Search Results

Search found 8555 results on 343 pages for 'virtualbox networking'.

Page 204/343 | < Previous Page | 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211  | Next Page >

  • What are the different ways of remotely connecting to your computer?

    - by Rogue
    I'll be leaving for uni soon and would like to know the different methods of connecting remotely to my home pc. I know about VPN but are there any other ways? Also how secure is each of this method as I wouldn't want snoopers on my home-pc especially when I'm away. Also can i set up a remote connection to start and shut down my computer My operating system is windows, but if linux is more secure i would be willing to switch.

    Read the article

  • Network topology for both direct and routed traffic between two nodes

    - by IndigoFire
    Despite it's small size, this is the most difficult network design problem I've faced. There are three nodes in this network: PC running Windows XP with an internal WiFi adapter.Base station with both WiFi and a Wireless Modem (WiModem)Mobile device with both WiFi and WiModem The modem is a low-bandwidth but high-reliability connection. We'd like to use WiFi for high-bandwidth stuff like file transfers when the mobile is nearby, and the modem for control information. Here's the tricky part: we'd like the wifi traffic to go directly from the mobile to the PC, as rebroadcasting packets on the same WiFi channel takes up double the bandwidth. We can do that with a manual configuration by giving the both the PC and the base station two IP addresses for their WiFi interfaces: one on a subnet shared with the mobile, and one on their own subnet. The routes on the PC are set up so that any traffic going to the mobile via WiModem goes through the secondary IP address so that return traffic from the mobile also goes through the WiModem. Here's what that looks like: PC WiFi 1: 192.168.2.10/24 WiFi 2: 192.168.3.10/24 Default route: 192.168.2.1 Base Station WiFi 1: 192.168.2.1/24 WiFi 2: 192.168.3.1/24 WiModem: 192.168.4.1/24 Mobile WiFi: 192.168.3.20/24 WiModem: 192.168.4.20/24 We'd like to move to having the base station automatically configure the mobile and PC, as the manual setup is problematic when you start having multiple mobiles and PCs. This means that the PC can only have 1 IP address and needs to be treated as being pretty simple. Is it possible to have a setup driven by DHCP on the base station that is efficient with bandwidth?

    Read the article

  • Windows 7 can't identify network

    - by Carl Hörberg
    I use a Windows 7 machine to share my internet connection, but the one network interface which are connected to my local network is marked as "Unidentified network", the sharing works well anyway but because the interface can't be chosen as Home network i can't use the HomeGroup features etc. Do you know which requirements an interface has meet to identify a network in Windows 7?

    Read the article

  • Unidentified network: How to configure TCP/IPv4 for Win7?

    - by Zolomon
    When I try to connect to internet I keep getting the error "Unidentified network". I've tried numerous attempts at restoring access without success. IP release, flushing DNS cache, reinstalling NIC, reactivating NIC, resetting router and so on... I've read several times that it's my default gateway that's wrong. Currently I've had automatic IP/DNS configuration set without any problems, and then it stopped working for some reason. Anyone know how I specify the IP? My subnetmask is 255.255.255.0, default gateway is 192.168.0.1 but I have no idea how to determine what IP I should set. I use a D-Link DIR-655 and other computers on the network have IPs like 192.168.0.194, next is 192.168.0.197. (I'm completely lost and am trying to cool down after two weekends of debugging filled with despair.)

    Read the article

  • Issue about mapping MAC address to Ipv6 address

    - by deepsky
    I know that the address in ipv6 with prefix range 001 to 111 should use a 64-bit interface identifier that follows the EUI-64 format, which translates the MAC to ipv6 as below. MAC:00-02-b3-1e-83-29 --> 02-02-b3-ff-fe-1e-83-29 --->ipv6 addr: fe80::202:b3ff:fe1e:8329 Then I checked my network status with ipconfig /all on my windows XP, but it seems my ipv6 address doesn't follow the above rule: MAC:00-24-81-XX-XX-XX ipv6 addr:2001:da8:8006:225:0:24:81XX:XXXX Obviously it doesn't follow the EUI-64 format. Instead it just directly use the MAC as the last 8 bytes. Anyone know the reason? Pls Correct me if I am wrong.

    Read the article

  • routing weirdness - traceroute 'vanishes' en route

    - by The Journeyman geek
    I'm attempting to set up one of my boxes as a server (again), but i'm having some odd connection issues- the box itself connects fine to the internet, but trying to connect to my external ip address seems to result in the trace getting 'lost' partway. http://pastebin.com/HCQAGbvn - this is a traceroute from another system that's connected to another ISP - starhub is my own one, while i have another system that i have access to on singtel. I'm wondering if my ISP is messing around with routing, or is something very odd going on. As you note, the traceroute dosen't reach me, but if it helps, i use a dd-wrt router. edit: Facepalmishly, turning the firewall on my router on and off fixed it. I don't get why it dropped off at different ip addresses each time, or why the router set it self to block.. everything, or why it affected the ipv6 tunnel as well.

    Read the article

  • What to do if people can't ping me?

    - by slayerIQ
    Today, I installed my new router so I can connect my other pc and my ps3. In my network, there are some other computers these are connected with each other through another router. So I have one modem with 2 routers that make up my network. Everything works fine the only problem I am having is being pinged by other computers in the network. All the computers are on the same subnet 255.255.255.0. There is no problem with my firewall or anything I tested everything. How can I solve this?

    Read the article

  • Why can't a PC with 2 network cards be accessed by hostname?

    - by lewis
    I set up PC with 2 network cards, connected to the same LAN. I can connect to this PC (e.g. by remote desktop) only via ip-addresses. Accessing by hostname does not work. Why is this the case? UPDATE: Full environment 1. PC with 2 hardware network adapters. 2. On this PC installed VMWare Workstation. Created 3 VM's, networked by "bridged" network setting in VMWare. 3. In LAN all ip-addresses given from DHCP. 4. Win2k8 on all hosts (both physical and vitrual). As result: 1. PC has 2 ip-address (e.g. 192.168.1.71 and 192.168.1.72). PC available in LAN by ip-addreses, but not avail by hostname. 2. VM's has own ip-addr on each (e.g. 192.168.1.73, *74, *75 etc). They are available from LAN by their ip's, BUT not by their hostnames. How can I access to PC and to VM's by hostname?

    Read the article

  • Ubuntu - wireless connection works great but wired is totally dead

    - by Dan
    I am running Ubuntu 10.04 on my Acer Aspire One netbook. The wireless connection works great, but the wired is totally dead. When I plug the Ethernet wire, the little led next to the port doesn't blink. If I do ifconfig, this is the output: 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:1659 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:1659 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:0 RX bytes:132304 (132.3 KB) TX bytes:132304 (132.3 KB) wlan0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 18:f4:6a:65:48:1f inet addr:192.168.1.7 Bcast:192.168.1.255 Mask:255.255.255.0 inet6 addr: fe80::1af4:6aff:fe65:481f/64 Scope:Link UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 RX packets:94823 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:81390 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:1000 RX bytes:93028474 (93.0 MB) TX bytes:18002558 (18.0 MB) There is no eth0. Is that normal? In the "Network Connections" GUI there is an entry "Wired connection 1", its "MAC address" field is blank. How can I make the wired connection work?

    Read the article

  • Connecting to Aerohive AP's from Laptops running Win. 7 using authentication from a Windows 2008 domain server

    - by user264116
    I have deployed a wireless network using Aerohive access points. 2 of them are set up as radius servers. I want my users to be able to use the same user name and password they use when they log onto our domain. They are able to do this from android devices or computers running Windows 8. It will not work on Windows 7 machines. How do I remedy this situation, keeping in mind that the machines are personal machines not company owned and I will have no way to change their hardware or software.

    Read the article

  • How to direct outgoing traffic through specific interface?

    - by user1434058
    I added eth1 and eth2 to my Ubuntu Server, all 3 use DHCP and are on the same lan eth0 10.0.0.41 eth1 10.0.0.42 eth3 10.0.0.43 Kernel IP routing table Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref Use Iface default router.net 0.0.0.0 UG 100 0 0 eth0 10.0.0.0 * 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth0 10.0.0.0 * 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth1 10.0.0.0 * 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth2 curl --interface eth1 www.google.com doesn't work what else do i need to do for the above to work?

    Read the article

  • Websocket handshake response not forwarded from TCP to client

    - by Saharsh
    I am trying to create a websocket server. I can see the websocket client's opening handhshake. My response to it is received by the client laptop (I can see this on wireshark). So the TCP connection has been established. But the client (a chrome websocket client extension) does not receive the handshake packet. What could be a possible reason for TCP to not forward the handshake to the client or for the client to not be able to read the TCP message? Client handshake: GET HTTP/1.1 Upgrade: websocket Connection:Upgrade Cache-Control:no-cache Host:192.168.0.101 Origin:http://www.websocket.org Pragma:no-cache Sec-WebSocket-Extensions:permessage-deflate; client_max_window_bits, x-webkit-deflate-frame Sec-WebSocket-Key: qrmw/m+BoZije6h9HYKmVw== Sec-WebSocket-Version:13 Upgrade:websocket Server Response: HTTP/1.1 101 Switching Protocols Upgrade: websocket Connection: Upgrade Sec-WebSocket-Accept: jj1g5Io57m9ks8cme3jkbyo2asc= Access-Control-Allow-Origin: http://www.websocket.org Server: xyz Sec-WebSocket-Extensions: Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Colocation and HSRP setup

    - by WinkyWolly
    My colocation provider has setup HSRP for us and has provided us 2 drops (plugged into 1/1/1 and 1/1/2) from their routers as well as a /29 with 2 HSRP IP's and the rest of the /29 usable for the switch. I know that HSRP should be pretty much plug and play as long as the ports are in the same VLAN. However I'm confused as to how to the IP setup should work. Currently I've assigned port 1/1/1 the full /29 however I think this is incorrect because if I were to unplug it port 1/1/2 wouldn't work as it has no IP assignment. What's the proper way to do this?

    Read the article

  • Why are my downloads up to ~1500KByte/sec only, when the ADSL connection locks at 13611Kbit/s?

    - by leladax
    No uploading is going on other than the overhead of downloading which appears to be not high for the abilities of the connection: Only about 30-40KByte/s when the router locks at 1012Kb/s and other direct uploads or uploading overheads can reach more than 100KByte/sec so I don't think it's a congestion at uploading that is doing it. Is there something I miss? Because I assume 13611Kbit/s should be ~1701Kbyte/sec. Is it an overheard at the ADSL level I don't understand? Could it be the ISP doing it? If it's active throttling it can't be on single connections since 2 high speed connections still go up to ~1500KByte/sec. It's not an example on torrents or other complex situations. The tests were on Ethernet, but I doubt the results would be different on wireless. I wonder if the settings of those connections at my end could be doing it, e.g. MTU settings, though I haven't touched the defaults of a common Realtek NIC.

    Read the article

  • Same network same switch but computers can't talk "ping"to eachother [closed]

    - by Sue
    Possible Duplicate: How does IPv4 Subnetting Work? Each computer(all 2 of them) can ping the router but can't ping each-other and firewall is off. Same default gateway, IP address very similar (just two number away at end) but the subnet mask is different between these two computers. One ends in 192 the other 224. There is a switch between them that then connects to the router. Why can't the computers ping each-other?

    Read the article

  • Preventing endless forwarding with two routers

    - by jarmund
    The network in quesiton looks basically like this: /----Inet1 / H1---[111.0/24]---GW1---[99.0/24] \----GW2-----Inet2 Device explaination H1: Host with IP 192.168.111.47 GW1: Linux box with IPs 192.168.111.1 and 192.168.99.2, as well as its own route to the internet. GW2: Generic wireless router with IP 192.168.99.1 and its own route to the internet. Inet1 & Inet2: Two possible routes to the internet In short: H has more than one possible route to the internet. H is supposed to only access the internet via GW2 when that link is up, so GW1 has some policy based routing special just for H1: ip rule add from 192.168.111.47 table 991 ip route add default via 192.168.99.1 table 991 While this works as long as GW2 has a direct link to the internet, the problem occurs when that link is down. What then happens is that GW2 forwards the packet back to GW1, which again forwards back to GW2, creating an endless loop of TCP-pingpong. The preferred result would be that the packet was just dropped. Is there something that can be done with iptables on GW1 to prevent this? Basically, an iptables-friendly version of "If packet comes from GW2, but originated from H1, drop it" Note1: It is preferable not to change anything on GW2. Note2: H1 needs to be able to talk to both GW1 and GW2, and vice versa, but only GW2 should lead to the internet TLDR; H1 should only be allowed internet access via GW2, but still needs to be able to talk to both GW1 and GW2. EDIT: The interfaces for GW1 are br0.105 for the '99' network, and br0.111 for the '111' network. The sollution may or may not be obnoxiously simple, but i have not been able to produce the proper iptables syntax myself, so help would be most appreciated. PS: This is a follow-up question from this question

    Read the article

  • Share ADSL Internet connection between two computers 40 meters away (straight) from each other

    - by dario_ramos
    I have a box with a working ADSL Internet connection. About 40 meters away (straight), in another house, there is another, older box. There are two houses in between. Would there be some practical way to supply an Internet connection to the older box? The neighbors are ok with us installing cables and stuff. I'd say wifi would not be practical, since the houses in between would weaken the signal too much. And using Ethernet cables might require a switch or router in between, due to Ethernet distance limitations. Advice?

    Read the article

  • RESOLVED Why does IPtables's NAT stop working when I enable the firewall's third interface?

    - by Kronick
    On my firewall I've three interfaces : eth0 : public IP (46.X.X.X.) eth0:0 public IP (46.X.X.Y.) eth1 : public IP (88.X.X.X.) eth2 : private LAN (172.X.X.X) I've setup a basic NAT which works great until I turn on the eth1 interface, I basically loose the connectivity. When I turn off the interface (ifconfig eth1 down) then the NAT re-work. I've added some policy routing via iproute, which makes my three public IP's available. I don't understand why turning on eth1 on makes the LAN unavailable. PS : weirder ; when I turn on eth1 BUT remove the NAT, then the firewall is accessible by using the public IPS. So to me it's exclusively a NAT issue, since without the NAT the network works while with the NAT without the second public interface, the NAT does work. Regards EDIT : I've been able to make it work by using iproute2 rules. That was definitely a routing issue. Here is what I did : ip rule add prio 50 table main ip rule add prio 201 from ip1/netmask table 201 ip rule add prio 202 from ip2/netmask table 202 ip route add default via gateway1 dev interface1 src ip1 proto static table 201 ip route append prohibit default table 201 metric 1 proto static ip route add default via gateway2 dev interface2 src ip2 proto static table 202 ip route append prohibit default table 202 metric 1 proto static # mutipath ip rule add prio 221 table 221 ip route add default table 221 proto static \ nexthop via gateway1 dev interface1 weight 2\ nexthop via gateway2 dev interface2 weight 3

    Read the article

  • Setting up a linux switch

    - by Shahmir Javaid
    I have a C++ Program to sniff each and every packet that crosses my linux box. However i need to now get my linux box to listen to every traffic in my network. I could buy a managed switch and set up port spanning, but i aint paying 200+ £'s for a switch and plus gives me a chance to learn. My Network +---------Computer A | Internet-----Router------Switch-------------+---------Linux Box | +---------Computer B Proposed Network +---------Computer A | Internet-----Router------Linux Box--------Switch eth0^ ^eth1 | +---------Computer B How would i setup this in linux. Do i just configure both the ethernet on different IP Address on the same network. Or am i completelly on the wrong track My System Fedora 13. Thanks

    Read the article

  • Is this anycast behaviour correct?

    - by etheros
    When connecting to an service provided using anycast, I am experiencing different behaviour depending on whether the request is made using TCP or UDP. With TCP, the request is made to address A, and the subsequent response also comes from A. With UDP however, while the request is made to A, the response comes from address B. Is this correct behaviour, or should the UDP response come from the same address it's sent to?

    Read the article

  • Storage replication/mirror over WAN

    - by galitz
    Hello, We are looking at storage replication between two data centers (600km apart) to support an active-passive cluster design for disaster recovery. The OS layer will be mostly Windows Server 2003/2008 with some OpenSuSE Linux used for performance monitoring on VMWare or possibly XenServer. The primary application service to replicate is Nvision. Datacenter 1 will have two storage systems for local active-passive or perhaps active-active replication with Datacenter 2 used as a last resport disaster recovery site. We have a handle on most aspects, but I am looking for specific recommendations on storage platforms that can handle remote replication cleanly. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • TCP dies on a Linux laptop

    - by Roman Cheplyaka
    Once in several days I have the following problem. My laptop (Debian GNU/Linux testing) suddenly becomes unable to work with TCP connections to the internet. The following things continue to work fine: UDP (DNS), ICMP (ping) — I get instant response TCP connections to other machines in the local network (e.g. I can ssh to a neighbour laptop) everything is ok for other machines in my LAN But when I try TCP connections from my laptop, they time out (no response to SYN packets). Here's a typical curl output: % curl -v google.com * About to connect() to google.com port 80 (#0) * Trying 173.194.39.105... * Connection timed out * Trying 173.194.39.110... * Connection timed out * Trying 173.194.39.97... * Connection timed out * Trying 173.194.39.102... * Timeout * Trying 173.194.39.98... * Timeout * Trying 173.194.39.96... * Timeout * Trying 173.194.39.103... * Timeout * Trying 173.194.39.99... * Timeout * Trying 173.194.39.101... * Timeout * Trying 173.194.39.104... * Timeout * Trying 173.194.39.100... * Timeout * Trying 2a00:1450:400d:803::1009... * Failed to connect to 2a00:1450:400d:803::1009: Network is unreachable * Success * couldn't connect to host * Closing connection #0 curl: (7) Failed to connect to 2a00:1450:400d:803::1009: Network is unreachable Restarting the connection and/or reloading the network card kernel module doesn't help. The only thing that helps is reboot. Clearly something is wrong with my system (everything else works fine), but I have no idea what exactly. I don't know how to reproduce this, but as I said, it happens every several days. My setup is a wireless router that is connected to the ISP via PPPoE. Any advice?

    Read the article

  • How can I detect if a NIC is UP in UNIX?

    - by Rich
    I am currently writing a bash script (for Nagios), and I would like to be able to detect if specific network cards are up or not. My best guess is to do something like this: ifconfig eth0 | grep UP | wc -l or: ethtool eth0 | grep "Link detected: yes" | wc -l Are either/both of those reliable ways of testing if the network card is up, or is there a better option? Perhaps there is a flag on ethtool which will do precisely what I want? Thanks in advance for any suggestions/pointers! Rich

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211  | Next Page >