Search Results

Search found 5864 results on 235 pages for 'secure gateway'.

Page 174/235 | < Previous Page | 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181  | Next Page >

  • Remote Desktop fails after VPN connection

    - by Samet Sorgut
    The local computer (comp 1) is connected to a remote computer (comp 2) with Remote Desktop. On the remote computer (comp 2), I try to establish an VPN connection to a different remote computer (comp 3). Once I try to establish the VPN connection from the remote computer (comp 2) to the second remote computer (comp 3), Remote Desktop freezes on comp 1. It is not possible to connect to comp 2 again via Remote Desktop. What can be done to connect to this remote computer (comp 2) after it establishes a VPN connection? The only thing that comes to my mind is to install a second NIC and configure Remote Desktop to accept connection from this NIC while VPN is working from the other... What do you suggest? EDIT: I want to use the internet connection of the VPN, so all traffic should go over the VPN but still RDP working. My IP: 100.0.0.1 The IP where I'm connecting via RDP: 200.0.0.20 (Mask: 255.255.255.192, Gateway: 200.0.0.193) Where the 200.0.0.1 connects to VPN the IP of the VPN is: 65.254.61.250 Will routing like this help (Command is issued in 200.0.0.20, the RDP location): route ADD 65.254.61.250 MASK 255.255.255.192 200.0.0.193 Couldn't add gives the error: The route addition failed: The parameter is incorrect. I tried before connecting to VPN.

    Read the article

  • network routing between mac & virtual XP

    - by Kevin
    Hi - I have a max laptop running XP inside VirtualBox. The network is setup to be a "Bridged Adapter" so that the IPs for both the host & guest OS's are assigned by my wireless routed. My guest XP has Nortel VPN connecting to corporate lan. When this is connected, I want to allow my host Mac OS to access the corporate network. But I'm struggling. Without Nortel VPN running, I can change routing on the mac so all traffic is sent via the guest XP - this works. But once I activate the VPN, this no longer works. If I try to change the routing on mac to run through the IP address assigned to the Nortel adapter, I get a "Network is unreachable" error. Below is the output from ipconfig /all on the guest XP OS. I'm beginning to believe that what I want to do is not possible because of the way Nortel secure the VPN - but before I give up I thought I'd post the problem here. Thanks, Kevin z:\eclipseworkspace\RESMobileSuite\trunk>ipconfig /all Windows IP Configuration Host Name . . . . . . . . . . . . : zzzz-3177b42dd0 Primary Dns Suffix . . . . . . . : Node Type . . . . . . . . . . . . : Unknown IP Routing Enabled. . . . . . . . : Yes WINS Proxy Enabled. . . . . . . . : No DNS Suffix Search List. . . . . . : zzzz.zzz Ethernet adapter Local Area Connection: Connection-specific DNS Suffix . : Description . . . . . . . . . . . : AMD PCNET Family PCI Ethernet Adapter Physical Address. . . . . . . . . : 08-00-XX-XX-XX-XX Dhcp Enabled. . . . . . . . . . . : Yes Autoconfiguration Enabled . . . . : Yes IP Address. . . . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.1.3 Subnet Mask . . . . . . . . . . . : 255.255.255.0 Default Gateway . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.1.1 DHCP Server . . . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.1.1 DNS Servers . . . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.1.1 Lease Obtained. . . . . . . . . . : 30 April 2010 12:22:02 Lease Expires . . . . . . . . . . : 01 May 2010 12:22:02 Ethernet adapter {8EB7A442-9683-45FB-A602-56110A4B3434}: Connection-specific DNS Suffix . : zzzz.zz Description . . . . . . . . . . . : Nortel IPSECSHM Adapter - Packet Scheduler Miniport Physical Address. . . . . . . . . : 44-45-YY-YY-YY-YY Dhcp Enabled. . . . . . . . . . . : No IP Address. . . . . . . . . . . . : XXX.4.52.62 Subnet Mask . . . . . . . . . . . : 255.255.254.0 Default Gateway . . . . . . . . . : XXX.4.52.62 DNS Servers . . . . . . . . . . . : XXX.6.21.36 XXX.6.21.100

    Read the article

  • Having two IP Routes/Gateways of last Resort on an HP Switch

    - by SteadH
    We have an HP Layer 3 Switch that is doing IP routing between vlans. The general set up is that the switch has an IP address on each VLAN and IP routing is enabled. On our servers VLAN, we have a firewall that has a connection to the outside world. To set a IP route on the HP router, we use IOS command ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 192.168.2.1 where 192.168.2.1 is the address of our firewall, and the zeros essentially mean to route all traffic that the switch doesn't know what to do with out the firewall as a gateway. We're in the middle of an ISP and firewall change. I set up the new firewall and ran the IOS command ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 192.168.2.254 (the address of the new firewall). Things started working nicely. When I reviewed the configuration of the switch though, I noticed that it did not replace the previous ip route command, but just added another route. Now, I know how to remove the old firewall route (no ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 192.168.2.1), but what is the effect of having these two 0.0.0.0 routes? Is it switch implosion? Will a server just respond back over the route it receives the request from? I've read elsewhere that having two default gateways is an impossibility by definition, but I'm curious about this situation that our switch allowed. Thanks!

    Read the article

  • trying to route between two openvpn clients

    - by user42055
    I have two openvpn clients on the 10.0.1.0 (client1) and 192.168.0.0 (client2) subnets with the server's openvpn connection having the ip 192.168.150.1 The server has ip forwarding enabled. Currently, client1's vpn ip is 192.168.150.10 and the P-t-P ip is 192.168.150.9 I have created the following static route on client1: route add -net 10.0.1.0 netmask 255.255.255.0 gw 192.168.150.9 The routing table on client1 looks like this: Destination Gateway Genmask Flags MSS Window irtt Iface 192.168.150.9 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.255 UH 0 0 0 tun0 192.168.150.1 192.168.150.9 255.255.255.255 UGH 0 0 0 tun0 10.0.1.0 192.168.150.9 255.255.255.0 UG 0 0 0 tun0 192.168.0.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth0 127.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 255.0.0.0 U 0 0 0 lo 0.0.0.0 192.168.0.1 0.0.0.0 UG 0 0 0 eth0 I thought this would be correct to allow traffic from client1 to reach computers on client2's network, but it does not work. Is 192.168.150.9 (the P-t-P address) the correct one to be routing through ? I tried using 192.168.150.1 but I couldn't create the route. I hope this is clear.

    Read the article

  • OpenVPN bridge network from routed clients

    - by gphilip
    I have the following setup: subnet 1 - 10.0.1.0/24 with a machine used as NAT and also running an OpenVPN client subnet 2 - 192.168.1/24 with an OpenVPN server (the server in subnet 1 connect here) subnet 3 - 10.0.2.0/24 that uses the NAT machine (subnet 1) to access the internet, so all non-local traffic is routed there to the eth0 interface The OpenVPN client creates the tun0 interface and appropriate routing so that I can access machines from 192.168.1/24 [root@ip-10-0-1-208 ~]# telnet 192.168.1.186 8081 Trying 192.168.1.186... Connected to 192.168.1.186. Escape character is '^]'. [root@ip-10-0-1-208 ~]# route -n Kernel IP routing table Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref Use Iface 0.0.0.0 10.0.1.1 0.0.0.0 UG 0 0 0 eth0 10.0.1.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth0 10.8.0.1 10.8.0.5 255.255.255.255 UGH 0 0 0 tun0 10.8.0.5 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.255 UH 0 0 0 tun0 169.254.169.254 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.255 UH 0 0 0 eth0 192.168.0.0 10.8.0.5 255.255.0.0 UG 0 0 0 tun0 However, when I try the same from subnet 3, it can't reach that machine. [root@ip-10-0-2-61 ~]# telnet 192.168.1.186 8081 Trying 192.168.1.186... I suspect that it's because subnet 3 is routed to eth0 on the NAT machine in subnet 1 and it cannot jump to tun0. What's the easiest way to resolve it? I don't want to use iptables. I can't change the routing from machines in subnet 1 because it's done in AWS and so it works only with specific interfaces. Also, the NAT machine gets its IP with DHCP and so bridging is a bit complicated. IP forwarding is set on the NAT machine [root@ip-10-0-1-208 ~]# cat /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_forward 1 Thank you!

    Read the article

  • How can I create a VLAN on my extreme switch for a seperate subnet/domain?

    - by drpcken
    I'm putting together a small active directory implementation for a buddy of mine. I currently have 2 servers (one is the primary domain controller) and a couple clients. I need to test and run updates on every machine on this domain, but I would have plug them into my current LIVE domain to get it internet access. From what I've read having two separate domains on a single subnet is a bad idea (even though it is temporary) so I don't want to risk messing anything up on my production domain. I'm pretty sure I can create a separate VLAN on my extreme 48 port switch and plug this smaller domain into it on a different subnet, but I don't know the commands. Both subnets would need internet access of course (one of the things I can't wrap my head around is routing internet traffic between subnets (gateway is on production subnet). My production domain is on subnet 192.168.200.0. My new domain I want to put online would go into subnet 192.168.10.0. A shove in the right direction would be greatly appreciated. Thank you!

    Read the article

  • Advertise a subnet route with radvd

    - by Thomas Berger
    we have set up a small IPv6 Testing network. The setup looks like this: ::/0 +----------+ | Firewall | Router to the public net +----------+ | 2001:...::/106 | +----------+ +-------| SIT GW | sit Tunnel gatway to the some test users | +----------+ | +----------+ | Test Sys | Testsystem +----------+ The idea is to advertise the default route from the firewall and the route for the SIT subnets from the sit gateway. The configurations for radvd are: # Firewall interface eth0 { AdvSendAdvert on; route ::/0 { }; }; # SIT Gatway interface eth0 { AdvSendAdvert on; route 2001:...::/106 { }; }; We have captured the adv. packages with tcpdump and the packages looks good. We see a default route from the fw, and the subnet route from the SIT gatway. But if we look on the testsystem there are two default routes over both gateways. There is no subnet route. The routing does not work of course. Here the routes we get: 2001:.....::/64 dev eth0 proto kernel metric 256 mtu 1500 advmss 1440 hoplimit 4294967295 fe80::/64 dev eth0 proto kernel metric 256 mtu 1500 advmss 1440 hoplimit 4294967295 default via fe80::baac:6fff:fe8e:XXXX dev eth0 proto kernel metric 1024 expires 0sec mtu 1500 advmss 1440 hoplimit 64 default via fe80::e415:aeff:fe12:XXXX dev eth0 proto kernel metric 1024 expires 0sec mtu 1500 advmss 1440 hoplimit 64 Any Idea?

    Read the article

  • Ubuntu server apt-get says "(-5 - No address associated with hostname)"

    - by Srini
    I have a ubuntu 12.04 server. Running sudo apt-get update on it produces errors like this: W: Failed to fetch http://au.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/dists/precise-backports/main/binary-i386/Packages Something wicked happened resolving 'au.archive.ubuntu.com:http' (-5 - No address associated with hostname) I am able to ping all the other hosts on the network and also Google's DNS 8.8.8.8. But am unable to ping www.google.com. So, I'm guessing something is wrong with my DNS setup, but not sure what. I use static IP and my /etc/network/interfaces looks like this: auto eth0 iface eth0 inet static address 192.168.1.50 netmask 255.255.255.0 network 192.168.1.0 broadcast 192.168.0.255 gateway 192.168.1.1 #dns-nameserver 203.12.160.35 203.12.160.36 #nameserver 203.12.160.35 203.12.160.36 My /etc/resolv.conf and /etc/resolvconf/resolv.conf.d/base are both empty and my /etc/resolvconf/resolv.conf.d/original says: nameserver 192.168.1.1 Any help would be greatly appreciated. P.S. I've googled it a bit and the common resolution is to switch to DHCP which I don't want to do since this is my home server. Thanks Srini

    Read the article

  • xen + debian network after upgrade squeeze to wheeze

    - by rush
    I've got a Debian + Xen server. After a system upgrade to the stable version the network doesn't come up after boot. Every time after reboot I need to bring it up manually. The network configuration was not changed during upgrade. Here is /etc/network/interfaces: auto lo iface lo inet loopback auto eth0 iface eth0 inet static address 11.22.33.44 netmask 255.255.255.0 gateway 11.22.33.1 nameserver 8.8.8.8 After boot ip r shows no route and eth0 has no ip address. Manually ip and route setup goes fine and network starts working. Messages from dmesg about network I've found (looks like nothing interesting) [ 3.894401] ACPI: Fan [FAN3] (off) [ 3.894444] ACPI: Fan [FAN4] (off) [ 4.178348] e1000e 0000:00:19.0: eth0: (PCI Express:2.5GT/s:Width x1) 00:1e:67:14:66:c9 [ 4.178351] e1000e 0000:00:19.0: eth0: Intel(R) PRO/1000 Network Connection [ 4.178392] e1000e 0000:00:19.0: eth0: MAC: 10, PHY: 11, PBA No: 0100FF-0FF [ 4.178413] e1000e 0000:02:00.0: Disabling ASPM L0s L1 [ 4.178432] xen: registering gsi 16 triggering 0 polarity 1 -- [ 4.223667] ata5: DUMMY [ 4.223668] ata6: DUMMY [ 4.289153] e1000e 0000:02:00.0: eth1: (PCI Express:2.5GT/s:Width x1) 00:1e:67:14:66:c8 [ 4.289155] e1000e 0000:02:00.0: eth1: Intel(R) PRO/1000 Network Connection [ 4.289245] e1000e 0000:02:00.0: eth1: MAC: 3, PHY: 8, PBA No: 1000FF-0FF [ 4.506908] usb 1-1: new high-speed USB device number 2 using ehci_hcd [ 4.542920] ata2: SATA link up 3.0 Gbps (SStatus 123 SControl 300) -- [ 10.362999] EXT4-fs (dm-23): mounted filesystem with ordered data mode. Opts: (null) [ 10.419103] EXT4-fs (dm-3): mounted filesystem with ordered data mode. Opts: (null) [ 10.988255] ADDRCONF(NETDEV_UP): eth1: link is not ready [ 13.175533] Event-channel device installed. [ 13.287555] XENBUS: Unable to read cpu state -- [ 13.288670] XENBUS: Unable to read cpu state [ 13.965939] Bridge firewalling registered [ 14.134048] e1000e: eth1 NIC Link is Up 1000 Mbps Full Duplex, Flow Control: Rx/Tx [ 14.283862] ADDRCONF(NETDEV_UP): peth0: link is not ready [ 14.284543] ADDRCONF(NETDEV_CHANGE): eth1: link becomes ready [ 17.800627] e1000e: peth0 NIC Link is Up 1000 Mbps Full Duplex, Flow Control: Rx/Tx [ 17.801377] ADDRCONF(NETDEV_CHANGE): peth0: link becomes ready [ 18.307278] device peth0 entered promiscuous mode [ 24.538899] eth1: no IPv6 routers present [ 28.570902] peth0: no IPv6 routers present I've upgraded two servers and I've such behaviour on two of them. How to fix this and get network starts automatically on boot?

    Read the article

  • Vmware Workstation, Win7 host, Ubuntu guests with Nat + Host-only networks but they cannot connect to the Internet

    - by Ikon
    I have a Win7 host machine with Vmware Workstation. In the workstation I have 3 Ubuntu installed. All 3 Ubuntu guests have a Nat network - to access the internet without asking the router for a local address - and a Host-only network - to connect all Ubuntu quests and the host in a private network for internal communication, without touching the router. When I try to make any of the Ubuntu quests to get data from the internet - assuming that they would figure out that the Nat-ed interface can access the requested data - they fail and report that there is no route to my query. If I disconnect the 2nd interface on the Ubuntu guests with the Host-only network and restart networking, they start to know the route to the internet. Odd, during the installation of the guests they asked which of the 2 given interfaces - with Nat and Host-only config - should be used to get updates during installation and they oddly managed to get the updates. Not so after the installation has finished and rebooted. I have checked the Virtual Network Editor that the Nat interface should use my real network card to access the net, so there should be no problem. I wish not to use the router's dhcp service to give the Ubuntu quests an address, and also I don't want the guests to be accessable from the local network directly, but only by the host - that's the Host-only network is for. Any suggestions? Edit: 192.168.189.0 is the Nat interface and 192.168.7.0 is the Host-only. $ route -n Kernel IP routing table Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref Use Iface 192.168.7.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth1 192.168.189.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth0 0.0.0.0 192.168.189.2 0.0.0.0 UG 100 0 0 eth0

    Read the article

  • VMware Workstation Bridged Network Host UnReachable

    - by user2097818
    VMware Workstation 7 on Win7-64 (Home Premium). I have confirmed this on any guest running on this machine (from winxp to debian). I am using a bridged network connection for my guests (Automatic on VMnet0). All of the network configuration is done with DHCP (including on the host). Problem What I can not do: Ping my host machine from inside any VM. (either shows me "Destination Host Unreachable" or will just timeout) What I CAN do right after power up, with no problems at all. I can connect to the internet from inside the VM I can ping my router from inside the VM I can ping other machines on my network from inside the VM Other machines can ping the VM Other machines can ping the host My host machine can ping the VM (this one is important. read further) Details So I have my router assigned as 192.168.2.1/255.255.255.0, and the router provides the DHCP service (and it seems to be doing so successfully). There are no IP conflicts on the network that I am aware of. All Gateways and Subnet masks are appropriate and matching. My entire workshop is on one single subnet, with one single DHCP server and gateway. There is one method in which I can ping successfully, but it requires an active connection initiated from the host (I start pinging from host to VM). During the period of the active connection, I can successfully ping from VM to host, using explicit IP address. As soon as the host connection is closed, the VM ping starts hanging with the same old messages. My Thoughts This really feels like a firewall problem, but I have turned off all firewalls on host and VM, powered down the network, powered back up, and the problem still persists. And if it was firewall, why would only the IP address associated with bridged VM networks be blocked. I feel as though my host operating system (Win7) is somehow configured incorrectly, or, VMware Workstation is configured incorrectly from the host side. Although I have done my best to put everything in default, I feel like I am missing something silly.

    Read the article

  • Setting up /etc/network/interface file for KVM ubuntu 10.10

    - by Charles Thornton
    I am trying to setup KVM on Unbuntu 10.10 IFCONFIG DUMP: hydra(~}$ifconfig eth0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:1b:fc:cb:77:eb inet addr:172.20.20.3 Bcast:172.20.20.255 Mask:255.255.255.0 inet6 addr: fe80::21b:fcff:fecb:77eb/64 Scope:Link UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 RX packets:1345 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:1541 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:1000 RX bytes:820414 (820.4 KB) TX bytes:317708 (317.7 KB) Interrupt:23 Base address:0xc000 lo Link encap:Local Loopback inet addr:127.0.0.1 Mask:255.0.0.0 inet6 addr: ::1/128 Scope:Host UP LOOPBACK RUNNING MTU:16436 Metric:1 RX packets:8 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:8 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:0 RX bytes:480 (480.0 B) TX bytes:480 (480.0 B) virbr0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 0a:1e:fb:b4:77:84 inet addr:192.168.122.1 Bcast:192.168.122.255 Mask:255.255.255.0 inet6 addr: fe80::81e:fbff:feb4:7784/64 Scope:Link UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 RX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:56 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:0 RX bytes:0 (0.0 B) TX bytes:8934 (8.9 KB) hydra(~}$ QUESTION:: How should /etc/network/interfaces be setup?? The following attempt just kills my internet connection! --------- /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 auto eth0 iface eth0 inet manual auto br0 iface br0 inet static address 172.20.20.3 netmask 255.255.255.0 network 172.20.20.0 broadcast 172.20.20.255 gateway 172.20.20.1 bridge_ports eth0 bridge_fd 9 bridge_hello 2 bridge_maxage 12 bridge_stp off What am I doing wrong????

    Read the article

  • Assign individual NIC to KVM guest

    - by Bin S
    I have a server with 6 NICs installed and is running Ubuntu 12.04LTS. I want to setup 4 guest VMs using kvm. Now I want to assign 2 NICs for the host(1 Public IP and 1 private IP), and 1 NIC each to 4 guest VM(all private IP). How do I do this? /etc/network/interfaces I am having trouble with my configuration file shown below: # The loopback network interface auto lo iface lo inet loopback # The primary network interface auto eth0 iface eth0 inet static address 192.168.1.109 netmask 255.255.255.0 gateway 192.168.1.5 auto eth1 iface eth1 inet static address 192.168.1.117 netmask 255.255.255.0 auto eth2 iface eth2 inet manual auto br0 iface br0 inet static address 192.168.1.118 netmask 255.255.255.0 bridge_ports eth2 bridge_fd 9 bridge_hello 2 bridge_maxage 12 bridge_stp off auto eth3 iface eth3 inet manual auto br1 iface br1 inet static address 192.168.1.119 netmask 255.255.255.0 bridge_ports eth3 bridge_fd 9 bridge_hello 2 bridge_maxage 12 bridge_stp off auto eth4 iface eth4 inet manual auto br2 iface br2 inet static address 192.168.1.123 netmask 255.255.255.0 bridge_ports eth4 bridge_fd 9 bridge_hello 2 bridge_maxage 12 bridge_stp off auto eth5 iface eth5 inet manual auto br3 iface br3 inet static address 192.168.1.124 netmask 255.255.255.0 bridge_ports eth5 bridge_fd 9 bridge_hello 2 bridge_maxage 12 bridge_stp off

    Read the article

  • Strange network connectivity problem

    - by Marc
    Here is my network connectivity: cable modem | |(WAN) wrt54g (default gateway, 192.168.1.1) -- earth |(LAN) | Simple Switch1 | | | | | SimpleSwitch2- neptune | | | | mars mercury | |- venus | |- laptop | saturn (Windows AD DC) simpleSwitch2 was hanging off the wrt54g. I moved it to SW1 during troubleshooting. Nothing described below was any different. earth is connected via wireless to the wrt54g. I can ping from laptop to mars, neptune & mercury. I can ping from earth to venus, saturn & laptop. However, pinging mars, mercury or neptune from earth gives the following result. Pinging mars.XXX.XXX [192.168.1.105] with 32 bytes of data: Reply from 192.168.1.122: Destination host unreachable. Reply from 192.168.1.122: Destination host unreachable. Reply from 192.168.1.122: Destination host unreachable. Reply from 192.168.1.122: Destination host unreachable. Ping statistics for 192.168.1.105: Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss), .122 is the address of the machine from which I am pinging. earth is a Vista machine. Windows firewall is off. saturn is my DNS & DHCP server. Can anyone give me any ideas what the h*ll is going on? Clearly the topology is a factor And yes, I am a space geek.

    Read the article

  • Two internet connections at once in Windows 7

    - by webmasters
    I have a 3G wireless modem and I have a LAN - Right now they are both connected. I need a way to choose which applications will use the 3G connection and which applications will use the LAN. My Operating System is windows 7. How can I do this? Any ideas? Here is a route print: - the 3G modem's IP is 10.81.132.96 Lets say, for example, map google.com to using the 3G internet connection. IPv4 Route Table =========================================================================== Active Routes: Network Destination Netmask Gateway Interface Metric 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 192.168.2.1 192.168.2.102 20 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 10.81.132.97 10.81.132.111 286 10.81.132.96 255.255.255.224 On-link 10.81.132.111 286 10.81.132.111 255.255.255.255 On-link 10.81.132.111 286 10.81.132.127 255.255.255.255 On-link 10.81.132.111 286 127.0.0.0 255.0.0.0 On-link 127.0.0.1 306 127.0.0.1 255.255.255.255 On-link 127.0.0.1 306 127.255.255.255 255.255.255.255 On-link 127.0.0.1 306 192.168.2.0 255.255.255.0 On-link 192.168.2.102 276 192.168.2.102 255.255.255.255 On-link 192.168.2.102 276 192.168.2.255 255.255.255.255 On-link 192.168.2.102 276 224.0.0.0 240.0.0.0 On-link 127.0.0.1 306 224.0.0.0 240.0.0.0 On-link 192.168.2.102 276 224.0.0.0 240.0.0.0 On-link 10.81.132.111 286 255.255.255.255 255.255.255.255 On-link 127.0.0.1 306 255.255.255.255 255.255.255.255 On-link 192.168.2.102 276 255.255.255.255 255.255.255.255 On-link 10.81.132.111 286 ===========================================================================

    Read the article

  • "Network is unreachable" When pinging google, can connect to internal computers on debian VM

    - by musher
    Similar to this SU question: "Network is unreachable" when attempting to ping google, but internal addresses work Actually, it's pretty much the same base issue. I went through that thread trying to find a solution, I changed my resolv.conf: before: domain [my work domain] search [my work domain] nameserver [my gateway] nameserver [my gateway2] I changed it to: after: domain [my work domain] search [my work domain] nameserver 8.8.8.8 nameserver 8.8.4.4 However, any time I reboot the computer the resolv.conf gets overwritten to the previous version (the 'before' above). The issues began after I installed virtualbox additions, X server and (specifically) LXDE: Cat of apt history.log: Start-Date: 2014-08-21 10:03:42 Commandline: apt-get install virtualbox-guest-utils virtualbox-guest-dkms Install: x11-xkb-utils:amd64 (7.7+1, automatic), libxaw7:amd64 (1.0.12-2, automatic), xfonts-utils:$ End-Date: 2014-08-21 10:03:56 Start-Date: 2014-08-21 10:18:39 Commandline: apt-get install lxde Install: desktop-base:amd64 (7.0.3, automatic), libgoa-1.0-0b:amd64 (3.12.4-1, automatic), lxmenu-d$ End-Date: 2014-08-21 10:21:52 Start-Date: 2014-08-21 10:26:40 Commandline: apt-get upgrade Upgrade: libio-socket-ssl-perl:am ifconfig on the guest: root@Peridot:~# ifconfig eth0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 08:00:27:89:c9:20 og inet addr:172.31.2.102 Bcast:172.31.2.255 Mask:255.255.255.0 inet6 addr: fe80::a00:27ff:fe89:c920/64 Scope:Link UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 RX packets:2281 errors:0 dropped:1 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:463 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:1000 RX bytes:266507 (260.2 KiB) TX bytes:120554 (117.7 KiB) lo Link encap:Local Loopback inet addr:127.0.0.1 Mask:255.0.0.0 inet6 addr: ::1/128 Scope:Host UP LOOPBACK RUNNING MTU:65536 Metric:1 RX packets:4 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:4 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:0 RX bytes:240 (240.0 B) TX bytes:240 (240.0 B) The adapter in VBox is a bridged adapter directly onto my ethernet connection; as are my other 2 VMs (which work) Other SU questions I've tried: "connect: Network is unreachable" in VirtualBox VM

    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

  • Can't ping localhost/or reach locally hosted domain

    - by Ian
    I can't reach a locally hosted domain, and in testing I have discovered I can't ping localhost or the actual IP either. OS is Windows7 64bit, Pro. DNS works, I can ping others on my network, they can ping me, and they can reach the hosted domain. The ONLY problem I have found is that I can't reach the locally hosted domains! C:\Users\ianipconfig /all Windows IP Configuration Host Name . . . . . . . . . . . . : leda Primary Dns Suffix . . . . . . . : Node Type . . . . . . . . . . . . : Hybrid IP Routing Enabled. . . . . . . . : No WINS Proxy Enabled. . . . . . . . : No DNS Suffix Search List. . . . . . : hcs Ethernet adapter Local Area Connection: Connection-specific DNS Suffix . : hcs Description . . . . . . . . . . . : Atheros AR8121/AR8113/AR8114 PCI-E Ethern et Controller Physical Address. . . . . . . . . : 00-23-54-7C-E2-2A DHCP Enabled. . . . . . . . . . . : No Autoconfiguration Enabled . . . . : Yes IPv4 Address. . . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.0.12(Preferred) Subnet Mask . . . . . . . . . . . : 255.255.255.0 Default Gateway . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.0.1 DNS Servers . . . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.0.1 NetBIOS over Tcpip. . . . . . . . : Enabled Ethernet adapter VirtualBox Host-Only Network #2: Connection-specific DNS Suffix . : Description . . . . . . . . . . . : VirtualBox Host-Only Ethernet Adapter #2 Physical Address. . . . . . . . . : 08-00-27-00-88-4A DHCP Enabled. . . . . . . . . . . : No Autoconfiguration Enabled . . . . : Yes Autoconfiguration IPv4 Address. . : 169.254.205.215(Preferred) Subnet Mask . . . . . . . . . . . : 255.255.0.0 Default Gateway . . . . . . . . . : NetBIOS over Tcpip. . . . . . . . : Enabled C:\Users\ianping localhost Pinging leda [127.0.0.1] with 32 bytes of data: Request timed out. Request timed out. Request timed out. Request timed out. Ping statistics for 127.0.0.1: Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 0, Lost = 4 (100% loss), C:\Users\ianping coachmaster.leda.hcs Pinging coachmaster.leda.hcs [192.168.0.12] with 32 bytes of data: Request timed out. Request timed out. Request timed out. Request timed out. Ping statistics for 192.168.0.12: Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 0, Lost = 4 (100% loss), C:\Users\ian I can reach a hosted VM in VirtualBox and the VM can browse the hosted sites. I've removed Zone Alarm and disabled Windows Firewall - same results. So how can I browse my locally hosted sited? What could be blocking it? Thanks Ian

    Read the article

  • KVM virtual machine unable to access internet

    - by peachykeen
    I have KVM set up to run a virtual machine (Windows Home Server 2011 acting as a build agent) on a dedicated server (CentOS 6.3). Recently, I ran updates on the host, and the virtual machine is now unable to connect to the internet. The virtual network is running through NAT, the host has an interface (eth0:0) set up with a static IP (virt-manager shows the network and its IP correctly), and all connections to that IP should be sent to the guest. The host and guest can ping one another, but the guest cannot ping anything above the host, nor can I ping the guest from anywhere else (I can ping the host). Results from the guest to another server under my control and from an external system to the guest both return "Destination port unreachable". Running tcpdump on the host and destination shows the host replying to the ping, but the destination never sees it (it doesn't even look like the host is bothering to send it on at all, which leads me to suspect iptables). The ping output matches that, listing replies from 192.168.100.1. The guest can resolve DNS, however, which I find rather odd. The guest's network settings (connection TCP/IPv4 properties) are set up with a static local IP (192.168.100.128), mask of 255.255.255.0, and gateway and DNS at 192.168.100.1. When originally setting up the vm/net, I had set up some iptables rules to enable bridging, but after my hosting company complained about the bridge, I set up a new virtual net using NAT and believe I removed all the rules. The VM's network was working perfectly fine for the last few months, until yesterday. I haven't heard anything from the hosting company, didn't change anything on the guest, so as far as I know, nothing else has changed (unfortunately the list of packages updated has since fallen off scrollback and I didn't note it down).

    Read the article

  • Wireless Access Point stopped working

    - by Alex Pritchard
    I have a simple LAN set up at home using a Linksys WRT54GSV4 as my primary router and an Encore ENHWI-2AN3 as an access point. I connect the Encore to the Linksys by running a cable from one of the Linksys LAN ports into the Encore WAN input. I originally configured this using the Encore setup wizard, setting the device up in AP Router Mode. It detected the input network and worked about as expected, creating a second network that used my primary network to connect to the internet. It worked fine for about 2 weeks, then abruptly cut out today. I checked to make sure the network was still live through the cable going into the Encore (provides internet when connected to a laptop directly) and that devices are still able to connect to the network being broadcast by the Encore. When I try to rerun the connection wizard on the Encore, I receive the message "No Services found in WAN port." The WAN Settings is no longer retrieving a dynamic ip from the line. I tried providing a static IP, assigning an IP address within the subnet range of my primary router that wasn't being used and pointing the Default Gateway to the Linksys IP, but this did not work either. When I plug the cable into the WAN port, an internet light comes on that is not lit when a live network is not connected. I've tried doing a hard reset on the Encore (held down the rest button until the lights flashed, reconfigured from scratch), but the WAN settings are still not detected. Also tried powering off and on the modem, linksys, and encore. Any suggestions would be appreciated!

    Read the article

  • OpenVPN server will not redirect traffic

    - by skerit
    I set up an OpenVPN server on my VPS, using this guide: http://vpsnoc.com/blog/how-to-install-openvpn-on-a-debianubuntu-vps-instantly/ And I can connect to it without problems. Connect, that is, because no traffic is being redirected. When I try to load a webpage when connected to the vpn I just get an error. This is the config file it generated: dev tun server 10.8.0.0 255.255.255.0 ifconfig-pool-persist ipp.txt ca ca.crt cert server.crt key server.key dh dh1024.pem push "route 10.8.0.0 255.255.255.0" push "redirect-gateway" comp-lzo keepalive 10 60 ping-timer-rem persist-tun persist-key group daemon daemon This is my iptables.conf # Generated by iptables-save v1.4.4 on Sat May 7 13:09:44 2011 *raw :PREROUTING ACCEPT [37938267:10998335127] :OUTPUT ACCEPT [35616847:14165347907] COMMIT # Completed on Sat May 7 13:09:44 2011 # Generated by iptables-save v1.4.4 on Sat May 7 13:09:44 2011 *nat :PREROUTING ACCEPT [794948:91051460] :POSTROUTING ACCEPT [1603974:108147033] :OUTPUT ACCEPT [1603974:108147033] -A POSTROUTING -s 10.8.0.0/24 -o eth0 -j MASQUERADE -A POSTROUTING -s 10.8.0.0/24 -o eth1 -j MASQUERADE -A POSTROUTING -s 10.8.0.0/24 -o venet0 -j MASQUERADE COMMIT # Completed on Sat May 7 13:09:44 2011 # Generated by iptables-save v1.4.4 on Sat May 7 13:09:44 2011 *mangle :PREROUTING ACCEPT [37938267:10998335127] :INPUT ACCEPT [37677226:10960834925] :FORWARD ACCEPT [0:0] :OUTPUT ACCEPT [35616847:14165347907] :POSTROUTING ACCEPT [35680187:14169930490] COMMIT # Completed on Sat May 7 13:09:44 2011 # Generated by iptables-save v1.4.4 on Sat May 7 13:09:44 2011 *filter :INPUT ACCEPT [37677226:10960834925] :FORWARD ACCEPT [0:0] :OUTPUT ACCEPT [35616848:14165347947] -A INPUT -i eth0 -j LOG --log-prefix "BANDWIDTH_IN:" --log-level 7 -A FORWARD -o eth0 -j LOG --log-prefix "BANDWIDTH_OUT:" --log-level 7 -A FORWARD -i eth0 -j LOG --log-prefix "BANDWIDTH_IN:" --log-level 7 -A OUTPUT -o eth0 -j LOG --log-prefix "BANDWIDTH_OUT:" --log-level 7 COMMIT # Completed on Sat May 7 13:09:44 2011

    Read the article

  • Why does my Windows 8 Pro Hyper-V guest have no internet?

    - by Perplexed
    Trying to get this working on my Windows 8 Pro machine. I created an External Switch Assigned the newly available adapter to a Guest machine with Win 2008 os. My host has internet connection. Host can ping Guest, Guest cannot ping Host. Guest has no internet connection. Pasting the IP of both host and guest. HOST ========================== Ethernet adapter vEthernet (EXTSW01): Connection-specific DNS Suffix . : Description . . . . . . . . . . . : Hyper-V Virtual Ethernet Adapter #2 Physical Address. . . . . . . . . : 9C-B7-0F-0F-D7-D0 DHCP Enabled. . . . . . . . . . . : Yes Autoconfiguration Enabled . . . . : Yes Link-local IPv6 Address . . . . . : fe80::5434:a9fd:8611:d207%54(Preferred) IPv4 Address. . . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.0.15(Preferred) Subnet Mask . . . . . . . . . . . : 255.255.255.0 Lease Obtained. . . . . . . . . . : Saturday, September 8, 2012 12:34:44 PM Lease Expires . . . . . . . . . . : Saturday, September 15, 2012 12:34:44 PM Default Gateway . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.0.1 DHCP Server . . . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.0.1 DHCPv6 IAID . . . . . . . . . . . : 916240141 DHCPv6 Client DUID. . . . . . . . : 00-01-00-01-17-DC-C9-2C-9C-B7-0D-0D-D7-D0 DNS Servers . . . . . . . . . . . : 64.71.255.999 NetBIOS over Tcpip. . . . . . . . : Enabled GUEST ========================== Ethernet adapter Local Area Connection: Connection-specific DNS Suffix . : Description . . . . . . . . . . . : Microsoft Virtual Machine Bus Network Adapter Physical Address. . . . . . . . . : 00-15-5D-3F-0F-00 DHCP Enabled. . . . . . . . . . . : No Autoconfiguration Enabled . . . . : Yes Link-local IPv6 Address . . . . . : fe80::953f:ec5c:5d84:1b50%11(Preferred) IPv4 Address. . . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.0.20(Preferred) Subnet Mask . . . . . . . . . . . : 255.255.255.0 Default Gateway . . . . . . . . . : 0.0.0.0 DHCPv6 IAID . . . . . . . . . . . : 234886493 DHCPv6 Client DUID. . . . . . . . : 00-01-00-01-17-DD-2F-29-0F-15-5E-00-0F-00 DNS Servers . . . . . . . . . . . : ::1 127.0.0.1 NetBIOS over Tcpip. . . . . . . . : Enabled

    Read the article

  • How do I enable Ubuntu Gnome system tools

    - by RussellW
    I am running Ubuntu 10 with Gnome 2.30.2. This is a VMWare workstation image provided by another company that I do not have support in this regard. I am trying to access the graphical tools for configuring the network, users, and services but the System-Administration menu does not have these options listed. The main issue I am trying to solve is to correct the problems with the gnome menu options and network settings I have the gnome-system-tools package installed, and I am unable to run command-line versions of the tools, such as nm-applet (I get no GUI if I run that command, the process is running in the background). I realize that I can perform many tasks command-line, but I would like to use the GUI for administrative functions as I am not overly proficient for all command for restarting services and setting a static IP with a specific gateway. Further, I can run gnome-nettool, but I cannot change the IP, I can only see my network card. nm-connection-editor does not show any network cards that I can configure to change the IP. Currently, I am getting a DHCP through my NAT in VMWare, I want to set it to a specific IP address though. Preferences Menu (note some missing options) ![Preferences Menu][1] Admin Menu (note some missing options) ![Admin Menu][2] Network Tools (I can view but not change IP address) ![Network Tools][3] Network Settings (Unable to change IP address) ![Network Settings][4] Network Connections (no connections listed, not even my existing ethernet NAT connection through VMWare) ![Network Connections][5] See images here that I have referenced: 1- http://i.imgur.com/kl8pP.png 2- http://i.imgur.com/K3Cjz.png 3- Iq7Xb.png 4- 7wheV.png 5- J2ad8.png

    Read the article

  • VirtualBox with Ubuntu Server guest can't ping outside

    - by Danidan
    Here's my situation: an Ubuntu 12.04 Host running VirtualBox; two guest VMs running Ubuntu Server 12.04 home network, so my Host pc has a wireless connection to the router of my ISP. My problem is in one of the virtual machines: it has 3 NICs, one in NAT mode and the others in Host Only mode. My purpose is to use eth0 (NAT) for Internet access and eth1, eth2 (Host Only) for management of internal virtual network (eth1 uses a VBoxNet with this IP 192.168.69.254). Whenever I try to $ping 8.8.8.8 I get Destination Host Unreachable. While if I $ping 192.168.69.10, that is the IP of the other VM, it works. I can't also ping my Host nor my router My /etc/network/interfaces file is: auto lo iface lo inet loopback auto eth0 iface eth0 inet dhcp auto eth1 iface eth1 inet static address 192.168.69.1 netmask 255.255.255.0 auto eth2 iface ifconfig $IFACE 0.0.0.0 up up ip link set $IFACE promisc on down ip link set $IFASE promisc off down ifconfig $IFACE down $route -n returns: Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref Use Iface 0.0.0.0 10.0.2.2 0.0.0.0 UG 100 0 0 eth0 10.0.2.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth0 192.168.69.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth1 192.168.100.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 virbr0 Forgetting for now what eth2 needs to do and its setup, why I can't go outside the Host box? What can I do to help you helping me? :-)

    Read the article

  • Splitting an HTTP request into multiple byte-range requests

    - by redpola
    I have arrived at the unusual situation of having two completely independent Internet connections to my home. This has the advantage of redundancy etc but the drawback that both connections max out at about 6Mb/s. So one individual outbound http request is directed by my "intelligent gateway" (TP-LINK ER6120) out over one or the other connection for its lifetime. This works fine over complex web pages and utilises both external connects fine. However, single-http-request downloads are limited to the maximum rate of one of the two connections. So I'm thinking, surely I can setup some kind of proxy server to direct all my http requests to. For each incoming http request, the proxy server will issue multiple byte-range requests for the desired data and manage the reassembly and delivery of that data to the client's request. I can see this has some overhead, and also some edge cases where there will be blocking problems waiting for data. I also imagine webmasters of single-servers would rather I didn't hit them with 8 byte-range requests instead of one request. How can I achieve this http request deconstruct/reconstruction? Or am I just barking mad?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181  | Next Page >