Search Results

Search found 8979 results on 360 pages for 'dynamic routing'.

Page 10/360 | < Previous Page | 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17  | Next Page >

• routing traffic between two network cards through firewall

  - by RubyFreak

  I'm trying to test a network device (firewall) using a Linux box, with two network cards, one interface connected to the WAN zone and another interface to LAN zone. The configuration is similar with that |ETH0| <-> | FW | <-> ETH1 So from both interfaces I'm able to ping the respective firewall interface. But i'm not able to fire something like: ping -I eth0 ip.from.eth1 and to get any answer. Is that possible or should the linux network namespace solution or user level tcp stacks (VMs are out of question)

  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

• 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

• adding a route entry to linux routing table

  - by netg

  hi, I have two systems with ip address say 64.103.56.1(A)(Dev name -wlan0) and 64.103.225.18(B),now what i want is , everytime I ping B from my system A, it has to be routed via a router say with address 10.0.0.251(C)(I want this to be my next hop to reach B) , but this router is on a different subnetwork than the two systems.How do I do this? /* Things I tried: I used 'route add -host B gw C wlan0', and got an error saying " no such process exist or no such device found". Tried ping C and traceroute and found the gw addr at my side is some 63.103.236.3(D), so added another entry route add -host C gw D wlan0, I was able to do this without any error! */

  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

• 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

• 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

• 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

• 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

• 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 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

• 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

• 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 between 2 different subnets on 2 different interfaces in SonicOS

  - by Chris1499

  I'm having a bit of a problem allowing traffic between two of my subnets. Here's the structure I've built. The X0 interface has our windows server on it and it handles DHCP/DNS, etc. X1 has the WAN connection. The Sonicwall is handling DHCP on X2. The X3 interface is connected to a different vlan on the 48 port switch. The Sonicwall is handling DHCP on this network as well. So here's what i want to do. The network on X2 is for our guest wireless; i don't want it to be able to access any of the other networks, just the internet, so i that all blocked in the firewall. No issues there. The X3 network is going to be for programmable controllers, and needs to be able to access the X0 network where our computers are. This is where my problem is. I'm not able to get between the 192.168.2.xxx and the 192.168.1.xxx on interfaces X0 and X3 respectively. I have these rules set up in the firewall. The Lan Primary Subnet is the 192.168.2.0 on X0. So if i'm not mistaken, this will allow traffic between the two through the firewall. Now this is where I'm a little confused. Do i need to use NAT to get the traffic from X0 to go to X3 (and vice versa), or a static route, or both? Currently i have both, though i doubt they're done correctly (also in screenshot). I've tried to ping between the two without luck. Any advice, or if you see what's wrong with my setup, is much appreciated. If you need some more information, let me know. Thanks all! EDIT: So i found that i don't neither either NAT or a static route, that the setting in the firewall is enough. I can now ping from the 192.168.1.xxx network, however i can't access the server on the 192.168.2.xxx network. When i try to access i get "An error occured while reconnecting to Z: to server Microsoft Windows Network: The local device name is already in use. This connection has not been restored. What am i missing?

  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

• 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

• PFSence 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

• 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

• Iptables: masquarading and routing

  - by nixnotwin

  I have a WAN router which is linked to isp over a /30 WAN subnet. But it also servers as a router to a /29 local public WAN subnet which is connected to few of my servers. The traffic from /29 gets routed to ISP via /30 subnet. For a wired reason I want to masqarade (NAT) the interface which has /30 ip. So the interface with /30 ip should appear as masquaraded for my 192.168.1.0/24 network and it also should act as a normal non-NAT router for my WAN public subnet /29. Can this be done with iptables on a Linux machine?

  Read the article

• Routing between two networks on linux?

  - by gGololicic

  I got stuck with one problem I cant find solution. I have linux pc with two NIC. first nic (eth1) is connected to public ip (probably switch or whatever, doesnt really mater) so eth1 is connected to wan and another eth0 that I connected to switch and make it a lan nic. configuration: eth1 ip address 88.200.1xx.xxx //xxx's are cuz of security reasons eth0 ip address 192.168.1.1 wan ------ [eth1 (linux PC) eth0]<----[switch]<---- [eth1 (PC1)] Now I want to connect this two networks, so PC1 can access linux PC and wan. I think I know how to do it but I cant confiugre it right. This is what I tried: I turend on ip forwarding (for sure) I set eth1 default gw to the right ip on the wan I tried to set eth0 default gw to the same ip (but i couldnt) What or how can I do this, I was trying with linux route command, but I got stuck. Please help.

  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

• Amazon EC2 + SSL Godaddy are not routing properly in HTTPS

  - by azngunit81

  I have an Amazon EC2 + SSL just installed on GoDaddy. I have successfully managed to install it and get the green https on the main domain https://www.example.com however it doesn't any https://www.example.com/something but the route works under http://www.example.com I am using an .htacess file for some rewrite. Options -MultiViews RewriteEngine On RewriteCond %{REQUEST_FILENAME} !-f RewriteRule ^ index.php [L] the Ec2 instance is ubuntu if that helps in anyway.

  Read the article

• Manual Http error response code in non-existent folder via routing

  - by Slytherin

  Apache server running on ubuntu-like linux I am getting unexpected behaviour when i try to manually send error response. If my .htaccess is responsible for the error response , then appropriate error document is loaded and displayed , with according response code in browser console. However , if my router is origin of the response code , then i get blank screen , but correct response code. .htaccess looks like this RewriteEngine On # RewriteBase / RewriteCond %{REQUEST_FILENAME} !-f RewriteCond %{REQUEST_FILENAME} !-d RewriteRule !\.(css|js|icon|zip|rar|png|jpg|gif|pdf)$ index.php [L] ErrorDocument 404 /err/404.html ErrorDocument 403 /err/403.html ErrorDocument 500 /err/500.html part of my router that sends the response is the following header("HTTP/1.1 403 Forbidden"); trying this format didnt help either header("HTTP/1.1 403 Forbidden", TRUE, 403); I also tried HTTP/1.0. Furthermore i was thinking that maybe relative path to error page might be an issue , but discarded this idea after attempting to access a document that is forbidden via .htaccess EDIT I should also point out , this scenario happens when URL for not-existing article is requested. Is it possible that Server is looking for a .htaccess file in a folder based on URL ? Eg: domain/blog/non-existent , is server looking for blog folder ? I am specifically asking this because there is no blog folder

  Read the article

• sporadic routing to another website when opening a common url

  - by user226098

  I have a strange problem in our office: Sometimes when opening a url from one of our projects random url in any browser not the right website shows up but some other website. In most of the cases it redirects to google.com with some parameters like https://www.google.de/?gfe_rd=cr&ei=krOOU8_kGcSKswadyYDQBw&gws_rd=ssl or just the ugly google 404 page). But today it remains on the origial url but shows up the the content of http://debug.netdna-cdn.com/. This happens about 1 time a week and for no apparent reason. Even stranger it only occurs on a single pc in the network. It now happens on two different computers in the network. Both use windows 8. The problem cannot be fixed by clearing the browser cache but by rebooting the pc or using ipconfig /flushdns. So I think it has something to do with the dns cache of the machine. But I have no idea what the reason is for this and how i can figure out how to solve it. Any ideas?

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17  | Next Page >