Search Results

Search found 3489 results on 140 pages for 'tcp'.

Page 26/140 | < Previous Page | 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33  | Next Page >

• SVN Server not responding

  - by Rob Forrest

  I've been bashing my head against a wall with this one all day and I would greatly appreciate a few more eyes on the problem at hand. We have an in-house SVN Server that contains all live and development code for our website. Our live server can connect to this and get updates from the repository. This was all working fine until we migrated the SVN Server from a physical machine to a vSphere VM. Now, for some reason that continues to fathom me, we can no longer connect to the SVN Server. The SVN Server runs CentOS 6.2, Apache and SVN 1.7.2. SELinux is well and trully disabled and the problem remains when iptables is stopped. Our production server does run an older version of CentOS and SVN but the same system worked previously so I don't think that this is the issue. Of note, if I have iptables enabled, using service iptables status, I can see a single packet coming in and being accepted but the production server simply hangs on any svn command. If I give up waiting and do a CTRL-C to break the process I get a "could not connect to server". To me it appears to be something to do with the SVN Server rejecting external connections but I have no idea how this would happen. Any thoughts on what I can try from here? Thanks, Rob Edit: Network topology Production server sits externally to our in-house SVN server. Our IPCop (?) firewall allows connections from it (and it alone) on port 80 and passes the connection to the SVN Server. The hardware is all pretty decent and I don't doubt that its doing its job correctly, especially as iptables is seeing the new connections. subversion.conf (in /etc/httpd/conf.d) LoadModule dav_svn_module modules/mod_dav_svn.so <Location /repos> DAV svn SVNPath /var/svn/repos <LimitExcept PROPFIND OPTIONS REPORT> AuthType Basic AuthName "SVN Server" AuthUserFile /var/svn/svn-auth Require valid-user </LimitExcept> </Location> ifconfig eth0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:0C:29:5F:C8:3A inet addr:172.16.0.14 Bcast:172.16.0.255 Mask:255.255.255.0 inet6 addr: fe80::20c:29ff:fe5f:c83a/64 Scope:Link UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 RX packets:32317 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:632 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:1000 RX bytes:2544036 (2.4 MiB) TX bytes:143207 (139.8 KiB) netstat -lntp Active Internet connections (only servers) Proto Recv-Q Send-Q Local Address Foreign Address State PID/Program name tcp 0 0 0.0.0.0:3306 0.0.0.0:* LISTEN 1484/mysqld tcp 0 0 0.0.0.0:111 0.0.0.0:* LISTEN 1135/rpcbind tcp 0 0 0.0.0.0:22 0.0.0.0:* LISTEN 1351/sshd tcp 0 0 127.0.0.1:631 0.0.0.0:* LISTEN 1230/cupsd tcp 0 0 127.0.0.1:25 0.0.0.0:* LISTEN 1575/master tcp 0 0 0.0.0.0:58401 0.0.0.0:* LISTEN 1153/rpc.statd tcp 0 0 0.0.0.0:5672 0.0.0.0:* LISTEN 1626/qpidd tcp 0 0 :::139 :::* LISTEN 1678/smbd tcp 0 0 :::111 :::* LISTEN 1135/rpcbind tcp 0 0 :::80 :::* LISTEN 1615/httpd tcp 0 0 :::22 :::* LISTEN 1351/sshd tcp 0 0 ::1:631 :::* LISTEN 1230/cupsd tcp 0 0 ::1:25 :::* LISTEN 1575/master tcp 0 0 :::445 :::* LISTEN 1678/smbd tcp 0 0 :::56799 :::* LISTEN 1153/rpc.statd iptables --list -v -n (when iptables is stopped) Chain INPUT (policy ACCEPT 0 packets, 0 bytes) pkts bytes target prot opt in out source destination Chain FORWARD (policy ACCEPT 0 packets, 0 bytes) pkts bytes target prot opt in out source destination Chain OUTPUT (policy ACCEPT 0 packets, 0 bytes) pkts bytes target prot opt in out source destination iptables --list -v -n (when iptables is running, after one attempted svn connection) Chain INPUT (policy ACCEPT 68 packets, 6561 bytes) pkts bytes target prot opt in out source destination 19 1304 ACCEPT all -- * * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 state RELATED,ESTABLISHED 0 0 ACCEPT icmp -- * * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 0 0 ACCEPT all -- lo * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 0 0 ACCEPT tcp -- * * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 state NEW tcp dpt:22 1 60 ACCEPT tcp -- * * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 state NEW tcp dpt:80 0 0 ACCEPT tcp -- * * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 state NEW tcp dpt:80 0 0 ACCEPT udp -- * * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 state NEW udp dpt:80 Chain FORWARD (policy ACCEPT 0 packets, 0 bytes) pkts bytes target prot opt in out source destination Chain OUTPUT (policy ACCEPT 17 packets, 1612 bytes) pkts bytes target prot opt in out source destination tcpdump 17:08:18.455114 IP 'production server'.43255 > 'svn server'.local.http: Flags [S], seq 3200354543, win 5840, options [mss 1380,sackOK,TS val 2011458346 ecr 0,nop,wscale 7], length 0 17:08:18.455169 IP 'svn server'.local.http > 'production server'.43255: Flags [S.], seq 629885453, ack 3200354544, win 14480, options [mss 1460,sackOK,TS val 816478 ecr 2011449346,nop,wscale 7], length 0 17:08:19.655317 IP 'svn server'.local.http > 'production server'k.43255: Flags [S.], seq 629885453, ack 3200354544, win 14480, options [mss 1460,sackOK,TS val 817679 ecr 2011449346,nop,wscale 7], length 0

  Read the article

• Internet Protocol Suite: Transition Control Protocol (TCP) vs. User Datagram Protocol (UDP)

  How do we communicate over the Internet?  How is data transferred from one machine to another? These types of act ivies can only be done by using one of two Internet protocols currently. The collection of Internet Protocol consists of the Transition Control Protocol (TCP) and the User Datagram Protocol (UDP).  Both protocols are used to send data between two network end points, however they both have very distinct ways of transporting data from one endpoint to another. If transmission speed and reliability is the primary concern when trying to transfer data between two network endpoints then TCP is the proper choice. When a device attempts to send data to another endpoint using TCP it creates a direct connection between both devices until the transmission has completed. The direct connection between both devices ensures the reliability of the transmission due to the fact that no intermediate devices are needed to transfer the data. Due to the fact that both devices have to continuously poll the connection until transmission has completed increases the resources needed to perform the transmission. An example of this type of direct communication can be seen when a teacher tells a students to do their homework. The teacher is talking directly to the students in order to communicate that the homework needs to be done.  Students can then ask questions about the assignment to ensure that they have received the proper instructions for the assignment. UDP is a less resource intensive approach to sending data between to network endpoints. When a device uses UDP to send data across a network, the data is broken up and repackaged with the destination address. The sending device then releases the data packages to the network, but cannot ensure when or if the receiving device will actually get the data.  The sending device depends on other devices on the network to forward the data packages to the destination devices in order to complete the transmission. As you can tell this type of transmission is less resource intensive because not connection polling is needed,  but should not be used for transmitting data with speed or reliability requirements. This is due to the fact that the sending device can not ensure that the transmission is received.  An example of this type of communication can be seen when a teacher tells a student that they would like to speak with their parents. The teacher is relying on the student to complete the transmission to the parents, and the teacher has no guarantee that the student will actually inform the parents about the request. Both TCP and UPD are invaluable when attempting to send data across a network, but depending on the situation one protocol may be better than the other. Before deciding on which protocol to use an evaluation for transmission speed, reliability, latency, and overhead must be completed in order to define the best protocol for the situation.  

  Read the article

• Apache MaxClients doubt

  - by Milan Babuškov

  I have a busy Apache server serving only dynamic PHP+MySQL pages. It is a prefork Apache, version 2.2.4 with following config: KeepAlive off StartServers 8 MinSpareServers 32 MaxSpareServers 64 ServerLimit 512 MaxClients 512 MaxRequestsPerChild 4000 MaxClients/ServerLimit used to be set to 256, but I got the following error in error_log so I increased it: [error] server reached MaxClients setting, consider raising the MaxClients setting It seems to work now, but I have a doubt. Looking at MySQL log of queries, I have a couple hundred clients per seconds, but "ps ax" only shows 8, 9 or 10 processes running: [root@engine ~]# ps ax | grep http | wc -l 10 I even got this many processes when the above error message was shown in error_log. This made me investigate further. When I run netstat -a, I get something like this: tcp 0 0 engine:http adsl-105-143.teol.net:21453 TIME_WAIT tcp 0 0 engine:http 118-36.static.kds:mck-ivpip TIME_WAIT tcp 0 0 engine:http 118-36.static:oce-snmp-trap TIME_WAIT tcp 0 0 engine:http 118-36.static.kd:unifyadmin TIME_WAIT tcp 0 0 engine:http cable-188-2-25-29.dyna:4906 TIME_WAIT tcp 0 0 engine:http adsl-105-143.teol.net:21458 TIME_WAIT tcp 0 0 engine:http 109-92-83-91.dynamic.:62821 TIME_WAIT tcp 0 0 engine:http cable-89-216-142-192.:63576 TIME_WAIT tcp 0 0 engine:http 109-92-83-91.dynamic.:62819 TIME_WAIT tcp 1081 0 engine:http pttnetadsl38-36.ptt.r:50496 ESTABLISHED tcp 0 0 engine:http cable-188-2-36-196.dyn:4136 TIME_WAIT tcp 0 0 engine:http cable-89-216-142-192.:63580 TIME_WAIT tcp 0 0 engine:http cable-89-216-142-192.:63581 TIME_WAIT etc. When counting those, I get: [root@engine ~]# netstat -a | grep http | wc -l 431 Can anyone tell me what is really going on here and how to make sure my server keeps working, because I only use 50% of available RAM in machine?

  Read the article

• IPTables Rule for Google Apps SMTP

  - by XpresServers

  I am trying to add iptables rule to allow traffic on ports 465 & 587 to google apps smtp servers. But I got not luck. My WHMCS installation works fine with google apps when I turn off iptables but iptables turn on itself again and email stop working. Please add rules to allow traffic from port 465 and 587. Following are my IPTables rules grabbed from /etc/sysconfig/iptables # Generated by iptables-save v1.3.5 on Fri Oct 5 01:33:52 2012 *filter :INPUT ACCEPT [2191:434537] :FORWARD ACCEPT [0:0] :OUTPUT ACCEPT [2390:987151] :acctboth - [0:0] -A INPUT -j acctboth -A OUTPUT -p tcp -m multiport --dports 25,465,587 -m owner --gid-owner mailman -j ACCEPT -A OUTPUT -p tcp -m multiport --dports 25,465,587 -m owner --gid-owner mail -j ACCEPT -A OUTPUT -d 127.0.0.1 -p tcp -m multiport --dports 25,465,587 -m owner --uid-owner cpanel -j ACCEPT -A OUTPUT -p tcp -m multiport --dports 25,465,587 -m owner --uid-owner root -j ACCEPT -A OUTPUT -j acctboth -A OUTPUT -o eth0 -p tcp -m tcp --sport 587 -m state --state ESTABLISHED -j ACCEPT -A OUTPUT -o eth0 -p tcp -m tcp --sport 465 -m state --state ESTABLISHED -j ACCEPT <<IN THIS SPACE RULES ARE RELATED TO SPECIFIC IPS ONLY>> -A acctboth -i ! lo COMMIT # Completed on Fri Oct 5 01:33:52 2012 # Generated by iptables-save v1.3.5 on Fri Oct 5 01:33:52 2012 *nat :PREROUTING ACCEPT [196:12398] :POSTROUTING ACCEPT [191:15070] :OUTPUT ACCEPT [190:15010] -A OUTPUT -p tcp -m multiport --dports 25,465,587 -m owner --gid-owner mailman -j RETURN -A OUTPUT -p tcp -m multiport --dports 25,465,587 -m owner --gid-owner mail -j RETURN -A OUTPUT -d 127.0.0.1 -p tcp -m multiport --dports 25,465,587 -m owner --uid-owner cpanel -j RETURN -A OUTPUT -p tcp -m multiport --dports 25,465,587 -m owner --uid-owner root -j RETURN -A OUTPUT -p tcp -m multiport --dports 25,465,587 -j REDIRECT COMMIT # Completed on Fri Oct 5 01:33:52 2012 Thanks Hassan

  Read the article

• mount.nfs: access denied by server while mounting (Kerberos authentication)

  - by Nick

  There's plenty of references to this error on Goggle, and even a question here with the same title, but it seems that "access denied by server while mounting" is a catch-all error. I've tried suggestions that others have used to fix this problem, but they did not work in my case. I'm trying to set-up a Kerberos-based NFS file server with shared homes for a Linux network. I'm using Ubuntu 11.04 Servers and clients. When trying to mount a share using: mount 192.168.1.115:/export/home/ /media/tmp I get: mount.nfs: access denied by server while mounting 192.168.1.115:/export/home/ This is the same if I mount it from a client machine or from the server itself. On the server, in /var/log/syslog I get: Aug 25 06:22:37 nfs mountd[1580]: authenticated mount request from 192.168.1.115:835 for /export/home (/export/home) Aug 25 06:22:37 nfs mountd[1580]: authenticated unmount request from 192.168.1.115:766 for /export/home (/export/home) Which is odd, since it says it's authenticated the request, not denying it. /etc/exports: /export *(rw,fsid=0,crossmnt,insecure,async,no_subtree_check,sec=krb5p:krb5i:krb5) /export/home *(rw,insecure,async,no_subtree_check,sec=krb5p:krb5i:krb5) On client: me@dt1:/$ rpcinfo -p 192.168.1.115 program vers proto port 100000 2 tcp 111 portmapper 100024 1 udp 37320 status 100024 1 tcp 48460 status 100003 2 tcp 2049 nfs 100003 3 tcp 2049 nfs 100003 4 tcp 2049 nfs 100227 2 tcp 2049 100227 3 tcp 2049 100003 2 udp 2049 nfs 100003 3 udp 2049 nfs 100003 4 udp 2049 nfs 100227 2 udp 2049 100227 3 udp 2049 100021 1 udp 58625 nlockmgr 100021 3 udp 58625 nlockmgr 100021 4 udp 58625 nlockmgr 100021 1 tcp 49616 nlockmgr 100021 3 tcp 49616 nlockmgr 100021 4 tcp 49616 nlockmgr 100005 1 udp 45627 mountd 100005 1 tcp 60265 mountd 100005 2 udp 45627 mountd 100005 2 tcp 60265 mountd 100005 3 udp 45627 mountd 100005 3 tcp 60265 mountd Any suggestions I could try?

  Read the article

• Sync Vs. Async Sockets Performance in C#

  - by Michael Covelli

  Everything that I read about sockets in .NET says that the asynchronous pattern gives better performance (especially with the new SocketAsyncEventArgs which saves on the allocation). I think this makes sense if we're talking about a server with many client connections where its not possible to allocate one thread per connection. Then I can see the advantage of using the ThreadPool threads and getting async callbacks on them. But in my app, I'm the client and I just need to listen to one server sending market tick data over one tcp connection. Right now, I create a single thread, set the priority to Highest, and call Socket.Receive() with it. My thread blocks on this call and wakes up once new data arrives. If I were to switch this to an async pattern so that I get a callback when there's new data, I see two issues The threadpool threads will have default priority so it seems they will be strictly worse than my own thread which has Highest priority. I'll still have to send everything through a single thread at some point. Say that I get N callbacks at almost the same time on N different threadpool threads notifying me that there's new data. The N byte arrays that they deliver can't be processed on the threadpool threads because there's no guarantee that they represent N unique market data messages because TCP is stream based. I'll have to lock and put the bytes into an array anyway and signal some other thread that can process what's in the array. So I'm not sure what having N threadpool threads is buying me. Am I thinking about this wrong? Is there a reason to use the Async patter in my specific case of one client connected to one server?

  Read the article

• Sync Vs. Async Sockets Performance in .NET

  - by Michael Covelli

  Everything that I read about sockets in .NET says that the asynchronous pattern gives better performance (especially with the new SocketAsyncEventArgs which saves on the allocation). I think this makes sense if we're talking about a server with many client connections where its not possible to allocate one thread per connection. Then I can see the advantage of using the ThreadPool threads and getting async callbacks on them. But in my app, I'm the client and I just need to listen to one server sending market tick data over one tcp connection. Right now, I create a single thread, set the priority to Highest, and call Socket.Receive() with it. My thread blocks on this call and wakes up once new data arrives. If I were to switch this to an async pattern so that I get a callback when there's new data, I see two issues The threadpool threads will have default priority so it seems they will be strictly worse than my own thread which has Highest priority. I'll still have to send everything through a single thread at some point. Say that I get N callbacks at almost the same time on N different threadpool threads notifying me that there's new data. The N byte arrays that they deliver can't be processed on the threadpool threads because there's no guarantee that they represent N unique market data messages because TCP is stream based. I'll have to lock and put the bytes into an array anyway and signal some other thread that can process what's in the array. So I'm not sure what having N threadpool threads is buying me. Am I thinking about this wrong? Is there a reason to use the Async patter in my specific case of one client connected to one server?

  Read the article

• Is it possible to make a persistent connection between a Python web service and a .Net WCF Client?

  - by Ad Hock

  I have a .Net 3.5 SOAP client written in C# using the WCF. It's expecting basicHTTPBinding and a persistent connection with HTTP/1.1. I'm trying to create a Python 2.6 application that will act as a web-service for the client. My problem is that the client keeps closing the connection and opening a new one for every command to the web service. How does the .Net WCF client know to stay open when connecting with a .Net Service? When I create a dummy .Net web service the client connects fine and the connection remains persistent. From what I can tell, when connected to a .Net server, there are no special HTTP headers being sent, that makes sense since HTTP/1.1 assumes a persistent connection unless otherwise specified (right?). However, with the python web service I accept/open a connection and eventually the client will send a TCP FIN and the connection will close (the client never sends a FIN or RST when connecting to a .Net service). The communication goes something like this: Incoming -- HTTP Header for SOAP Command #1 Outgoing -- HTTP Header with a Continue Incoming -- Body of Command #1 Outgoing -- ACK Command #1 (HTTP headers and body) Incoming -- HTTP Header for SOAP Command #2 Outgoing -- HTTP Header with a Continue Incoming -- TCP FIN <Connection closes> <New connection opens and SOAP command #2 (with full HTTP headers) is sent> I'm using a SocketServer.ThreadingTCPServer as the server and a BaseHTTPServer.BaseHTTPRequestHandler for any requests. The handler is actually a derived class of that with a do_POST method to handle the HTTP headers. I've looked at WireShark captures and I'm stumped. I've tried setting socket options to SO_KEEPALIVE and SO_REUSEADDR in the server but that didn't seem to change anything. What am I missing?

  Read the article

• How does the socket API accept() function work?

  - by Eli Bendersky

  The socket API is the de-facto standard for TCP/IP and UDP/IP communications (that is, networking code as we know it). However, one of its core functions, accept() is a bit magical. To borrow a semi-formal definition: accept() is used on the server side. It accepts a received incoming attempt to create a new TCP connection from the remote client, and creates a new socket associated with the socket address pair of this connection. In other words, accept returns a new socket through which the server can communicate with the newly connected client. The old socket (on which accept was called) stays open, on the same port, listening for new connections. How does accept work? How is it implemented? There's a lot of confusion on this topic. Many people claim accept opens a new port and you communicate with the client through it. But this obviously isn't true, as no new port is opened. You actually can communicate through the same port with different clients, but how? When several threads call recv on the same port, how does the data know where to go? I guess it's something along the lines of the client's address being associated with a socket descriptor, and whenever data comes through recv it's routed to the correct socket, but I'm not sure. It'd be great to get a thorough explanation of the inner-workings of this mechanism.

  Read the article

• What does LAST_ACK mean, as a State value in netstat?

  - by nbolton

  If a Windows server has several thousand ports open in LAST_ACK state (as shown by netstat), what could this mean? Is it because one endpoint is waiting for the other to respond?

  Read the article

• ICMP Redirect Theory VS. Application

  - by joeqwerty

  I'm trying to watch ICMP redirects in a lab using Cisco Packet Tracer (version 5.3.2) and I'm not seeing them, which leads me to believe that either my lab configuration isn't correct or my understanding of ICMP redirects isn't correct or that Packet Tracer doesn't support/use ICMP redirects. Here's what I believe to be true regarding ICMP redirects: Routers send ICMP redirects when all of these conditions are met: The interface on which the packet comes into the router is the same interface on which the packet gets routed out. The subnet or network of the source IP address is on the same subnet or network of the next-hop IP address of the routed packet. The datagram is not source-routed. The router kernel is configured to send redirects. I have the lab set up in Cisco Packet Tracer as displayed in the image and would expect to see an ICMP redirect from Router1 when pinging from PC1 to PC3. I'm not seeing the ICMP redirect and it looks like Router1 is actually routing all of the packets via Router2. I have IP ICMP debugging enabled on Router1 (and Router2) and I'm not seeing any ICMP redirect activity in either console. I'm also not seeing a route to the PC3 network in the routing table on PC1, which I think confirms that the ICMP redirect is not occurring. I'm using only static routing on Routers 1 and 2. Is my understanding of ICMP redirects incorrect, or is there a problem with my lab configuration or does Packet Tracer not support/use ICMP redirects?

  Read the article

• iptables not allowing mysql connections to aliased ips?

  - by Curtis

  I have a fairly simple iptables firewall on a server that provides MySQL services, but iptables seems to be giving me very inconsistent results. The default policy on the script is as follows: iptables -P INPUT DROP I can then make MySQL public with the following rule: iptables -A INPUT -p tcp --dport 3306 -j ACCEPT With this rule in place, I can connect to MySQL from any source IP to any destination IP on the server without a problem. However, when I try to restrict access to just three IPs by replacing the above line with the following, I run into trouble (xxx=masked octect): iptables -A INPUT -p tcp --dport 3306 -m state --state NEW -s 208.XXX.XXX.184 -j ACCEPT iptables -A INPUT -p tcp --dport 3306 -m state --state NEW -s 208.XXX.XXX.196 -j ACCEPT iptables -A INPUT -p tcp --dport 3306 -m state --state NEW -s 208.XXX.XXX.251 -j ACCEPT Once the above rules are in place, the following happens: I can connect to the MySQL server from the .184, .196 and .251 hosts just fine as long as am connecting to the MySQL server using it's default IP address or an IP alias in the same subnet as the default IP address. I am unable to connect to MySQL using IP aliases that are assigned to the server from a different subnet than the server's default IP when I'm coming from the .184 or .196 hosts, but .251 works just fine. From the .184 or .196 hosts, a telnet attempt just hangs... # telnet 209.xxx.xxx.22 3306 Trying 209.xxx.xxx.22... If I remove the .251 line (making .196 the last rule added), the .196 host still can not connect to MySQL using IP aliases (so it's not the order of the rules that is causing the inconsistent behavior). I know, this particular test was silly as it shouldn't matter what order these three rules are added in, but I figured someone might ask. If I switch back to the "public" rule, all hosts can connect to the MySQL server using either the default or aliased IPs (in either subnet): iptables -A INPUT -p tcp --dport 3306 -j ACCEPT The server is running in a CentOS 5.4 OpenVZ/Proxmox container (2.6.32-4-pve). And, just in case you prefer to see the problem rules in the context of the iptables script, here it is (xxx=masked octect): # Flush old rules, old custom tables /sbin/iptables --flush /sbin/iptables --delete-chain # Set default policies for all three default chains /sbin/iptables -P INPUT DROP /sbin/iptables -P FORWARD DROP /sbin/iptables -P OUTPUT ACCEPT # Enable free use of loopback interfaces /sbin/iptables -A INPUT -i lo -j ACCEPT /sbin/iptables -A OUTPUT -o lo -j ACCEPT # All TCP sessions should begin with SYN /sbin/iptables -A INPUT -p tcp ! --syn -m state --state NEW -j DROP # Accept inbound TCP packets (Do this *before* adding the 'blocked' chain) /sbin/iptables -A INPUT -m state --state ESTABLISHED,RELATED -j ACCEPT # Allow the server's own IP to connect to itself /sbin/iptables -A INPUT -i eth0 -s 208.xxx.xxx.178 -j ACCEPT # Add the 'blocked' chain *after* we've accepted established/related connections # so we remain efficient and only evaluate new/inbound connections /sbin/iptables -N BLOCKED /sbin/iptables -A INPUT -j BLOCKED # Accept inbound ICMP messages /sbin/iptables -A INPUT -p ICMP --icmp-type 8 -j ACCEPT /sbin/iptables -A INPUT -p ICMP --icmp-type 11 -j ACCEPT # ssh (private) /sbin/iptables -A INPUT -p tcp --dport 22 -m state --state NEW -s xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx -j ACCEPT # ftp (private) /sbin/iptables -A INPUT -p tcp --dport 21 -m state --state NEW -s xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx -j ACCEPT # www (public) /sbin/iptables -A INPUT -p tcp --dport 80 -j ACCEPT /sbin/iptables -A INPUT -p tcp --dport 443 -j ACCEPT # smtp (public) /sbin/iptables -A INPUT -p tcp --dport 25 -j ACCEPT /sbin/iptables -A INPUT -p tcp --dport 2525 -j ACCEPT # pop (public) /sbin/iptables -A INPUT -p tcp --dport 110 -j ACCEPT # mysql (private) /sbin/iptables -A INPUT -p tcp --dport 3306 -m state --state NEW -s 208.xxx.xxx.184 -j ACCEPT /sbin/iptables -A INPUT -p tcp --dport 3306 -m state --state NEW -s 208.xxx.xxx.196 -j ACCEPT /sbin/iptables -A INPUT -p tcp --dport 3306 -m state --state NEW -s 208.xxx.xxx.251 -j ACCEPT Any ideas? Thanks in advance. :-)

  Read the article

• Socket(TCPIP) Unstable

  - by Lee Kwan Wee

  I have a setup of a SCPI server in a Win7 PC and have 2 other programs talking to it locally(127.0.0.1) over TCPIP socket 5025 and 5029. This worked well and stable in a fresh PC, but when we moved it into our production lines and the IT dept added their policies and stuff, it became unstable. The PC is connected to the production floor server but both of the programs are running locally in the PC. The connection tends to be disconnected when there is an idle period. And it takes 5-6times to refreshing the connection to get it back. I'm not a programmer myself, so I'm hoping to see if anyone here can help with some answers. Thank you very much!! Regards, KwanWee.

  Read the article

• TIME_WAIT connections not being cleaned up after timeout period expires

  - by Mark Dawson

  I am stress testing one of my servers by hitting it with a constant stream of new network connections, the tcp_fin_timeout is set to 60, so if I send a constant stream of something like 100 requests per second, I would expect to see a rolling average of 6000 (60 * 100) connections in a TIME_WAIT state, this is happening, but looking in netstat (using -o) to see the timers, I see connections like: TIME_WAIT timewait (0.00/0/0) where their timeout has expired but the connection is still hanging around, I then eventually run out of connections. Anyone know why these connections don't get cleaned up? If I stop creating new connections they do eventually disappear but while I am constantly creating new connections they don't, seems like the kernel isn't getting chance to clean them up? Is there some other config options I need to set to remove the connections as soon as they have expired? The server is running Ubuntu and my web server is nginx. Also it has iptables with connection tracking, not sure if that would cause these TIME_WAIT connections to live on. Thanks Mark.

  Read the article

• (OS 10055) Queue full

  - by Ali

  I'm using apache with mysql on the other server, apache on windows 2003 with 4gb ram 3 dual core CPU My server keep on running smoothly without any issue for about 3 days or roundabout 60+ hours however between 60-70 hours my apache stop working & log events shows this error, I tried to search a lot but helpless, I have already increased max port, please if someone can help ? (OS 10055)An operation on a socket could not be performed because the system lacked sufficient buffer space or because a queue was full. : make_sock: unable to listen for connections on address 0.0.0.0:80

  Read the article

• How to troubleshoot connectivity when curl gets an *empty response*

  - by chad

  I want to know how to proceed in troubleshooting why a curl request to a webserver doesn't work. I'm not looking for help that would be dependent upon my environment, I just want to know how to collect information about exactly what part of the communication is failing, port numbers, etc. chad-integration:~ # curl -v 111.222.159.30 * About to connect() to 111.222.159.30 port 80 (#0) * Trying 111.222.159.30... connected * Connected to 111.222.159.30 (111.222.159.30) port 80 (#0) > GET / HTTP/1.1 > User-Agent: curl/7.19.0 (x86_64-suse-linux-gnu) libcurl/7.19.0 OpenSSL/0.9.8h zlib/1.2.3 libidn/1.10 > Host: 111.222.159.30 > Accept: */* > * Empty reply from server * Connection #0 to host 111.222.159.30 left intact curl: (52) Empty reply from server * Closing connection #0 So, I understand that an empty response means that curl didn't get any response from the server. No problem, that's precisely what I'm trying to figure out. But what more specific info can I derive from cURL here? It was able to successfully "connect", so doesn't that involve some bidirectional communication? If so, then why does the response not come also? Note, I've verified my service is up and returning responses. Note, I'm a bit green at this level of networking, so feel free to provide some general orientation material.

  Read the article

• server will not reply (syn -ack)

  - by Brent

  I like to use the following commands to manage 'TIME_WAIT', in the hope to free up resources. echo 20 > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/tcp_fin_timeout sysctl -w net.ipv4.tcp_tw_reuse=1 sysctl -w net.ipv4.tcp_tw_recycle=1 I found something interesting while doing a tcpdump. Sometimes if a client makes a connection (syn), the server will not reply (syn -ack). My question is, could it be because of the top three commands.

  Read the article

• SYN flooding still a threat to servers?

  - by Rob

  Well recently I've been reading about different Denial of Service methods. One method that kind of stuck out was SYN flooding. I'm a member of some not-so-nice forums, and someone was selling a python script that would DoS a server using SYN packets with a spoofed IP address. However, if you sent a SYN packet to a server, with a spoofed IP address, the target server would return the SYN/ACK packet to the host that was spoofed. In which case, wouldn't the spoofed host return an RST packet, thus negating the 75 second long-wait, and ultimately failing in its attempt to DoS the server?

  Read the article

• Connection to mysql server in SYN_SENT

  - by Sunil

  We are facing a strange problem from last few days between our application server and database server(Mysql): connection to database server from application server hangs in SYN_SENT state and after that we are not able to make any connection to database server on mysql port(3306). When we checked the netstat output on database server its in SYN_RECV state. What I can figure out is mysql server is receiving the SYN request and responding also and its not reaching to the client hence SYN_RECV at server side and SYN_SENT at client side. I think SYN_SENT state should go after some time and because of this other db connection attempts to same server should not hang. Does anybody have any idea how can we resolve this issue? Out setup details : Application server: RHEL 5.4, kernel-release = 2.6.18-164.el5, x86_64 Database server: Mysql Version : 5.1.49 RHEL 5.4, kernel-release = 2.6.18-164.el5, x86_64

  Read the article

• redirect all youtube video requests to a specific one

  - by iTayb

  I'm on an IT team in my company and I would like to block youtube to users. I don't want to just deny access to the whole youtube domain, but only to replace the .flv/.mp4 request with the one that I want. That way, if someone tries to watch youtube videos on the network, He'll get a video of why using our expensive bandwidth for pleasure is a no-no. I thought about using a packet manipulation program and just replace the video ID with something that I want, but I didn't manage to do it right.

  Read the article

• tcpsndbuf high fail count

  - by Matthew Crenshaw

  I've got a small setup, one machine that acts as a load balancer and two machines that do all the work. The load balancer runs nginx (static content + php proxying to workers) and mysql, the two workers run php5-fpm and memcached (pooled between workers). Here's beancounters for the balancer: tcpsndbuf 2171848 2386280 10000000 20000000 3947733 tcprcvbuf 1248288 1669504 10000000 20000000 0 Here's worker 1: tcpsndbuf 951976 1262672 20000000 40000000 0 tcprcvbuf 278528 393496 20000000 40000000 0 Here's worker 2: tcpsndbuf 989888 527472 20000000 40000000 0 tcprcvbuf 212992 452520 20000000 40000000 0 The balancer has 1GB ram, the two workers have 2GB ram each. What is eating my send buffer?

  Read the article

• pfSense router on a LAN with two gateways

  - by JohnCC

  I have a LAN with an ADSL modem/router on it. We have just gained an alternative high-speed internet connection at our location, and I want to connect the LAN to it, eventually dropping the ADSL. I've chosen to use a small PFSense box to connect the LAN to the new WAN connection. Two servers on the LAN run services accessible to the outside via NAT using the single ADSL WAN IP. We have DNS records which point to this IP. I want to do the same via the new connection, using the WAN IP there. That connection permits multiple IPs, so I have configured pfSense using virtual IP's, 1:1 NAT and appropriate firewall rules. When I change the servers' default gateway settings to the pfSense box, I can access the services via the new WAN IPs without a problem. However, I can no longer access them via the old WAN IP. If I set the servers' default gateway back to the ADSL router, then the opposite is true - I can access the services via the ADSL IP, but not via the new one. In the first case, I believe this is because an incoming SYN packet arrives at the ADSL WAN IP, and is NAT'd and sent to the internal IP of the server. The server responds with a SYN/ACK which it sends via its default gateway, the pfSense box. The pfSense box sees a SYN/ACK that it saw no SYN for and drops the packet. Is there any sensible way around this? I would like the services to be accessible via both IPs for a short period at least, since once I change the DNS it will take a while before everyone picks up the new address.

  Read the article

• Is SYN flooding still a threat?

  - by Rob

  Well recently I've been reading about different Denial of Service methods. One method that kind of stuck out was SYN flooding. I'm a member of some not-so-nice forums, and someone was selling a python script that would DoS a server using SYN packets with a spoofed IP address. However, if you sent a SYN packet to a server, with a spoofed IP address, the target server would return the SYN/ACK packet to the host that was spoofed. In which case, wouldn't the spoofed host return an RST packet, thus negating the 75 second long-wait, and ultimately failing in its attempt to DoS the server?

  Read the article

• Access Methods to a computer Using MAC Address

  - by Dimal Chandrasiri

  I have my own wifi network at home & recently when I checked the active clients on the wifi I found out the there is one active client. Router shows the MAC address of this client and I want to Access this computer in order to let him know that he's doing a wrong thing. I dont intent to do any harm to his data. I just want to know a method to send him a message saying "Buy you own wifi". How can I achieve this using a windows 8 computer. Is there any specific softwares that I can use or will the netsend command do the trick! Thank you.

  Read the article

• Determine the Ports reserved and what service reserved them in Windows XP/2003

  - by bogha

  hi, this question is always rise. How can i know what ports are currently reserved in windows XP/2003 and what service had reserved them. for example when i want to install Apache, default port will be 80, but sometimes the Server will have IIS installed on the same port. so i want to know the way to check the ports and what services had reserved them and also if there is a way to re assign those ports to different services. thank you

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33  | Next Page >