Search Results

Search found 9758 results on 391 pages for 'wireless networking'.

Page 222/391 | < Previous Page | 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229  | Next Page >

  • Can't get nmap to work under Windows 7 64 bit

    - by jitbit
    I'm trying to install and run the nmap tool to test my server, but it keeps saying Note: Host seems down. If it is really up, but blocking our ping probes, try -P0 and showing all the server ports are closed. Which is not true - the server is up and has lots of open ports. Any ideas? UPDATE: Just to clarify - the server can be pinged and port-scanned fine by other programs. It's juts nmap that does not work. Even "google.com" seems to be down for nmap.

    Read the article

  • Connect android to linux laptop [closed]

    - by Claudio Ferraro
    I've a laptop with linux and wanna to connect an android device to the linux machine. On linux i have an mpd server installed. wanna to be able to connect from an android mpd client to the server which resides on the laptop. I tryed to create an Ad-hoc Wifi network on linux but the Android cannot find the Wifi network..How can I proceed..Should I buy a wifi hotspot or something like that ? I've a wifi router , it could help me somehow ?

    Read the article

  • Window 7 image in vmware will allow network connection out but not http

    - by Ormis
    I am currently trying to create a set of images to deploy on my network, but I've run in to a snag. When I create my own Windows 7 image I can successfully use NAT for connecting to the network but whenever I try to access a webpage I get nothing. To be more specific, All firewalls/iptables are disabled on my host machine, my virtual machine, and my network. I can do lookups and all addresses respond correctly (i'm even using Google's DNS). On the host OS i have full connectivity. On the virtual machine I can ping any device I want and all addresses resolve correctly. Within a browser I cannot reach any page via hostname or IP. I feel almost like port 80 is being blocked but i can't find any reason this would be the case. If anyone has had this occur before, I would love some insight to the problem. I initially asked this on stackoverflow and now my eyes are now opened up to superuser. Thank you for any help you can provide.

    Read the article

  • Server not resolving after restart

    - by DomainSoil
    I restarted our server today, and now cannot for the life of me get anything to resolve... I suspect it has something to do with our routes. I've tried numerous Google results to no avail. Here is as far as I've gotten: [root@www ~]# route -n Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref Use Iface 192.168.1.101 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.255 UH 0 0 0 eth1 0.0.0.0 192.168.1.101 0.0.0.0 UG 0 0 0 eth1 Things you need to know: Our server (CentOS 6.3) runs two virtual machines, one live, and one development. They mirror each other as much as possible, but I can't find where I've went wrong with the live server. The dev server works fine. [root@www ~]# ifconfig eth1 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx inet6 addr: xxxx:xxx:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx/64 Scope:Link UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 RX packets:118206 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:165 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:1000 RX bytes:7825749 (7.4 Mib) TX bytes:7146 (69.2 KiB) Interrupt:28 [root@www ~]# /etc/init.d/network status Configured devices: lo Auto eth0 Currently active devices: lo eth1 If there is any other information you need, please don't hesitate to ask!

    Read the article

  • Route web browsing through a separate iterface

    - by tkane
    I'd like to route web browsing 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

  • iptables rule on INPUT between 2 ethernet cards on the same host

    - by user1495181
    I have 2 eth cards on the same host. Both connected directly with LAN cable. I set eth0 with ip - 192.168.1.2 I set eth1 with ip - 192.168.1.1 I set this rule: iptables -A INPUT -p tcp -j NFQUEUE --queue-num 0 There are no other rules. (I ran iptables -X,-F) I send TCP syn packet ( with c++ program by using raw socket) from 192.168.1.2 to 192.168.1.1 In wireshark i see that the packet received on eth0, but the iptables rule (above) dosnt apply for this packet. when i sent the packet to remote host and apply this rule on the remote host than it work correct. So, i guess that this is due to the fact that both eth cards exists the same host. . I need to create iptables INPUT rule for local eth card (dest and src on the same machine ). I need it for simplify test. Did i guess the problem correct? is there a way to bypass this? Ps - connected them via switch didn't help. the rule wasn't applied. Run on Ubuntu. TCDUMP show the packet: 10:48:42.365002 IP 192.168.1.2.38550 > 192.168.1.1.34298: Flags [S], seq 0, win 5840, length 0 but logging of iptables like this, has nothing: iptables -A INPUT -p tcp -j LOG --log-prefix '*****************' iptables -A OUTPUT -p tcp -j LOG --log-prefix '#################'

    Read the article

  • Jumbo Frames on DIR-655

    - by Spookyone
    I am trying to set up jumbo frames on my gigabit home LAN but no luck so far. My setup is: D-Link DIR-655 router, HW Revision A3, Firmware 1.21 EU Synology DS107+, Firmware 3.0-1337 Laptop w/ Win7 x64, external PCIx NIC managed by "Generic Marvel Yukon 88E8053 based Ethernet Controller" The router is supposed to support jumbo frames but doesn't feature any relevant setting. I set the Jumbo Packet value to 9000 on both the NIC and the Synobox but it doesn't work, ping -f -l 8972 says "Packet needs to be fragmented but DF set". Is there any other setting I overlooked, the DIR-655 doesn't actually support jumbo frames, or what else could be the problem?

    Read the article

  • WinXP workgroup, 3 routers 3 computers

    - by Silvera
    I have 3 computers with WinXP x86, and 3 Cisco 1800 series routers. I'm trying to create a workgroup so that the 3 computers can share files with eachother. They can ping eachother (without any internet connection), and the routers setup is correctly configured (with interfaces, ip adresses, and ports). But none of the computers can see eachother, even though they are on the same network. My first question would be - can it be done the way it is currently configured - and, if yes, how, or can anyone point me in the right direction?

    Read the article

  • Process vsserv.exe attempts connection to unknown host (clients.your-server.de)

    - by pushpraj
    from past few day I notice a new connection is being made from my system, I discovered it within the outpost firewall, it is blocked by default with the reason Block Transit Packets in the image above you can see that the process vsserv.exe is attempting a connection to static.88-198-155-41.clients.your-server.de I tried to search on google but could not find any relevant info, however this link http://www.webmasterworld.com/search_engine_spiders/3963600.htm says that your-server.de hosts bad bots. I am bit concerned if something is not correct. Could you help me understand the same?

    Read the article

  • OSD with ConfigMgr across subnets?

    - by MattUebel
    I am trying to deploy a system image from one subnet to another. Subnet A contains the SCCM server. Subnet B contains the workstation that I want to build. Subnet B contains a DHCP server with a scope configured to service the workstations. How would I configure the DHCP server so that it tells the workstations to look at the SCCM server on Subnet A as its bootserver?

    Read the article

  • Lots of dropped packages when tcpdumping on busy interface

    - by Frands Hansen
    My challenge I need to do tcpdumping of a lot of data - actually from 2 interfaces left in promiscuous mode that are able to see a lot of traffic. To sum it up Log all traffic in promiscuous mode from 2 interfaces Those interfaces are not assigned an IP address pcap files must be rotated per ~1G When 10 TB of files are stored, start truncating the oldest What I currently do Right now I use tcpdump like this: tcpdump -n -C 1000 -z /data/compress.sh -i any -w /data/livedump/capture.pcap $FILTER The $FILTER contains src/dst filters so that I can use -i any. The reason for this is, that I have two interfaces and I would like to run the dump in a single thread rather than two. compress.sh takes care of assigning tar to another CPU core, compress the data, give it a reasonable filename and move it to an archive location. I cannot specify two interfaces, thus I have chosen to use filters and dump from any interface. Right now, I do not do any housekeeping, but I plan on monitoring disk and when I have 100G left I will start wiping the oldest files - this should be fine. And now; my problem I see dropped packets. This is from a dump that has been running for a few hours and collected roughly 250 gigs of pcap files: 430083369 packets captured 430115470 packets received by filter 32057 packets dropped by kernel <-- This is my concern How can I avoid so many packets being dropped? These things I did already try or look at Changed the value of /proc/sys/net/core/rmem_max and /proc/sys/net/core/rmem_default which did indeed help - actually it took care of just around half of the dropped packets. I have also looked at gulp - the problem with gulp is, that it does not support multiple interfaces in one process and it gets angry if the interface does not have an IP address. Unfortunately, that is a deal breaker in my case. Next problem is, that when the traffic flows though a pipe, I cannot get the automatic rotation going. Getting one huge 10 TB file is not very efficient and I don't have a machine with 10TB+ RAM that I can run wireshark on, so that's out. Do you have any suggestions? Maybe even a better way of doing my traffic dump altogether.

    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

  • How can I set my TP-Link TL-WR1043ND to extend my router - modem range?

    - by Pitto
    I'd like to extend my WiFi coverage, so I've bought the TP-Link TL-WR1043ND and updated its firmware to the latest (wr1043nv1_en_3_13_4_up(110429)) but I can't find how to use its WDS function. Reading further on Super User I understand that both the modem-router (Pirelli Alice Gate) and the TL-WR1043ND should support WDS. Are there any tricks to achieve the same result - extending my WiFi range - even changing the firmware to DD-WRT or Tomato etc?

    Read the article

  • Macvlan based interface pings from host but not from namespace

    - by jtlebi
    My setup: Private network vboxnet1 10.0.7.0/24 1 Host, ubuntu desktop 1 VM, ubuntu server (VirtualBox) Adressing layout: HOST: 10.0.7.1 VM: 10.0.7.101 VM MAC NAMESPACE: 10.0.7.102 On the VM, I ran the following commands: ip netns add mac # create a new nmespace ip link add link eth0 mac0 type macvlan # create a new macvlan interface ip link set mac0 netns mac On the mac namespace, inside the VM: ip link set lo up ip link set mac up ip addr add 10.0.7.102/24 dev mac0 So that we basically end up with: (Like Inception ?) +------------------------+ | Host: 10.0.7.1 | | | | +--------------------+ | | | VM: 10.0.7.101 | | | | | | | | +----------------+ | | | | | NS: 10.0.7.102 | | | | | | | | | | | +----------------+ | | | +--------------------+ | +------------------------+ What works: Ping between Host and VM Ping between NS and NS dhclient from NS What does not work: ping between NS and VM ping between NS and Host Where I started to go nuts: tcpdump on host (the real machine) actually shows ARP request AND replies tcpdump on NS shows ARP requests sent to the host tcpdump on VM makes the whole mess work (!) -- ping starts to get answers when tcpdump is started on the VM ?!? So, I bet you were eager for it, my question is: how to I make it work ? I suspect something's wrong with ARP on the macvlan inside the NS but can't figure out what exactly... Btw, I did the same expérimentations with the mac0 interface directly on the VM (no namespace) and it worked flawlessly.

    Read the article

  • TCP/IP communication between Hyper-V host and guests

    - by Tedd Hansen
    This may be a simple one. :) I have a simple Hyper-V setup with a few guest os running. The host has 1 physical network adapter with a static IP assigned to it. The guests have network adapters assigned to "Internet" (Hyper-V network) which is bound to the physical host network adapter (Hyper-V "External" connection type). I am not able to communicate (ping or anything else) between guests and host. I've checked firewall and it seems fine (ports open from anywhere still don't work). I'm trying to communicate with the hosts IP assigned to the same physical interface that the guests are sharing. Guests can communicate between them just fine. I can't seem to find any relevant setting (I might just be missing it). So my questions: How do I fix it so host and guests can communicate?

    Read the article

  • Repeated requests on our server?

    - by pitty.platsch
    I encountered something strange in the access log of our Apache server which I cannot explain. Requests for webpages that I or my colleagues do from the office's Windows network get repeated by another IP (that we don't know) a couple of seconds later. The user agent repeating our requests is Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 8.0; Windows NT 5.1; Trident/4.0; .NET CLR 2.0.50727; .NET CLR 3.0.04506.648; .NET CLR 3.5.21022; .NET CLR 3.0.4506.2152; .NET CLR 3.5.30729; InfoPath.2) Has anyone an idea? Update: I've got some more information now. The referrer of the replicate is set to the URL I requested before and it's not the exact same request as the protocol version is changed from 'HTTP/1.1' to 'HTTP/1.0'. The IP is not just one, it's just one of a subnet (80.40.134.*). It's just the first request to a resource that's get repeated, so it seems the "spy" is building up some kind of cache of visited places. The repeater is also picky. I tried randomly URLs with different HTTP status codes and different file patterns. 301s and 200s are redone, 404s not. Image extensions seem to be ignored. While doing my tests I discovered that this behavior seems to be common as I found other clients visiting just after the first requests: 66.249.73.184 - - [25/Oct/2012:10:51:33 +0100] "GET /foobar/ HTTP/1.1" 200 10952 "-" "Mediapartners-Google" 50.17.125.180 - - [25/Oct/2012:10:51:33 +0100] "GET /foobar/ HTTP/1.1" 200 41312 "-" "Mozilla/5.0 (compatible; proximic; +http://www.proximic.com/info/spider.php)" I wasn't aware about this practice, so I don't see it that much as a threat anymore. I still want to find out who this is, so any further help is appreciated. I'll try later if this also happens if I query some other server where I have access to the access logs and will update here then.

    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

  • 8 Character Device names

    - by Lee Harrison
    Is there any reason to still use only 8 characters in a device name? My boss still uses this rule for printers, computers, routers, servers... basicly any device connected to our network. This leads to massive confusion among users, especially when it comes to printer. It also leads to confusion from an administration standpoint because every device is named vaguely, and similarly(its only 8 characters!). I understand the history behind this and compatibility with older systems, but none of our legacy systems will ever make use of PS-printers and Wifi networks. Is there any reason to still do this, and what is everyone else doing when it comes to naming network devices at an enterprise level?

    Read the article

  • Kill UDP port that has no process?

    - by Chocohound
    I can't bind to UDP port 500 from my code (yes I'm running w/ sudo). The port is reported as "already in use" (Mac os X), but doesn't have an associated process: $ sudo netstat -na | grep "udp.*\.500\>" udp4 0 0 192.168.50.181.500 *.* udp4 0 0 192.168.29.166.500 *.* But sudo lsof doesn't show a process on port 500 (ie sudo lsof -i:500 -P reports nothing). How can I unbind port 500 so I can use it again? I believe I have a bad VPN client that isn't cleaning up after itself, but I can't get rid of this without rebooting the machine.

    Read the article

  • Cant ping ip on LAN. Port forward works fine though.

    - by Anoop
    I have a Solaris 11 machine running inside the LAN. It is a default install. I can access the machine and ping it if I ssh into my router (if it matters, it is running dd-wrt). I cannot ping the Solaris machine using ip address from any other machine inside the LAN. But if I setup port forwarding everything works perfectly fine. I can also use the port forward from outside the LAN (from my office) - which is good and how I want it to be. I can SSH and ping and do pretty much everything else from outside as well as inside but only as long as I have the port forwarded from my router. Why would I not be able to ping or ssh or even access the Solaris 11 machine from within the LAN - I have checked and couldn't find any firewall running on the Solaris 11 box. I even tried disabling every known firewall on the router (dd-wrt, it had something like SPI firewall running). I even tried setting a static IP for my Solaris box but all in vain! Please help me understand how and why this happens!! Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Internet connection sharing windows server 2008 R2

    - by This is it
    I have one windows server 2008 r2, and that server has 4 network interfaces (3 private, 1 internet connection). I would like to share internet connection with other 3 networks. Windows server firewall should make logs of data that is transfered. It should not be possible to connect directly to private networks from internet. How could I do it? Edit: I tried with NAT in RRAS, but it doesn't work. Here is the configuration: Server: IP private:192.168.0.1 IP public: xx.xx.xx.xx client IP:192.168.0.2 Default gateway: 192.168.0.1 Public and private interface added in NAT section of RRAS.

    Read the article

  • Simple server status page hosted externally available for users

    - by Chris
    I am looking for any kind of script - can be asp or php or any other web language - that gives me the ability to log outages and the current state of the network for our organisation. This would be similar to any major Telco's "Network Status" page, but I just want to tell the user's out there if the systems are up and running and have a history of recent outages. This would be for our remote user's so they could go to a webpage (externally hosted from our main site) and see that we are currently having problems with our network. What are other people out there using?

    Read the article

  • Switches with large MAC address table?

    - by user1290200
    Does anyone know which switches have a large MAC address table ? I see most switches having only 8K, but we need to store way, way more than that (hundreds of K). I know this may seem odd, but trust me, there's no other way we can make our setup work. The only thing we seem to be able to do is install Juniper routers that store up to 1M addresses, but that will get quite costly and we'd rather avoid doing that.

    Read the article

  • Prevent Linux from processing incoming ICMP Host unreachable packets

    - by bbc
    I have a test setup with one host on a network (10.1.0.0/16) talking via TCP to another one on another network (10.2.0.0/16) and a gateway in the middle. Sometimes, the TCP connection is lost and while scanning the trace (pcap), I looks like it's because of just one ICMP Host unreachable message sent by the gateway to 10.1.0.1 at some point. 10.1.0.1 then sends a TCP RST to 10.2.0.1. In my opinion, the gateway (pfSense) is broken or not configured correctly but anyway, for testing purposes, I'd like to block this kind of ICMP on the host (10.1.0.1) before it has an influence on my TCP connection (or does it? I'm not even sure). I've tried iptables: iptables -I INPUT -i eth0 -p icmp --icmp-type host-unreachable -j DROP but while it does a good job at preventing userpace applications like ping from receiving these ICMP messages, my TCP connection still comes to an end when the alleged "killer ICMP packet" is sent by the gateway. Am I right about how it is processed? If yes, then what can I do to achieve my goal?

    Read the article

  • Is it possible to map static IP to computer name instead of MAC address?

    - by xenon
    I have a number of computers with different hostnames connected to the network. They currently hold a static IP address based on their MAC address. In other words, the static IP address is mapped to their MAC address. This gives rise to a problem and that's when we swap the harddrive from one computer to another, the MAC address becomes different and the application we are running on the harddrive has problem getting the right static IP for it to work. We can't configure the IP address in the application all the time. And changing the static IP addresses to re-map to the computer's new MAC address can be quite a pain. Since all the computers have a unique computer name as their hostname, is it possible to configure such that when these computers grab IP addresses from the DHCP server, DHCP will learn about their hostname and assign the correct IP address? This is to say, the static IP is mapped to the computers' hostname instead of their MAC address. All the computers are running on Windows 7. Would this be possible? If so how should I go about do this?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229  | Next Page >