Search Results

Search found 12281 results on 492 pages for 'ip blocking'.

Page 186/492 | < Previous Page | 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193  | Next Page >

  • Setup a Reverse Proxy with Nginx and Apache on EC2

    - by heavymark
    Good Day, I am currently using the free Amazon EC2 micro instance to learn Linux and server setup. I wish to setup Nginx as a reverse web proxy. I found a great article on mediatemple on how to do it: http://wiki.mediatemple.net/w/Using_Nginx_as_a_Reverse_Web_Proxy The directions work for most any server except for EC2.One difference between EC2 and MediaTemple is how IPs work. Overall EC2 instances do not know their elastic IP. So when following the wiki directions in the virtual hosts for instance instead of myip:80 for instance I put *:80. When just using Apache this works perfectly. In the apache virtual hosts I did "127.0.0.1:80" and in the Nginx I put *:80. Apache restarts, by Nginx provides an error that it cannot bind because the ip is already in use. If I could add an actual IP in the Nginx file it would work but since EC2 requires me to put in the asterisk it ends up conflicting with the apache virtual hosts entry. Anyone know a simple way around this (other than not using EC2) ;-) Thank you! Cheers, Christopher

    Read the article

  • ProCurve ACL to prevent a subnet from leaving the switch

    - by kce
    I have a single HP ProCurve 2610 in a remote location that is connected in with the rest of the network via SHDSL. There are two Layer-3 networks on this segment. ACLs are setup to deny one subnet (192.0.2.0/24) from ever being able to leave the switch by virtue of being applied to port attached to the upstream connection. The other subnet should be permitted to freely leave the switch. Both subnets are on the same VLAN. Unfortunately SFlow very clearly show broadcast traffic from 192.0.2.0/24 on the upstream connection. ProCurve ACLs are not my strong suit but I feel like I'm missing something very simple here. ip access-list extended "Filter for Camera Network" deny ip 192.0.2.0 0.0.0.255 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.255 log permit ip 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.255 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.255 exit interface 24 name "DSL - UPLINK" access-group "Filter for Camera Network" in exit Unless I am mistaken traffic from 192.0.2.0/24 should be dropped as it crosses the uplink port (int 24) whereas all other traffic will be permited by the following default allow rule. What exactly am I missing here? EDIT: Firstly, why do you have two subnets contained in the same VLAN? Because that's how it was configured by a previous administrator and while it makes conceptual sense that a single subnet is "mapped" to a single VLAN there's no technical constraint that I am aware of that makes this have to be the case. Instead of filtering inbound traffic on your uplink, you should be filtering outbound traffic. The HP2600 series can only filter inbound traffic on interfaces. Should I change my filter to deny any to 192.0.2.0/24?

    Read the article

  • WRT54GL Tomato Router in Client wireless mode to an iPhone Personal Hotspot

    - by Gordo
    I am trying to connect a router with Tomato firmware to an iPhone 4. The goal is to connect to the Personal Hotspot in Client Wireless mode. This should allow wired and wireless users to connect to the router rather then the iPhone. In theory this should be possible but I am having difficulty. Router Linksys WRT54GL Tomato 1.28.1816 firmware iPhone iPhone 4 iOS 5.1 (9B176) Carrier Rogers Wireless Personal Hotspot works with other devices, wifi/bluetooth/usb iPhone Personal Hotspot settings Mode: B/G Security: WPA or WPA2 Personal Encryption: AES Router IP: 172.20.10.1 Subnet: 172.20.10.0 Min IP: 172.20.10.2 Max IP: 172.20.10.14 maximum number of wireless tethered hosts is 5 I have followed the directions here: http://www.wi-fiplanet.com/tutorials/article.php/3810281 Ensured that the router subnet does not 'collide' with the iPhone subnet. Here is the configuration of the Tomato 'Basic - Network - Wireless' section: http://i.stack.imgur.com/pbmTB.png I have tried several variations of this configuration, but nothing seems to work. NOTE: I have successfully connected to my own wifi network in Wireless Client mode, so I am confident that there are no bad cables or other hardware issues. I would prefer to use Tomato, but DD-WRT maybe my only other option. Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Apache reverse proxy with VirtualHost not serving a page

    - by Mr Aleph
    I have an Apache reverse proxy set to move requests to a Tomcat Applet. The config is similar to: <VirtualHost 100.100.100.100:80> ProxyPass /AppName/App http://1.1.1.1/AppName/App ProxyPassReverse /AppName/App http://1.1.1.1/AppName/App </VirtualHost> I also have a page called summary.html that exists on 1.1.1.1 as: http://1.1.1.1/AppName/summary.html When I browse directly to it I have no problem viewing it, however if I try to get there via the reverse proxy I get a blank page. Wireshark shows me a 503, but this one is coming from the Apache reverse proxy (IP 100.100.100.100) and not the Tomcat (IP 1.1.1.1). Should I add http://1.1.1.1/AppName/ to the config? How? I tried it but I get a blank page, however this one shows on the URL bar of the browser the internal IP of the Tomcat, so, no go. Help is appreciated. Thanks. EDIT: This is the dump from Wireshark: GET /AppName/ HTTP/1.1 Host: 100.100.100.100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_6_8) AppleWebKit/534.52.7 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1.2 Safari/534.52.7 Accept: text/html,application/xhtml+xml,application/xml;q=0.9,*/*;q=0.8 Cache-Control: max-age=0 Accept-Language: en-us Accept-Encoding: gzip, deflate Connection: keep-alive HTTP/1.1 404 Not Found Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2012 09:08:51 GMT Server: Apache Content-Length: 1 Connection: close Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1

    Read the article

  • Why does my DD-WRT not accept SSH connections from my laptop?

    - by Vlad Seghete
    So, here is my system: I have a 2Wire AT&T modem/router which I use for wireless and a Buffalo router flashed with DD-WRT which is physically attached to the 2Wire and set in the DMZ. I set everything up on the DD-WRT to be able to connect to it using ssh and also so that it forwards ssh requests on a different port to one of the servers behind it. Now, when I am physically connected to the DD-WRT all this works great and as I would want it to. I ssh into the two different ports using the WAN IP of my network, and I get where I expect to land. If, however, I am connected using wi-fi to the 2Wire, the same commands do not work. I do not get an error, simply a timeout. I have trouble understanding this, since the DD-WRT is set in the DMZ and everything should pass to it. To further complicate the problem, I tried connecting to the same IP using my phone (wireless disabled, so really from the WAN) and surprise, it works! If I go back on the local network by enabling the wifi, the ssh connection times out. To make this even stranger, my WAN IP address always responds to pings (meaning in all the above situations). What could be going on here? I know what I should do, completely disable the 2wire as a router and use it strictly as a modem and them use all the routing capabilities of the dd-wrt. It's what I will probably end up doing anyway, but my question remains, because I really want to know what is happening here.

    Read the article

  • Tomato/DD-WRT router to act as switch & only NAT some port

    - by fseto
    BACKGROUND: I have a device that must use a real IP address. Currently, my ISP uses DHCP and I can have up to 4 real IP address assigned. However, the cable modem only have 1 ethernet port and it's connected to my router (running Tomato, but can run DD-wrt or other Openwrt if required). Question stems from how I can connect the additional device, requiring a real IP? EASY SOLUTION: would be to get a switch and connect to the CM, Router, and Device. But alas, I want to avoid this route, since: my wiring cabinet in my home is drawing lots of power and heat already Device will be unprotected by any firewall unable to monitor the traffic to/from device. Besides, what would be the FUN in that? =) IDEA: So what I want to do is to configure the router, so that one of the switchport is removed from the normal br0 bridge. Instead, I want to make it behave like a switch on the WAN port. What's the best way of doing this? Should I create another bridge on the WAN & the device port? Can a single port belongs to two bridges? or would I need to create a subinterface first? Would I need a DHCP-relay? Am I expecting too much from my poor cheapie router? +------+ | CM | +--++--+ || +----WAN---------------+ | / \ Router | | BR1? BR0 | | | \ | | | {NAT} | | | / | | \ | +-P0----P1-P2-P3-Wifi--+ | +------+ |Device| +------+

    Read the article

  • I've just set up FreeBSD 8.0 and can't login with ssh

    - by Matt
    /etc/hosts.allow is set to allow any protocol from anywhere. I can "ssh localhost" and it works. I simply get "connection refused" from putty on another machine. Any ideas? Will try to get a copy of the sshd_server.conf file as soon as I can find a flash disk to copy it to, but I thought someone might know what you need to set initially to permit login. EDIT: I think I can see why it's not working now. If I telnet to the IP address of the server I'm seeing MGE UPS SYSTEMS SNMP Web/Agent configuration menu. Enter Password: Doh. Ok, so the IP address is assigned by DHCP, but it seems there is already a device statically assigned to that address. I'll put in a reservation and try again. ok, sorted now. It was an ip address conflict. Windows DHCP isn't smart enough to check if there is something listening on the address before first assigning it.

    Read the article

  • Running HTTP and HTTPS connections for a single domain (say, www.example.com) through a Cisco ACE SS

    - by Paddu
    My web application config has a Cisco ACE load balancing across a server farm and I want to use the ACE as an SSL endpoint as well. To make this work, the network architect has come up with a design where all secure pages have to be served from secure.my-domain.com, while non-secure pages are served up from www.my-domain.com. The reason for this is apparently that the configuring the Cisco ACE to accept HTTPS requests on port 443 for a particular public IP prevents the simultaneous acceptance of HTTP requests on port 80 for the same IP. While I'm not a networking (or Cisco) expert, this seems to be intuitively wrong, as it would prevent any website using the Cisco ACE to serve pages on http://www.my-domain.com and https://www.my-domain.com simultaneously. In this situation, my questions are: Is this truly a limitation of the Cisco ACE when used as an SSL endpoint? If not, then can I assume that we can set up the ACE to accept connections for a particular IP on ports 80 and 443, and function as an SSL endpoint for the incoming requests on 443? Links to appropriate documentation most welcome here. Assuming the setup in the previous question, can I then redirect both sets of requests to the same server farm on the same port?

    Read the article

  • Intermittent 5.7.1 email bounce to Exchange 2007

    - by Steve Kennaird
    My knowledge of Exchange isn't particularly great, so excuse me if some of the terminology I use isn't quite right. I'm primarily a web developer who's now responsible for a small business's network. We have a server running SBS 2008 and Exchange 2007. Generally, everything works well, emails are able to be sent to both internal and external domains without issue. We've only got ~20 users, Exchange is sitting on a single server. I use SendGrid to send emails generated by our externally hosted website to users in the office. Primarily, order notifications are sent to [email protected]. Without any pattern and less than once per week on average, an email to [email protected] will bounce back, and the logs on SendGrid detail the following error: 550 5.7.1 Unable to relay for [email protected] Either side of that failed delivery attempt, I'm able to send and receive emails to/from [email protected]. Having done some research, incorrect reverse DNS seems like it could be a cause of intermittent bounces like this. Having used nslookup, I have found that the reverse DNS doesn't map like it should, e.g. Office IP: 135.325.351.123 (made up IP, for example only) Domain: office.somedomain.com (made up, for example only) Reverse DNS: somedomain.gotadsl.co.uk (half made up) Could this be a cause? I'm sure that the IP address and the domain should map to each other. Also, it has been suggested to me that as the Exchange server is on a network with an ADSL connection, that could be a potential cause as the connection "goes up and down all day long". I don't have an opinion on this, as I don't have enough knowledge of Exchange/ADSL to form a reliable opinion. Can anyone offer any insight as to whether one or both are actually potential causes, or if there is another possible cause?

    Read the article

  • VPN on a ubuntu server limited to certain ips

    - by Hultner
    I got an server running Ubuntu Server 9.10 and I need access to it and other parts of my network sometimes when not at home. There's two places I need to access the VPN from. One of the places to an static IP and the other got an dynamic but with DynDNS setup so I can always get the current IP if I want to. Now when it comes to servers people call me kinda paranoid but security is always my number one priority and I never like to allow access to the server outside the network therefor I have two things I have to have on this VPN. One it shouldn't be accessiable from any other IP then these 2 and two it has to use a very secure key so it will be virtually impossible to bruteforce even from the said IP´s. I have no experience what so ever in setting up VPNs, I have used SSH tunneling but never an actuall VPN. So what would be the best, most stable, safest and performance effiecent way to set this up on a Ubuntu Server? Is it possible or should I just set up some kind of SSH Tunnel instead? Thanks on beforehand for answers.

    Read the article

  • How to place a virtual machine in DMZ?

    - by Giordano
    I have an Ubuntu 12.04 server running few virtual machines with KVM. I would like to expose some of these virtual machines on the internet, to make it possible for customers to test the products we're developing and make available other products for demo purposes. One of the server NICs is configured with a public IP. However before exposing anything on the web I would like to be sure that if one of the virtual machines get compromised, the attacker doesn't reach the rest of the hosts. What I would like to do is to put these virtual machines into a DMZ. These are the steps I'm planning to do: Create a tap interface in the virtualization host (let's say tap1) Create a bridge using tap1 and give it an IP in a subnet separate from the other hosts. Let's say 10.0.0.1 Attach the DMZ virtual machines to the bridge and configure their IP statically (10.0.0.2, 10.0.0.3, etc...) Using UFW, forbid any traffic from 10.0.0.0/24 to any of the internal hosts, allow the traffic from the internal hosts towards 10.0.0.0/24 and expose the virtual machines on the web using port forwarding. Do you think this setup is safe? Can you suggest any improvement or a better/safer approach? Thanks in advance!

    Read the article

  • Trouble with port 80 nating (XenServer to WebServer VM)

    - by Lain92
    I have a rent server running XenServer 6.2 I only have 1 public IP so i did some NAT to redirect ports 22 and 80 to my WebServer VM. I have a problem with the port 80 redirection. When i use this redirection, i can get in the WebServer's Apache but this server lose Web access. I get this kind of error : W: Failed to fetch http://http.debian.net/debian/dists/wheezy/main/source/Sources 404 Not Found [IP: 46.4.205.44 80] but i can ping anywhere. XenserverIP:80 redirected to 10.0.0.2:80 (WebServer). This is the port 80 redirection part of my XenServer iptables : -A PREROUTING -i xenbr1 -p tcp -m tcp --dport 80 -j DNAT --to-destination 10.0.0 .2:80 -A INPUT -i xenbr1 -p tcp -m state --state NEW -m tcp --dport 80 -j ACCEPT COMMIT What is wrong in my configuration? Is there a problem with XenServer? Thanks for your help ! Edit : Here is my iptables full content : *nat :PREROUTING ACCEPT [51:4060] :POSTROUTING ACCEPT [9:588] :OUTPUT ACCEPT [9:588] -A PREROUTING -p tcp -m tcp --dport 1234 -j DNAT --to-destination 10.0.0.2:22 -A PREROUTING -i xenbr1 -p tcp -m tcp --dport 80 -j DNAT --to-destination 10.0.0 .2:80 -A POSTROUTING -s 10.0.0.0/255.255.255.0 -j MASQUERADE COMMIT *filter :INPUT ACCEPT [5434:4284996] :FORWARD ACCEPT [0:0] :OUTPUT ACCEPT [5014:6004729] -A INPUT -i xenbr1 -p tcp -m state --state NEW -m tcp --dport 80 -j ACCEPT COMMIT Update : I have a second server with 10.0.0.3 as IP and it has the same problem that 10.0.0.2 has.

    Read the article

  • E-mail duplication problem

    - by Gavin Osborn
    I have taken out a hosting agreement with a well respected hosting provider for a couple of internet facing servers. We have deployed several applications to these servers which send various e-mails back to us for reporting purposes. Context: Each server runs Windows Server 2003 R2 with the IIS 6.0 SMTP service installed. Each application is configured to use the local instance of IIS to send e-mails. The external IP address of each server is mapped to a particular domain eg: server1.mydomain.com server2.mydomain.com These e-mails are sent from a company domain name and not the domain name of the hosted servers (eg: [email protected]) Symptoms: A small number (<1%) of e-mails sent from these applications appear to be duplicated. These are exact duplicate in terms of both content and message headers. The Fix: I contacted my hosting provider and they told me this was a common problem & instructed me to: Change the HELO response of your mail server service to a FQDN (server1.mydomain.com && server2.mydomain.com) Create a DNS A record that resolves the FQDN of your mail server to the primary IP address of your sending mail server. Create a PTR record that resolves your primary IP address back to your mail server's FQDN In the sending domain's (mycompanydomain.com) DNS zone file, add the appropriate SPF record for your hosted servers. eg: v=spf1 a mx include:mydomain -all The Problem Continues: I made all of the changes as prescribed above, I was a little hesitant because these steps seemed to suggest they were more for stopping your messages getting blocked than they were for stopping them from being duplicated - but I am certainly no expert in these matters. It has been 5 days since I applied this fix and the problem still persists. I am certain that these problems are not a bug in the software because they are 4 different applications installed on 2 different servers, all of whom are exhibiting this strange behaviour. This behaviour has also not been seen in our UAT environment. Were my hosts correct to suggest this fix? If not, does anyone know what could be the cause of this problem? Many Thanks

    Read the article

  • Varnish with multiple sites/boxes

    - by jerhinesmith
    Is it possible for Varnish to redirect traffic to different IPs based on the url? For example, is the following setup feasible (and if so, what would the VCL look like): *.example.com points to Varnish IP address When a request is made to foo.example.com, varnish checks the cache and sends the request to Server1's IP address on a cache miss. When a request is made to bar.example.com, varnish checks the cache and sends the request to Server2's IP address on a cache miss. foo and bar are (for the most part) completely unrelated sites. They use the engine, but have different content and their own distinct database. Since there previously was no penalty for doing so (other than cost) we split them up into two separate boxes so that a ton of traffic to foo won't have a negative impact on visitors browsing around bar. I could set up two instances of varnish and have one serve up foo's static content and the other serve up bar's, but as there doesn't seem to be much overhead to running Varnish, I think (perhaps mistakenly) that it would make more sense to go with one Varnish server that redirects the traffic to the appropriate box on a cache miss.

    Read the article

  • Does MySQL have some kind of DoS protection or per-user query limit?

    - by Ghostrider
    I'm a bit at a loss. I'm running a MySQL database that's roughly 1GB data in indices combined on a dedicated Linux server. DB version is '5.0.89-community'. Configuration is controlled via cPanel. PHP actually runs elsewhere on a shared hosting. IP addresses are static and don't change. Access from remote IP address is properly configured. Website gets around 10K hits per day with each hit generating a a database query. Some of these queries are expensive (~1 sec execution time). All is fine and well until at some point DB server starts refusing connections from the client, claiming that specific user can't access the server from that IP. Resetting the server will always fix the problem for a day or two and then the same thing happens. There are some other DBs on that server, some of which are hit pretty hard on occasion but constantnly. One of the apps maintains several persistent connections since it does couple of updates per minute. Though I don't think it's related. What's driving me mad is that I can't figure out why server would start refusing connections. There is nothing in the logs. This server is a hosted dedicated server so hosting company created the OS image and I didn't write or go over every line of configuration. I'd do it but I'm at a loss as to where start looking. Any advice is appreciated.

    Read the article

  • Configuring network route between two routers on home network

    - by Paul
    I have a home network - the main router connected to the internet (and has wifi) is a Netopia box. Connected to it is a Linksys router. Everything currently works - I can connect via the wireless network and get to the internet. Machines connected to the Linksys can connect with each other and connect to the internet. Both routers are configured to serve addresses via DHCP (Netopia 192.168.1.1 - 192.168.1.99), Linksys (192.168.0.1 - 192.168.0.100). Here's how they are connected: Internet <-> Netopia w/wifi (192.168.1.254) <-> Linksys (192.168.0.1) I decided I really need to allow wireless connections to also communicate with machines behind the Linksys router. Currently the Linksys is configured to obtain an IP address via DHCP. I thought this would be straightforward. I configured the Linksys to have a static IP address: IP: 192.168.1.100 Mask: 255.255.255.0 GW: 192.168.1.254 Then I configured a static route on the Netopia: Network: 192.168.0.0 Mask: 255.255.255.0 GW: 192.168.1.100 So it should now look like this: Internet <-> Netopia w/wifi (192.168.1.254) <-> (192.168.1.100) Linksys (192.168.0.1) I reset both routers. I cannot ping the Netopia (192.168.1.254) from inside the Linksys network, and if I attempt to ping 192.168.0.1 from a wifi connection I get a "Destination host not available" error. Obviously I'm missing something, but I'm not sure where. Any ideas on what I'm missing?

    Read the article

  • Unable to mount root fs over NFS [on hold]

    - by johnmadrak
    I am attempting to set up a Raspberry Pi running Pidora to boot from an NFS share. My configuration in cmdline.txt is: dwc_otg.lpm_enable=0 console=ttyAMA0,115200 console=tty1 root=/dev/nfs nfsroot=<serverip>:/fake/path,nfsvers=3,rw,nolock nfsrootdebug ip=dhcp elevator=deadline rootwait On the Pi, the output I see is: IP-Config: Got DHCP answer from <router>, my address is <clientip> IP-Config: Complete: device=eth0, hwaddr=<macaddress>, ipaddr=<clientip>, mask=255.255.255.0, gw=<routerip> host=<clientip>, domain=, nis-domain=(none) bootserver=<routerip>, rootserver=<serverip>, rootpath= nameserver0=<routerip> (It pauses for a bit here) VFS: Unable to mount root fs via NFS, trying floppy VFS: Cannot open root device "nfs" or unknown-block(2,0); error -6 Please append a correct "root=" boot option; here are the available partitions: ..... On the NFS Server (an OpenVZ Container), the output I see in the /var/log/messages is: Aug 22 23:24:01 vps-4178 rpc.mountd[928]: authenticated mount request from <clientip>:783 for /fake/path (/fake/path) Aug 22 23:24:38 vps-4178 rpc.mountd[928]: authenticated mount request from <clientip>:741 for /fake/path (/fake/path) Aug 22 23:25:25 vps-4178 rpc.mountd[928]: authenticated mount request from <clientip>:752 for /fake/path (/fake/path) Aug 22 23:26:12 vps-4178 rpc.mountd[928]: authenticated mount request from <clientip>:876 for /fake/path (/fake/path) To test, I've made sure I can mount (non-root) from both the Pi and another machine and it worked. Does anyone have an idea on what could be wrong or how to narrow it down? Thank you in advanced for your help.

    Read the article

  • Single m0n0wall - Two LAN Subnets - How To Setup

    - by SnAzBaZ
    I have two LAN subnets that I need to link together they are 192.168.4.0/24 and 192.168.5.0/24 There is a m0n0wall running on 192.168.4.1. It's LAN connection goes out to our network switch, and it's WAN port goes out to our ADSL modem. WAN is connected via PPPoE. The 192.168.4.0 subnet contains all of our office workstations. The 192.168.5.0 subnet contains development servers and test machines that need to obtain internet access and be "managed" by computers on the 192.168.4.0 subnet, but need to be on their own subnet as well. I have a Draytek 2820N configured on 192.168.5.1 with it's WAN2 port configured as 192.168.4.25 and a default gateway of 192.168.4.1. Machines on the 5.0 subnet can connect to the internet via the m0n0wall just fine. I configured a static route on the m0n0wall LAN interface, Network 192.168.5.0/24 and Gateway 192.168.4.25. Machines on the 5.0 subnet can ping machines on the 4.0 network but the reverse does not work. I configured a new firewall rule on the m0n0wall that allows any traffic on the LAN interface with a source IP of 192.168.4.25 to be allowed. The DrayTek firewall is currently configured to pass all traffic regardless. When I try to ping a machine in the 5.0 subnet from 4.0 I see this in my m0n0wall log: BLOCK 14:45:27.888157 LAN 192.168.4.25 192.168.4.37, type echoreply/0 ICMP So the reply is being sent from the 5.0 subnet but is not being allowed to reach my workstation because the firewall is blocking it. Why is the firewall blocking it ? I hope the explanation of my network is clear, please ask if you require further clarification. Thank you.

    Read the article

  • connecting to server with multiple nics in other vlan

    - by Thierry
    I have a windows 2003 server with 3 nics on 3 vlan's (this is in domain 1). nic 1 has a default gateway to my router/firewall (sonicwall). In nic 2 and 3 I have left it empty, because it is advised like that everywhere. Within this domain and VLAN's 1-3 everything works fine. BUT... I have a second domain (domain 2) with a 4th Vlan (all 4 VLAN's connected to the same router/firewall) from which my clients need to access the 2003 server in domain 1 (it's my antivirus management console for both domains). when i ping the server from my vlan4 by it's FQDN, it randomly chooses ip from nic 1, 2 or 3 from my 2003 server. (logically because that server is know in DNS with it's 3 IP-addresses. And that is needed for my VLAN's 1-3) I don't really have a problem with that. BUT, I only get an answer of NIC1 (which sounds logically to me, because it's the only one with a gateway). It is not a router problem, because I'm testing in this phase and ping from vlan4 to any machine in vlan1, 2 or 3 that has 1 nic works just fine. If i add a gateway to nic2 and nic3, I get answer from all 3 nics and this works fine. But I know it's adviced to not do that. Can anyone give me advice in this particular case? Would it really be a problem to add a gateway to nic 2 and 3? They would be pointing to the same router/firewall (only with different ip-address, based on the vlan). Or is there another good solution to fix this problem? Thank's in advance, Thierry.

    Read the article

  • Error during SSL installation cPanel/WHM

    - by baswoni
    I have a dedicated server and I am using the install wizard via WHM to install an SSL certificate. I have the following keys: Certificate key RSA private key CA certificate I paste these three elements into the wizard along with the domain, IP address and username but I get this error: SSL install aborted due to error: Unable to save certificate key. Certificate verification passed Have I missed a step? I have given it another go to make sure I am copying and pasting the info correctly and I am now getting the following error: SSL install aborted due to error: Sorry, you must have a dedicated ip to use this feature for the user: username! If you are intending to install a shared certificate you must use the username "nobody" for security and bandwidth reporting reasons. Even though I am using a dedicated IP address, I am getting this problem. I thought I would also add that this SSL certificate has been installed on a shared hosting environment with my previous hostig provider. The account with them is still active, however the domain and its contents now reside on the dedicated server - could this cause problems?

    Read the article

  • Setup windows 2012 AD in Hyper-V for a Test environment

    - by hub
    Im trying to setup a Windos 2012 R2 test environment on my work computer (a laptop). I have a AD, DHCP and DNS server on server A, and a client connecting to the doman and that works. The client can ping the AD server and gets a valid IP adress. If I ping google.com from the client I get the IP adress but I dont get any responses (request time out). If i ping google.com from server A it works as it should. Server A have a connection to the Internet through a "external network switch" in hyper-v, which gets its internet from a router and the client is connected to a "internal network switch". May the poblem be that server A is behind a router? Can I make this solution to work regadless the network my laptop is connected to? At home i have one IP adress, at work its a totally different range. What I would like is to use my laptops internet connection, regardless wifi or wired, to act as incomming internet, is this possible?

    Read the article

  • Thomson router reboots unexpectedly with an apparent remote connection attempt

    - by ChrisF
    I've got a weird problem. Every so often my rooter (a Thomson TG585 v8 running version 8.2.7.8 of it's firmware) reboots itself. It seems to be associated with this message in the event log: FIREWALL replay check (1 of 2): Protocol: ICMP Src ip: 183.178.144.177 Dst ip: xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx Type: Destination Unreachable Code: Host Unreacheable xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx is my external IP address 183.178.144.177 resolves to 183178144177.ctinets.com We've got a student from Hong Kong staying with us at the moment and the reboots seem coincidental with him starting up his laptop. I say this because a check on ctinets.com shows it to be based in Hong Kong, though our guest's laptop doesn't appear to have any software related to this company installed. I say "apparently" as he is running the Chinese version of Windows and his English doesn't cover technical subjects like this. I know this is an incoming message but I was assuming that it was in response to something on the student's laptop which is why the first thought was malware, but we've got anti virus on all the other machines and have run malwarebytes on his with a negative result so I don't think the problem is due to a virus or (known) trojan. What else can I do to stop this and identify the cause?

    Read the article

  • How to configure a large mtu (linux)

    - by Somejan
    I have a gigabit ethernet connection from my laptop to my router, and a working ipv6 connection to the internet. I can receive very large packets from sites on the internet, with sizes up to at least 10000 bytes (according to wireshark). (edit: turns out to be linux's 'generic receive offload') However, when trying to send anything, my local computer fragments at just below 1500 bytes for ipv6. (On ipv4, I can send tcp packets to the internet of at least 1514 bytes, I can ping with packets up to the configured mtu of 6128 but they are blackholed.) I'm on ubuntu 12.04. I have configured an mtu for my eth0 of 6128 (the maximum it accepts), both using ip link set dev eth0 mtu 6128 and in the NetworkManager applet gui, and restarted the connection. ip link show eth0 shows the 6128 mtu is indeed set. ip -6 route shows that none of the paths the kernel knows about have an mtu set. I can ping over ipv4 with packets up to 6128 bytes (though I don't get responses), but when I do ping6 myrouter -c3 -s1500 -Mdo I get error replies from my own computer saying that the packets are too large and the mtu is 1480. I have confirmed with Wireshark that nothing is put on the wire, and the replies are indeed generated by my own computer. So, how do I get my computer to use the larger mtu?

    Read the article

  • What's going on with traceroute?

    - by Kevin
    The following is what happens when I run traceroute from a certain location: # traceroute google.com traceroute to google.com (74.125.227.39), 30 hops max, 60 byte packets 1 gateway.local.enactpc.com (10.0.0.1) 0.138 ms 0.101 ms 0.084 ms 2 * * * 3 * * * 4 * * * 5 * * * 6 * * * 7 * * * 8 * * * 9 * * * 10 * * * 11 * * * 12 * * * 13 * * * 14 * * * 15 * * * 16 * * * 17 * * * 18 * * * 19 * * * 20 * * * 21 * * * 22 * * * 23 * * * 24 * * * 25 * * * 26 * * * 27 * * * 28 * * * 29 * * * 30 * * * Absolutely nothing of interest... Now, originally I thought this was just a fact of the location's network set up. (I assume they block pings or something...) However, watch what happens when I use nmap to run a traceroute... # nmap -sP --traceroute google.com Starting Nmap 5.21 ( http://nmap.org ) at 2012-09-25 22:18 CDT Nmap scan report for google.com (74.125.227.40) Host is up (0.034s latency). Hostname google.com resolves to 11 IPs. Only scanned 74.125.227.40 rDNS record for 74.125.227.40: dfw06s06-in-f8.1e100.net TRACEROUTE (using proto 1/icmp) HOP RTT ADDRESS 1 0.19 ms gateway.local.enactpc.com (10.0.0.1) 2 1.93 ms 99-20-92-1.lightspeed.austtx.sbcglobal.net (99.20.92.1) 3 25.61 ms 99-20-92-2.lightspeed.austtx.sbcglobal.net (99.20.92.2) 4 ... 6 7 23.68 ms 12.83.68.137 8 31.30 ms gar23.dlstx.ip.att.net (12.122.85.73) 9 ... 10 31.82 ms 72.14.233.65 11 32.27 ms 209.85.250.77 12 32.98 ms dfw06s06-in-f8.1e100.net (74.125.227.40) Nmap done: 1 IP address (1 host up) scanned in 3.29 seconds When using nmap I get A LOT more results than with traceroute, why? Note, I checked, and the difference in target IP addresses is not related...

    Read the article

  • Trying to communicate between virtual servers on the same host through ipv6

    - by Daniele Testa
    I am running KVM on a host with 2 virtual servers. Each virtual server has a own bridge interface on the host VPS1 has br1 VPS2 has br2 Each virtual server has a own ipv4 and a ipv6. The virtual servers has no problem communicating with internet or with eachother through ipv4. However, with ipv6, they can only communicate with internet and NOT with eachother. The host can ping the 2 virtual servers without any problems, but they cannot ping eachother. iptables has been set to ACCEPT on all chains, so it is not the problem. VPS1 has ipv6 = 2a01:4f8:xxx:xxx::10 VPS2 has ipv6 = 2a01:4f8:xxx:xxx::5 the host has the following routes set: ip route add 2a01:4f8:xxx:xxx::10 dev br1 ip route add 2a01:4f8:xxx:xxx::5 dev br2 When I do a ping from VPS2 to VPS1, I see the following on the host: tcpdump -i br1 15:32:27.704404 IP6 2a01:4f8:xxx:xxx::10 > ff02::1:ff00:5: ICMP6, neighbor solicitation, who has 2a01:4f8:xxx:xxx::5, length 32 So it seems like the host is seeing the request coming from VPS1 on br1. But for some reason, it does not forward it to br2. Instead it is asking where the destination IP is through ipv6 multicast. Anyone has a clue what is going on? I find this very strange, as it is working fine with ipv4 with the exact same settings and routes.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193  | Next Page >