down, users are re-routed to the second server without noticing the first server is even down. This would create an automatic backup of the first server (albeit not offsite) and relinquish the need for the expensive offsite backup. Is the above solution a true solution to pricey backup or is offsite backup absolutely necessary? How would I go about doing this (obviously it's pretty complex so just links to some reading material or the terminology of the procedure would be great)? Appreciate the help and advice.

Read the article

< Previous Page | 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 | Next Page >