Search Results

Search found 8450 results on 338 pages for 'mail gateway'.

Page 270/338 | < Previous Page | 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277  | Next Page >

  • How Does EoR Design Work with Multi-tiered Data Center Topology

    - by S.C.
    I just did a ton of reading about the different multi-tier network topology options as outlined by Cisco, and now that I'm looking at the physical options (End of Row (EoR) vs Top of Rack(ToR)), I find myself confused about how these fit into the logical constructs. With ToR it also maps 1:1: at the top of each rack there is a switch(es) that essentially act as the access layer. They connect via fiber to other switches, maybe chassis-based, that act as the aggregation layer, that then connect to the core layer. With EoR it seems that the servers are connecting directly to the aggregation layer, skipping the access layer all together, by plugging directly into what are typically chassis switches. In EoR then is the standard 3-tier model now a 2-tier model: the servers go to the chassis switch which goes straight to the core switch? The reason it matters to me is that my understanding was that the 3-tier model was more desirable due to less complexity. The agg switch pair acts as default gateway and does routing; if you use up all of your ports in your agg layer pair it's much more complicated to add additional switches, than simply adding more switches at the access layer. Are there other downsides to this layout? Does this 3-tier architecture still apply in some way in EoR? Thanks.

    Read the article

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

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

    Read the article

  • Lion MacBook Pro will not load webpages with DNS just after wake

    - by NReilingh
    I'm working with a 2011 MacBook Pro running Lion (10.7.2), that after waking from sleep (i.e. opening the lid) takes an inordinately long amount of time (2-3 minutes or more) to get a usable internet connection. Upon waking, the wi-fi icon signifies it is negotiating a network connection, and completes one a few seconds later. At this point, network diagnostics will not show any issues, and everything in Network preferences looks as normal: I'm connected to the proper network, have the right IP address and gateway, and DNS settings are correct. However, any site accessed with a domain name (like http://www.google.com) in Safari will return the "You are not connected to the Internet." error. Accessing a site directly, say, with Google's 74.125.226.212, is successful. Yet, Network Diagnostics will insist that DNS is functioning properly. After a few minutes, the following lines will be printed to the Console log, and regular behavior will be restored. 11/18/11 8:11:31.288 PM airportd: _doAutoJoin: Already associated to “Wireless”. Bailing on auto-join. 11/18/11 8:11:32.000 PM kernel: en1: BSSID changed to 00:25:9c:63:91:bd This behavior occurs only when waking from sleep--not when turning wi-fi on and off. This problem also occurs when using a wired Ethernet connection. As per this thread, I have tried flushing the DNS cache and wiping the wireless network from memory (it's not a protected network). Neither have worked.

    Read the article

  • Why does my microwave kill the Wi-Fi?

    - by Ohlin
    Every time I start the microwave in the kitchen, our home Wi-Fi stops working and all devices lose connection with our router! The kitchen and the Wi-Fi router are in opposite ends of the apartment but devices are being used a little here and there. We've been annoyed by the instability of the Wi-Fi for some time and it wasn't until recently we realized it was correlated to microwave usage. After some testing with having the microwave on and off we could narrow down the problem to only occurring when the router is in b/g/n mode and uses a set channel. If I change to b/g mode or set channel to auto then there is no problem any more...but still! The router is a Zyxel P-661HNU ("802.11n Wireless ADSL2+ 4-port Security Gateway" with latest firmware) and the microwave is made by Neff with an effect of 1000W (if this information might be useful to anyone). There is an "internet connection" light on the router and it doesn't go out when the interruption occurs so I think this is only an internal Wi-Fi issue. Now to my questions: What parts of the Wi-Fi can possibly be affected by the microwave usage? Frequency? Disturbances in the electrical system? How can setting Auto on channels make a difference? I thought the different channels were just some kind of separation system within the same frequency spectrum? Could this be a sign that the microwave is malfunctioning and slowly roasting us all at home? Is there any need to be worried? Since we were able to find router settings that cooperate well with our microwave's demand for attention, this question is mainly out of curiosity. But as most people out there...I just can't help the fact that I need to know how it's possible :-)

    Read the article

  • How to connect via SSH to a linux mint system that is connected via OpenVPN

    - by Hilyin
    Is there a way to make SSH port not get sent through VPN so when my computer is connected to a VPN, it can still be remoted in via SSH from its non-VPN IP? I am using Mint Linux 13. Thank you for your help! This is the instructions I followed to setup the VPN: Open Terminal Type: sudo apt-get install network-manager-openvpn Press Y to continue. Type: sudo restart network-manager Download BTGuard certificate (CA) by typing: sudo wget -O /etc/openvpn/btguard.ca.crt http://btguard.com/btguard.ca.crt Click on the Network Manager icon, expand VPN Connections, and choose Configure VPN A Network Connections window will appear with the VPN tab open. Click Add. 8. A Choose A VPN Connection Type window will open. Select OpenVPN in the drop-down menu and click Create.. . In the Editing VPN connection window, enter the following: Connection name: BTGuard VPN Gateway: vpn.btguard.com Optional: Manually select your server location by using ca.vpn.btguard.com for Canada or eu.vpn.btguard.com for Germany. Type: select Password User name: username Password: password CA Certificate: browse and select this file: /etc/openvpn/btguard.ca.crt Click Advanced... near the bottom of the window. Under the General tab, check the box next to Use a TCP connection Click OK, then click Apply. Setup complete! How To Connect Click on the Network Manager icon in the panel bar. Click on VPN Connections Select BTGuard VPN The Network Manager icon will begin spinning. You may be prompted to enter a password. If so, this is your system account keychain password, NOT your BTGuard password. Once connected, the Network Manager icon will have a lock next to it indicating you are browsing securely with BTGuard.

    Read the article

  • Wireless router setup for 1-1 NAT

    - by Carlos
    What I have: A linksys router WAG160N with firmware version 2 A "pool" of 5 external static IP's provided by my ISP 213.xx.xxx.n All the required configuration values for the static IPs such as (Subnet Mask, Gateway and static DNS 1, 2, 3) Current WAN Configuration: Encapsulation: RFC 2364 PPPoA Multiplexing: VC QoS type: UBR DSL modulation: MultiMode What's connected to the network: 1 x Server (That I want to make available to the outside) 5 x Desktops with static internal IP's, such as 192.168.0.xx 2 x Network printers, also with internal static IP's 2 x Laptops 1 x NAS (Network Attached Storage) also on static IP What I want to do: I would like to make the server available from outside the network, for example from your house. The problem is that Im not really sure how to do this. I have tried following the steps on the instruction manual in Linksys but they do not seem to work, once I set it up as shown bellow, I loose internet and all hell breaks loose. Going into further detail, I would prefer if the network is changed as little as possible, by this I mean that all the computers stay networked within eachother and only the server is accessible from the outside the network. What I need HELP with: I have read around that it is possible to set a 1-1 NAT (I know where it is in the menu but have no clue what it does...) so that I can NAT a single public IP directly to a single private IP (in our case the server). But please, How do I do that? Or maybe an alternative?

    Read the article

  • OpenVPN bridge network from routed clients

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

    Read the article

  • Remote Desktop fails after VPN connection

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

    Read the article

  • Intermittently uncommunicative subnets

    - by mhd
    Last week proved me a veritable Cassandra: I've always said that it's a bad idea to have only one firewall/router, without a backup or failover. And thus our Cisco PIX went haywire, refusing to route properly. And of course, the only one available here on short notice is me, and while I'm quite grounded in Linux, I'm really a developer not a sysadmin (the fact that this hit me on sysadmin appreciation day is a bit ironic). Anyway, this weekend I tried to hack up a temporary solution: I used an old server with enough NICs (two built-in, four on a card) to serve as a gateway and firewall. Due to some problems with the raid controller, I got only two router distros running, and between Untangle and Ebox I decided for the latter. Now everything is quite okay. I've got all the different subnets we've got here (all with separate switches) talking to each other and even to the internet (Cisco 2800 router, T1 lines). But from time to time (20-60 minute intervals), I get a total routing failure. Our main, office subnet can't talk to our server subnet and can't connect to the internet. This is not the end of a gradual slowdown, either everything's working perfectly or I get a total lack of communication for about two minutes each time. Now I'm a bit at wits end what to check. At least with the default EBox setup, nothing in /var/log shows anything weird and it doesn't exactly have lots of built-in monitoring tools. So I'm hoping someone here could give me some pointers about what to look out for. I did change the ethernet cable from the office switch to the firewall, with no results. I might change switches, although within the switch it seems to work ok enough. Edit: I'm not sure whether this is the sole cause of the problem, but after I noticed a few DHCP entries just before the last drop of connectivity, I tried to reproduce that. And alas, whenever I renew a DHCP connection, I can't access other subnets anymore. Running ISC DHCPD 3.0.6.

    Read the article

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

    - by drpcken
    I'm putting together a small active directory implementation for a buddy of mine. I currently have 2 servers (one is the primary domain controller) and a couple clients. I need to test and run updates on every machine on this domain, but I would have plug them into my current LIVE domain to get it internet access. From what I've read having two separate domains on a single subnet is a bad idea (even though it is temporary) so I don't want to risk messing anything up on my production domain. I'm pretty sure I can create a separate VLAN on my extreme 48 port switch and plug this smaller domain into it on a different subnet, but I don't know the commands. Both subnets would need internet access of course (one of the things I can't wrap my head around is routing internet traffic between subnets (gateway is on production subnet). Switch is a Summit x450e-48p My production domain is on subnet 192.168.200.0. My new domain I want to put online would go into subnet 192.168.10.0. A shove in the right direction would be greatly appreciated. Thank you!

    Read the article

  • Server 2003 and XP Client; Why are HTTP connections being silently dropped.

    - by Asa Yeamans
    On my network, my edge-router, a windows 2003 r2 server router with all the latest updates, will drop packets, but only under specific circumstances. I have troubleshot and isolated it down to the most simple configuration i can. There is NO NAT involved. Only fully-public IP addresses. No Firewalls are running either, all ahve been disabled. no packet filters on any interfaces anywhere either. I have a single Windows XP virtual machine and my edge-router(the windows 2003 r2 server, and also a virtual machine) running on a windows 2008 x64 r2 system (running virtual server 2005 as i dont have Intel-VT compatible chip yet). The edge router can access any external http site just fine, no issues. However the windows XP machine is only able to access certain sites. These work: www.google.com www.txstate.edu www.workintexas.com www.thedailywtf.com . These Dont: www.yahoo.com www.utexas.edu en.wikipedia.org slashdot.org www.bing.com. I have removed all possibility of DNS issues by connecting with net-cat from the XP box and sending GET /\r\nHost: \r\n\r\n and that connection replicates the issue as well. The network setup: My statically assigned IP block: x.x.x.168/29 DSL Modem -----PPPoE Connection---- x.x.x.169[EdgeRouter] [EdgeRouter]x.x.x.170 -----Virtual Ethernet----- x.x.x.174 [Test2] Test2's Default gateway is x.x.x.170 and test2 can ping any and every valid, accessible, public IP address with no packet loss what-so-ever. If i connect directly over PPPoE from test2 (the XP box) everything works just fine... Im at my wits end, i have NO IDEA whats causing this.

    Read the article

  • How to connect computers to a network printer behind a router?

    - by kokbira
    General question: How to connect computers to an IP printer behind a router? Particular question: How to connect C-1 and C-2 to PRI? What? Where? [ISP] | | -> IPs:200.X.X.X/other configs:DC | [R-1] | | -> IPs:10.1.X.X locked by MAC,M:255.0.0.0,G:10.1.0.1 |¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯| | | [PRI] IP:10.1.7.7 [R-2] IP: 10.1.0.1,MAC:A | | -> IPs:192.168.1.X,M:255.255.255.0,G:192.168.1.1 |¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯| | | [C-1] IP:192.168.1.2 [C-2] IP:192.168.1.3,MAC:A Glossary and details: ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ - IP: IP. - IPs: Some IP range. - M: Mask. - G: Gateway. - MAC:A: A MAC address that I will not inform you :) - DC: Don't care. - ISP: Internet Service Provider (not so much details about it on that case). - R-1: A real router or some concatenated so IP range bellow that block is 10.1.X.X and above is ISP. The provided IPs are provided by MAC. As all available addresses are in use, you must clone an existing one to join with a new device (and to disconnect the cloned one). - PRI: An network printer (some people here call that IP printer). - R-2: A TP-LINK TL-WR340G, mine wireless router (since my computer does not have ethernet input, it is my ethernet-wifi adapter :), admin access, MAC address cloned from C-2 (MAC:A). I've to configure 10.0.1.1 and 10.0.1.2 as DNS addresses, other wise I cannot connect C-1 and C-2 to Internet. - C-1: My computer, a CCE XLE-425 (remember: no ethernet input), with Windows 7, admin access. - C-2: another computer with better configs than mine, MAC:A, Windows XP. Requirements: I want to print, to access Internet and to do it myself (no need to call network admin men in black people). Pay attention to MAC clones and DNS info.

    Read the article

  • No LAN and SMB access, and Explorer not responsive, when using a second connection

    - by Lorenzo
    I apologize if this is a duplicate question, I know that there are several questions about multiple connection (LAN + LAN and LAN + dialup) but I haven't been able to find one that fits my scenario. I'm still using Windows XP on my corporate laptop, and I'm connected to the corporate LAN via Ethernet. The LAN NIC has a public IP address, although not accessible externally, obtained via the corporate DNS server. This connection is firewalled and requires a proxy to access Internet. To access Internet sites blocked by the corporate firewall, I use my smartphone via USB tethering. It is seen as a new LAN interface, and I get a private IP address (class 192.168..). There are two problems: The LAN is not accessible, as the default gateway goes to the tethering NIC. I'd like to solve this, but I can live with it. My PC becomes unresponsive if I use Windows Explorer to view local files, or even when I open the start menu. I guess that this is caused by attemps to connect to a mapped network drive. But I disabled the "Client for Microsoft Networks" in the tethering NIC. Why the system still hangs? Of course if I disable the Ethernet NIC, Explorer stops hanging. If you need further details, add a comment. Thanks!

    Read the article

  • How is route automatic metric calculated on Windows 7?

    - by e-t172
    KB299540 explains how Windows XP automatically assign metrics to IP routes: The following table outlines the criteria that is used to assign metrics for routes that are bound to network interfaces of various speeds. Greater than 200 Mb: 10 Greater than 20 Mb, and less than or equal to 200 Mb: 20 Greater than 4 Mb, and less than or equal to 20 Mb: 30 Greater than 500 kilobits (Kb), and less than or equal to 4 Mb: 40 Less than or equal to 500 Kb: 50 However, they seem to have changed their algorithm in Windows 7, as my routing table looks like this: IPv4 Route Table =========================================================================== Active Routes: Network Destination Netmask Gateway Interface Metric 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 192.168.0.1 192.168.0.3 10 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 10.202.254.254 10.202.1.2 286 10.202.0.0 255.255.0.0 On-link 10.202.1.2 286 10.202.1.2 255.255.255.255 On-link 10.202.1.2 286 10.202.255.255 255.255.255.255 On-link 10.202.1.2 286 127.0.0.0 255.0.0.0 On-link 127.0.0.1 306 127.0.0.1 255.255.255.255 On-link 127.0.0.1 306 127.255.255.255 255.255.255.255 On-link 127.0.0.1 306 192.168.0.0 255.255.255.0 On-link 192.168.0.3 266 192.168.0.3 255.255.255.255 On-link 192.168.0.3 266 192.168.0.255 255.255.255.255 On-link 192.168.0.3 266 224.0.0.0 240.0.0.0 On-link 127.0.0.1 306 224.0.0.0 240.0.0.0 On-link 192.168.0.3 266 224.0.0.0 240.0.0.0 On-link 10.202.1.2 286 255.255.255.255 255.255.255.255 On-link 10.202.1.2 40 =========================================================================== The only "correct" metric is the first one (Gigabit connection = 10). However, other routes using the Gigabit connection have metric = 266, my VPN has metric = 286, and loopback is 306 (?!). Any idea what's going on?

    Read the article

  • Keepalived for more than 20 virtual addresses

    - by cvaldemar
    I have set up keepalived on two Debian machines for high availability, but I've run into the maximum number of virtual IP's I can assign to my vrrp_instance. How would I go about configuring and failing over 20+ virtual IP's? This is the, very simple, setup: LB01: 10.200.85.1 LB02: 10.200.85.2 Virtual IPs: 10.200.85.100 - 10.200.85.200 Each machine is also running Apache (later Nginx) binding on the virtual IPs for SSL client certificate termination and proxying to backend webservers. The reason I need so many VIP's is the inability to use VirtualHost on HTTPS. This is my keepalived.conf: vrrp_script chk_apache2 { script "killall -0 apache2" interval 2 weight 2 } vrrp_instance VI_1 { interface eth0 state MASTER virtual_router_id 51 priority 101 virtual_ipaddress { 10.200.85.100 . . all the way to . 10.200.85.200 } An identical configuration is on the BACKUP machine, and it's working fine, but only up to the 20th IP. I have found a HOWTO discussing this problem. Basically, they suggest having just one VIP and routing all traffic "via" this one IP, and "all will be well". Is this a good approach? I'm running pfSense firewalls in front of the machines. Quote from the above link: ip route add $VNET/N via $VIP or route add $VNET netmask w.x.y.z gw $VIP Thanks in advance. EDIT: @David Schwartz said it would make sense to add a route, so I tried adding a static route to the pfSense firewall, but that didn't work as I expected it would. pfSense route: Interface: LAN Destination network: 10.200.85.200/32 (virtual IP) Gateway: 10.200.85.100 (floating virtual IP) Description: Route to VIP .100 I also made sure I had packet forwarding enabled on my hosts: $ cat /etc/sysctl.conf net.ipv4.ip_forward=1 net.ipv4.ip_nonlocal_bind=1 Am I doing this wrong? I also removed all VIPs from the keepalived.conf so it only fails over 10.200.85.100.

    Read the article

  • How to configure network on Windows Server 2008

    - by Gokhan Ozturk
    I have a IBM x3400 Server Machine with Windows Server 2008 R2 installed on it. But, since I am not expert on networking I have some problems. These roles installed on my server: Active Directory DNS File Sharing Hyper-V ISS VPN There is two network card on them. I configured them like this: Local Connection 1: 192.168.30.3 255.255.255.0 192.168.30.2 127.0.0.1 Local Connection 2: 192.168.30.101 255.255.255.0 192.168.30.6 127.0.0.1 My problem is, when I use this Ip gateways, It is sharing internet to all computers. This is not I want. I want to use Local Connection 1 for internal network. I am giving all computers gateway and DNS IP as 192.168.30.3 The Local Connection 2 is for Hyper-V and VPN connections. 192.168.30.2 and 192.168.30.6 are my modem's gateways. I am using 192.168.30.6 external IP for VPN connections. There is two 24 port switches. There is a connection between them and this two ethernet card connected directly to them. And modems are connected to switches as well (Morems are not near the server. They are somewhere in the building). I disabled network Bridge and removed all ethernet cards from it. With this configuration, all computers can ping my server's IP (192.168.30.3) but on server I cannot ping any clients (Request timeout). What is the best way to configure my network? Thank you. Redgards

    Read the article

  • Adding Multiple Interfaces to EC2 Ubuntu 12.04

    - by nocode
    I have a m1.medium Ubuntu 12.04 instance with two ENI's. I have a VPC setup with a private and public subnet. Private: 10.50.1.0/24 Public: 10.50.101.0/24 I initiated the instance on the private subnet. I configured a NAT instance and route all servers in the private subnet internet access. The route tables on the private subnet point towards the NAT instance and the route table on the public subnet point to the internet gateway. I am trying to add a public interface on the machine so that I can put it behind a ELB. When I added the second ENI and configured a static IP in /etc/network/interfaces and restarted the network services, I can no longer access from the Public subnet to the Private Subnet. Works Private private Private public Does not work Public private From Public Private, I ran a TCPDUMp on the private machine and can see the request coming in. My guess is it's trying to route over the new Public interface instead of the Private. Here's my route: default 10.50.1.1 0.0.0.0 UG 100 0 0 eth0 10.50.1.0 * 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth0 10.50.101.0 * 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth1 My networking knowledge is limited and I believe I have to add some routes but unsure of what command/syntax needs to be.

    Read the article

  • VPN sharing on Mac OS X 10.5 machine

    - by Jens
    I have a rather weird problem. I want to share a VPN connection that has been established by my Mac OS X 10.5 computer with another machine in my network. This is what I did: In the /etc/hostcongig file on the main computer I added the line: IPFORWARDING=-YES- I assigned a fixed IP address to my computer (192.168.178.30), a fixed one to the other machine (192.168.178.60) and my computer's IP address as gateway on the other machine. I connected to my VPN using the internal Mac OS X VPN client (PPTP connection) I run this script: #!/bin/sh natd -same_ports -use_sockets -unregistered_only -dynamic -interface ppp0 -clamp_mss ipfw -f flush ipfw add divert natd ip from any to any via ppp0 ipfw add pass all from any to any sysctl -w net.inet.ip.forwarding=1 Source: Using (and sharing) a VPN connection on your Mac Now everthing works smootly, however speed is an issue. I get 1,8 MBit/s on my main machine and only 0,3 - 0,6 MBit/s on the other one. My question: What could possibly be wrong? Do I have to tweak MTU settings, is there any packet inspection ongoing that needs time....? Any help appreciated!

    Read the article

  • openvpn port 53 bypasses allows restrictions ( find similar ports)

    - by user181216
    scenario of wifi : i'm using wifi in hostel which having cyberoam firewall and all the computer which uses that access point. that access point have following configuration default gateway : 192.168.100.1 primary dns server : 192.168.100.1 here, when i try to open a website the cyberoam firewall redirects the page to a login page (with correct login information, we can browse internet else not), and also website access and bandwidth limitations. once i've heard about pd-proxy which finds open port and tunnels through a port ( usually udp 53). using pd-proxy with UDP 53 port, i can browse internet without login, even bandwidth limit is bypassed !!! and another software called openvpn with connecting openvpn server through udp port 53 i can browse internet without even login into the cyberoam. both of softwares uses port 53, specially openvpn with port 53, now i've a VPS server in which i can install openvpn server and connect through the VPS server to browse internet. i know why that is happening because with pinging on some website(eb. google.com) it returns it's ip address that means it allows dns queries without login. but the problem is there is already DNS service is running on the VPS server on port 53. and i can only use 53 port to bypass the limitations as i think. and i can not run openvpn service on my VPS server on port 53. so how to scan the wifi for vulnerable ports like 53 so that i can figure out the magic port and start a openvpn service on VPS on the same port. ( i want to scan similar vulnerable ports like 53 on cyberoam in which the traffic can be tunneled, not want to scan services running on ports). improvement of the question with retags and edits are always welcomed... NOTE : all these are for Educational purpose only, i'm curious about network related knowledge.....

    Read the article

  • openvpn port 53 bypasses allows restrictions ( find similar ports)

    - by user181216
    scenario of wifi : i'm using wifi in hostel which having cyberoam firewall and all the computer which uses that access point. that access point have following configuration default gateway : 192.168.100.1 primary dns server : 192.168.100.1 here, when i try to open a website the cyberoam firewall redirects the page to a login page (with correct login information, we can browse internet else not), and also website access and bandwidth limitations. once i've heard about pd-proxy which finds open port and tunnels through a port ( usually udp 53). using pd-proxy with UDP 53 port, i can browse internet without login, even bandwidth limit is bypassed !!! and another software called openvpn with connecting openvpn server through udp port 53 i can browse internet without even login into the cyberoam. both of softwares uses port 53, specially openvpn with port 53, now i've a VPS server in which i can install openvpn server and connect through the VPS server to browse internet. i know why that is happening because with pinging on some website(eb. google.com) it returns it's ip address that means it allows dns queries without login. but the problem is there is already DNS service is running on the VPS server on port 53. and i can only use 53 port to bypass the limitations as i think. and i can not run openvpn service on my VPS server on port 53. so how to scan the wifi for vulnerable ports like 53 so that i can figure out the magic port and start a openvpn service on VPS on the same port. ( i want to scan similar vulnerable ports like 53 on cyberoam in which the traffic can be tunneled, not want to scan services running on ports). improvement of the question with retags and edits are always welcomed... NOTE : all these are for Educational purpose only, i'm curious about network related knowledge.....

    Read the article

  • Assign individual NIC to KVM guest

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

    Read the article

  • VirtualBox with Ubuntu Server guest can't ping outside

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

    Read the article

  • Ping with explicit next-hop selection (aka Monitoring multiple default gateways)

    - by Michuelnik
    I have a linux (debian) router with two internet connections (A) and (B). (A) is preferred, (B) is fallback. I want to monitor the internet connection (and not only the availability of the gateways!) and change the default route appropriately. If (A) is not providing internet, switch to (B) If (A) is providing internet again, switch back to (A). Only problem I have is in case (2). My routing table points towards a working internet so I cannot easily detect whether internet is working over link (A) again. I am search for a ping or traceroute (or other diagnosis-tool) which can select the next-hop explicitly. ping -r looks promising, but can only ping a host on the lan. (It only has to write another destination address in the packet, damnit!) traceroute -g gateway looks even more promising and nearly does what I want - but sets source routing options which my next-hops deny. (Not within my administrative boundary...) I just want a $ping, that can: select a source interface (and address) select a next-hop on that interface ping any arbitrary ip address I could do evil trickery with policy-based routing but that would have production impact for all users. I would like to see a side-effect-free solution....

    Read the article

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

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

    Read the article

  • Cisco ASA user authentication options - OpenID, public RSA sig, others?

    - by Ryan
    My organization has a Cisco ASA 5510 which I have made act as a firewall/gateway for one of our offices. Most resources a remote user would come looking for exist inside. I've implemented the usual deal - basic inside networks with outbound NAT, one primary outside interface with some secondary public IPs in the PAT pool for public-facing services, a couple site-to-site IPSec links to other branches, etc. - and I'm working now on VPN. I have the WebVPN (clientless SSL VPN) working and even traversing the site-to-site links. At the moment I'm leaving a legacy OpenVPN AS in place for thick client VPN. What I would like to do is standardize on an authentication method for all VPN then switch to the Cisco's IPSec thick VPN server. I'm trying to figure out what's really possible for authentication for these VPN users (thick client and clientless). My organization uses Google Apps and we already use dotnetopenauth to authenticate users for a couple internal services. I'd like to be able to do the same thing for thin and thick VPN. Alternatively a signature-based solution using RSA public keypairs (ssh-keygen type) would be useful to identify user@hardware. I'm trying to get away from legacy username/password auth especially if it's internal to the Cisco (just another password set to manage and for users to forget). I know I can map against an existing LDAP server but we have LDAP accounts created for only about 10% of the user base (mostly developers for Linux shell access). I guess what I'm looking for is a piece of middleware which appears to the Cisco as an LDAP server but will interface with the user's existing OpenID identity. Nothing I've seen in the Cisco suggests it can do this natively. But RSA public keys would be a runner-up, and much much better than standalone or even LDAP auth. What's really practical here?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277  | Next Page >