Search Results

Search found 361 results on 15 pages for 'inter'.

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

Page 4/15 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

  • How to rewrite the following?(C#3.0)

    - by Newbie
    I am trying to write the following double sum_res = 0.0; double yhat = 0; double res = 0; int n = 0; for(int i=0;i<x.Count;i++) { yhat = inter + (slp*x[i]); res = yhat - y[i]; n++; } using lambda but somehow not able to get it work(compile time error) Enumerable.Range(0, x.Count).Select(i => { yhat = inter + (slp * x[i]); res = yhat - y[i]; sum_res += res * res; n++; }); Error: The type arguments for method 'System.Linq.Enumerable.Select(System.Collections.Generic.IEnumerable, System.Func)' cannot be inferred from the usage. Try specifying the type arguments explicitly. Help needed. Thanks

    Read the article

  • SQLAuthority News – Microsoft SQL Server Protocol Documentation Download

    - by pinaldave
    The Microsoft SQL Server protocol documentation provides detailed technical specifications for Microsoft proprietary protocols (including extensions to industry-standard or other published protocols) that are implemented and used in Microsoft SQL Server to interoperate or communicate with Microsoft products. The documentation includes a set of companion overview and reference documents that supplement the technical specifications with conceptual background, overviews of inter-protocol relationships and interactions, and technical reference information. Microsoft SQL Server Protocol Documentation Reference : Pinal Dave (http://blog.SQLAuthority.com) Filed under: SQL, SQL Authority, SQL Documentation, SQL Download, SQL Query, SQL Server, SQL Tips and Tricks, T SQL, Technology

    Read the article

  • World Record Performance on PeopleSoft Enterprise Financials Benchmark on SPARC T4-2

    - by Brian
    Oracle's SPARC T4-2 server achieved World Record performance on Oracle's PeopleSoft Enterprise Financials 9.1 executing 20 Million Journals lines in 8.92 minutes on Oracle Database 11g Release 2 running on Oracle Solaris 11. This is the first result published on this version of the benchmark. The SPARC T4-2 server was able to process 20 million general ledger journal edit and post batch jobs in 8.92 minutes on this benchmark that reflects a large customer environment that utilizes a back-end database of nearly 500 GB. This benchmark demonstrates that the SPARC T4-2 server with PeopleSoft Financials 9.1 can easily process 100 million journal lines in less than 1 hour. The SPARC T4-2 server delivered more than 146 MB/sec of IO throughput with Oracle Database 11g running on Oracle Solaris 11. Performance Landscape Results are presented for PeopleSoft Financials Benchmark 9.1. Results obtained with PeopleSoft Financials Benchmark 9.1 are not comparable to the the previous version of the benchmark, PeopleSoft Financials Benchmark 9.0, due to significant change in data model and supports only batch. PeopleSoft Financials Benchmark, Version 9.1 Solution Under Test Batch (min) SPARC T4-2 (2 x SPARC T4, 2.85 GHz) 8.92 Results from PeopleSoft Financials Benchmark 9.0. PeopleSoft Financials Benchmark, Version 9.0 Solution Under Test Batch (min) Batch with Online (min) SPARC Enterprise M4000 (Web/App) SPARC Enterprise M5000 (DB) 33.09 34.72 SPARC T3-1 (Web/App) SPARC Enterprise M5000 (DB) 35.82 37.01 Configuration Summary Hardware Configuration: 1 x SPARC T4-2 server 2 x SPARC T4 processors, 2.85 GHz 128 GB memory Storage Configuration: 1 x Sun Storage F5100 Flash Array (for database and redo logs) 2 x Sun Storage 2540-M2 arrays and 2 x Sun Storage 2501-M2 arrays (for backup) Software Configuration: Oracle Solaris 11 11/11 SRU 7.5 Oracle Database 11g Release 2 (11.2.0.3) PeopleSoft Financials 9.1 Feature Pack 2 PeopleSoft Supply Chain Management 9.1 Feature Pack 2 PeopleSoft PeopleTools 8.52 latest patch - 8.52.03 Oracle WebLogic Server 10.3.5 Java Platform, Standard Edition Development Kit 6 Update 32 Benchmark Description The PeopleSoft Enterprise Financials 9.1 benchmark emulates a large enterprise that processes and validates a large number of financial journal transactions before posting the journal entry to the ledger. The validation process certifies that the journal entries are accurate, ensuring that ChartFields values are valid, debits and credits equal out, and inter/intra-units are balanced. Once validated, the entries are processed, ensuring that each journal line posts to the correct target ledger, and then changes the journal status to posted. In this benchmark, the Journal Edit & Post is set up to edit and post both Inter-Unit and Regular multi-currency journals. The benchmark processes 20 million journal lines using AppEngine for edits and Cobol for post processes. See Also Oracle PeopleSoft Benchmark White Papers oracle.com SPARC T4-2 Server oracle.com OTN PeopleSoft Financial Management oracle.com OTN Oracle Solaris oracle.com OTN Oracle Database 11g Release 2 Enterprise Edition oracle.com OTN Disclosure Statement Copyright 2012, Oracle and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved. Oracle and Java are registered trademarks of Oracle and/or its affiliates. Other names may be trademarks of their respective owners. Results as of 1 October 2012.

    Read the article

  • Des pays proposent que l'ONU soit chargé de « maintenir l'ordre sur Internet », dont la Chine, l'Inde et l'Arabie Saoudite

    Des pays proposent que l'ONU soit chargé de « maintenir l'ordre sur Internet » Dont la Chine, l'Inde et l'Arabie Saoudite Le conseil des Nations Unis pourrait réagir suite à l'affaire Wikileaks, le site polémique qui continue de publier quotidiennement des câbles forts embarrassants pour les diplomaties du monde entier. Le conseil étudie en effet une proposition qui vise à créer un groupe de travail inter-gouvernemental dont le but serait d'harmoniser les efforts des décideurs pour "maintenir l'ordre" sur Internet. Cette proposition émane d'un groupe de plusieurs pays menés par le Brésil et...

    Read the article

  • Ask HTG: LAN-to-LAN Messaging in Windows 7, Multi-Monitor Full Screen Video, and Alternative File Copiers

    - by Jason Fitzpatrick
    Once a week we roundup some of the answers we’ve sent out to reader questions and share them with everyone. This week we’re looking at inter-LAN messaging with Windows 7, multi-monitor full screen video, and alternative Windows file copiers. How to See What Web Sites Your Computer is Secretly Connecting To HTG Explains: When Do You Need to Update Your Drivers? How to Make the Kindle Fire Silk Browser *Actually* Fast!

    Read the article

  • Slicing the EDG

    - by Antony Reynolds
    Different SOA Domain Configurations In this blog entry I would like to introduce three different configurations for a SOA environment.  I have omitted load balancers and OTD/OHS as they introduce a whole new round of discussion.  For each possible deployment architecture I have identified some of the advantages. Super Domain This is a single EDG style domain for everything needed for SOA/OSB.   It extends the standard EDG slightly but otherwise assumes a single “super” domain. This is basically the SOA EDG.  I have broken out JMS servers and Coherence servers to improve scalability and reduce dependencies. Key Points Separate JMS allows those servers to be kept up separately from rest of SOA Domain, allowing JMS clients to post messages even if rest of domain is unavailable. JMS servers are only used to host application specific JMS destinations, SOA/OSB JMS destinations remain in relevant SOA/OSB managed servers. Separate Coherence servers allow OSB cache to be offloaded from OSB servers. Use of Coherence by other components as a shared infrastructure data grid service. Coherence cluster may be managed by WLS but more likely run as a standalone Coherence cluster. Benefits Single Administration Point (1 Admin Server) Closely follows EDG with addition of application specific JMS servers and standalone Coherence servers for OSB caching and application specific caches. Coherence grid can be scaled independent of OSB/SOA. JMS queues provide for inter-application communication. Drawbacks Patching is an all or nothing affair. Startup time for SOA may be slow if large number of composites deployed. Multiple Domains This extends the EDG into multiple domains, allowing separate management and update of these domains.  I see this type of configuration quite often with customers, although some don't have OWSM, others don't have separate Coherence etc. SOA & BAM are kept in the same domain as little benefit is obtained by separating them. Key Points Separate JMS allows those servers to be kept up separately from rest of SOA Domain, allowing JMS clients to post messages even if other domains are unavailable. JMS servers are only used to host application specific JMS destinations, SOA/OSB JMS destinations remain in relevant SOA/OSB managed servers. Separate Coherence servers allow OSB cache to be offloaded from OSB servers. Use of Coherence by other components as a shared infrastructure data grid service. Coherence cluster may be managed by WLS but more likely run as a standalone Coherence cluster. Benefits Follows EDG but in separate domains and with addition of application specific JMS servers and standalone Coherence servers for OSB caching and application specific caches. Coherence grid can be scaled independent of OSB/SOA. JMS queues provide for inter-application communication. Patch lifecycle of OSB/SOA/JMS are no longer lock stepped. JMS may be kept running independently of other domains allowing applications to insert messages fro later consumption by SOA/OSB. OSB may be kept running independent of other domains, allowing service virtualization to continue independent of other domains availability. All domains use same OWSM policy store (MDS-WSM). Drawbacks Multiple domains to manage and configure. Multiple Admin servers (single view requires use of Grid Control) Multiple Admin servers/WSM clusters waste resources. Additional homes needed to enjoy benefits of separate patching. Cross domain trust needs setting up to simplify cross domain interactions. Startup time for SOA may be slow if large number of composites deployed. Shared Service Environment This model extends the previous multiple domain arrangement to provide a true shared service environment.This extends the previous model by allowing multiple additional SOA domains and/or other domains to take advantage of the shared services.  Only one non-shared domain is shown, but there could be multiple, allowing groups of applications to share patching independent of other application groups. Key Points Separate JMS allows those servers to be kept up separately from rest of SOA Domain, allowing JMS clients to post messages even if other domains are unavailable. JMS servers are only used to host application specific JMS destinations, SOA/OSB JMS destinations remain in relevant SOA/OSB managed servers. Separate Coherence servers allow OSB cache to be offloaded from OSB servers. Use of Coherence by other components as a shared infrastructure data grid service Coherence cluster may be managed by WLS but more likely run as a standalone Coherence cluster. Shared SOA Domain hosts Human Workflow Tasks BAM Common "utility" composites Single OSB domain provides "Enterprise Service Bus" All domains use same OWSM policy store (MDS-WSM) Benefits Follows EDG but in separate domains and with addition of application specific JMS servers and standalone Coherence servers for OSB caching and application specific caches. Coherence grid can be scaled independent of OSB/SOA. JMS queues provide for inter-application communication. Patch lifecycle of OSB/SOA/JMS are no longer lock stepped. JMS may be kept running independently of other domains allowing applications to insert messages fro later consumption by SOA/OSB. OSB may be kept running independent of other domains, allowing service virtualization to continue independent of other domains availability. All domains use same OWSM policy store (MDS-WSM). Supports large numbers of deployed composites in multiple domains. Single URL for Human Workflow end users. Single URL for BAM end users. Drawbacks Multiple domains to manage and configure. Multiple Admin servers (single view requires use of Grid Control) Multiple Admin servers/WSM clusters waste resources. Additional homes needed to enjoy benefits of separate patching. Cross domain trust needs setting up to simplify cross domain interactions. Human Workflow needs to be specially configured to point to shared services domain. Summary The alternatives in this blog allow for patching to have different impacts, depending on the model chosen.  Each organization must decide the tradeoffs for itself.  One extreme is to go for the shared services model and have one domain per SOA application.  This requires a lot of administration of the multiple domains.  The other extreme is to have a single super domain.  This makes the entire enterprise susceptible to an outage at the same time due to patching or other domain level changes.  Hopefully this blog will help your organization choose the right model for you.

    Read the article

  • Héritage multiple en C++: Pourquoi l'héritage d'interfaces est insuffisant, Par Loïc Joly

    Bonjour à tous ! Je viens de mettre en ligne un article, intitulé : Héritage multiple en C++ : Pourquoi l'héritage d'interfaces est insuffisant N'hésitez pas à faire donner votre avis, faire des remarques. L'article compare aussi des fonctionnalités de différents langages orientés objet, principalement C++, C# et Java. En tant que tel, j'espère qu'il pourra susciter des discussions intéressantes, sans sombrer dans le troll inter-langages. Bonne lecture !...

    Read the article

  • [News] ASP.NET V4 proposera des outils SEO pour le r?f?rencement

    Dans son dernier billet, Scott Guthrie pr?sente les nouveaut?s de ASP.NET V4 concernant la gestion du r?f?rencement, un sujet souvent d?licat dans les framework web modernes. Il ?voque de nouvelles propri?t?s de r?f?rencement permettant de g?n?rer des tags m?ta, un nouveau proc?d? de routage inter-pages et un Toolkit sp?cialis?.

    Read the article

  • Defining .NET Components with Namespaces

    A .NET software component is a compiled set of classes that provide a programmable interface that is used by consumer applications for a service. As a component is no more than a logical grouping of classes, what then is the best way to define the boundaries of a component within the .NET framework? How should the classes inter-operate? Patrick Smacchia, the lead developer of NDepend, discusses the issues and comes up with a solution.

    Read the article

  • Asking Can Make Your Website Stronger

    Google loves links. The premise behind the Google search isn't really about finding websites (we're used to thinking that because that's we use it to do!). It's about creating a stronger Internet through "inter-connectivity."

    Read the article

  • Unsteady Display

    - by Elton McRae
    I use Ubuntu 12:04. The Text character on my screen while on the inter-net s too small, so I decided to adjust the display to give larger characters. This caused the screen to become very unstable, once I am logged it the screen begins to flitter. I am now usingthe guest login. How can I readjust the display to first make it stable and secondly to have larger text characters. thanks in anticipation, Elton.

    Read the article

  • SEO Smart Links Plug-In Review

    As everybody is on the hunt for inbound links to their website to build PR and increase traffic, many fail to optimize the links within their site or sites. This articles discusses the WordPress Link Plug-ins that you need to increase your "intra" and "inter" site linking.

    Read the article

  • SEO Smart Links Plug-In Review

    As everybody is on the hunt for inbound links to their website to build PR and increase traffic, many fail to optimize the links within their site or sites. This articles discusses the WordPress Link Plug-ins that you need to increase your "intra" and "inter" site linking.

    Read the article

  • Open source Entity-Component game [on hold]

    - by Papavoikos
    I've been reading a lot about entity-component design but every article talks about the philosophy behind such design, leaving a lot of details and implementations outside. I'm looking for an open source game that uses the entity-component design so I can study the concrete implementations and see how they deal with things such as How (and if) they deal with inter-component communication How much logic each component has or doesn't have How a subsystem can change it's behavior depending on an entity's state (the screen darkens depending on the player's health)

    Read the article

  • OVH dévoile vRack, sa solution pour bâtir des architectures hybrides de nouvelle génération

    OVH dévoile vRack sa solution pour bâtir des architectures hybrides de nouvelle générationOVH lance vRack, une technologie qualifiée de révolutionnaire par l'hébergeur européen, qui repousse les limites entre infrastructures physiques et virtuelles.vRack, ou baie virtuelle, est une technologie permettant de connecter virtuellement plusieurs serveurs, physiques ou virtuels, qui peuvent ainsi communiquer de manière privée. Les données inter-serveurs ne transitent pas par le réseau public et son totalement...

    Read the article

  • FTP through HAProxy

    - by Menda
    I have a machine, which is the Host and has HAProxy installed in it and working. Then I have a Guest KVM virtual machine running inside the Host with an IP 192.168.122.152. I installed an FTP server in the Guest machine with VSFTPD. From the Host, if I try the command $ ftp -p 192.168.122.152, works perfectly and I can connect to the Guest FTP. I need to remark that this FTP is configured as passive, but both passive and active connections are working from the Host. This is an extract of part of /etc/vsftpd.conf in the Guest: # Passive mode connect_from_port_20=NO tcp_wrappers=YES listen_address=192.168.122.152 pasv_enable=YES pasv_promiscuous=NO port_enable=YES port_promiscuous=NO pasv_max_port=10000 pasv_min_port=10250 Now it's time to make it accessible from outside, so I configure /etc/haproxy/haproxy.cfg like this: listen FTP_Default *:21 server ftp01 192.168.122.152 check port 21 inter 10s rise 1 fall 2 listen FTP_Range *:10000-10250 server ftp01 192.168.122.152 check port 21 inter 10s rise 1 fall 2 But if I try to connect from other machine in internet $ ftp -p $PUBLICIP, it only responds: Connected to <PUBLICIP>, but it doesn't ask for the login and password. Something in the HAProxy config must be wrong, because it's the only point where it fails. By the way, I tried to adapt my configuration to this one in this blog. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • QoS for Cisco Router to Prioritize Voice and Interactive Traffic

    - by TJ Huffington
    I have a Cisco 891W NATing Voice and Data to the internet over a 10mbit/2mbit connection. Voice traffic gets degraded when I upload large files. Pings time out as well. I tried to configure a QoS policy but it's basically not doing anything. Voice traffic still degrades when upload bandwidth gets saturated. Here is my current configruation: class-map match-any QoS-Transactional match protocol ssh match protocol xwindows class-map match-any QoS-Voice match protocol rtp audio class-map match-any QoS-Bulk match protocol secure-nntp match protocol smtp match protocol tftp match protocol ftp class-map match-any QoS-Management match protocol snmp match protocol dns match protocol secure-imap class-map match-any QoS-Inter-Video match protocol rtp video class-map match-any QoS-Voice-Control match access-group name Voice-Control policy-map QoS-Priority-Output class QoS-Voice priority percent 25 set dscp ef class QoS-Inter-Video bandwidth remaining percent 10 set dscp af41 class QoS-Transactional bandwidth remaining percent 25 random-detect dscp-based set dscp af21 class QoS-Bulk bandwidth remaining percent 5 random-detect dscp-based set dscp af11 class QoS-Management bandwidth remaining percent 1 set dscp cs2 class QoS-Voice-Control priority percent 5 set dscp ef class class-default fair-queue interface FastEthernet8 bandwidth 1024 bandwidth receive 20480 ip address dhcp ip nat outside ip virtual-reassembly duplex auto speed auto auto discovery qos crypto map mymap max-reserved-bandwidth 80 service-policy output QoS-Priority-Output crypto map mymap 10 ipsec-isakmp set peer 1.2.3.4 default set transform-set ESP-3DES-SHA match address 110 qos pre-classify ! fa8 is my connection to the internet. Voice traffic goes over a VPN ("mymap") to the SIP server. That's why I specified "qos pre-classify" which I believe is the way to classify traffic over the VPN. However even when I ping a public IP while saturating upload bandwidth, the latency is exceptionally high. Is this configuration correct? Are there any suggestions that might make this work for my setup? Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • QoS for Cisco Router to Prioritize Voice and Interactive Traffic

    - by TJ Huffington
    I have a Cisco 891W NATing Voice and Data to the internet over a 10mbit/2mbit connection. Voice traffic gets degraded when I upload large files. Pings time out as well. I tried to configure a QoS policy but it's basically not doing anything. Voice traffic still degrades when upload bandwidth gets saturated. Here is my current configruation: class-map match-any QoS-Transactional match protocol ssh match protocol xwindows class-map match-any QoS-Voice match protocol rtp audio class-map match-any QoS-Bulk match protocol secure-nntp match protocol smtp match protocol tftp match protocol ftp class-map match-any QoS-Management match protocol snmp match protocol dns match protocol secure-imap class-map match-any QoS-Inter-Video match protocol rtp video class-map match-any QoS-Voice-Control match access-group name Voice-Control policy-map QoS-Priority-Output class QoS-Voice priority percent 25 set dscp ef class QoS-Inter-Video bandwidth remaining percent 10 set dscp af41 class QoS-Transactional bandwidth remaining percent 25 random-detect dscp-based set dscp af21 class QoS-Bulk bandwidth remaining percent 5 random-detect dscp-based set dscp af11 class QoS-Management bandwidth remaining percent 1 set dscp cs2 class QoS-Voice-Control priority percent 5 set dscp ef class class-default fair-queue interface FastEthernet8 bandwidth 1024 bandwidth receive 20480 ip address dhcp ip nat outside ip virtual-reassembly duplex auto speed auto auto discovery qos crypto map mymap max-reserved-bandwidth 80 service-policy output QoS-Priority-Output crypto map mymap 10 ipsec-isakmp set peer 1.2.3.4 default set transform-set ESP-3DES-SHA match address 110 qos pre-classify ! fa8 is my connection to the internet. Voice traffic goes over a VPN ("mymap") to the SIP server. That's why I specified "qos pre-classify" which I believe is the way to classify traffic over the VPN. However even when I ping a public IP while saturating upload bandwidth, the latency is exceptionally high. Is this configuration correct? Are there any suggestions that might make this work for my setup? Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • Issue with SSL using HAProxy and Nginx

    - by Ben Chiappetta
    I'm building a highly available site using a multiple HAProxy load balancers, Nginx web serves, and MySQL servers. The site needs to be able to survive load balancer or web servers nodes going offline without any interruption of service to visitors. Currently, I have two boxes running HAProxy sharing a virtual IP using keepalived, which forward to two web servers running Nginx, which then tie into two MySQL boxes using MySQL replication and sharing a virtual IP using heartbeat. Everything is working correctly except for SSL traffic over HAProxy. I'm running version 1.5 dev12 with openssl support compiled in. When I try to navigate to the virtual IP for haproxy over https, I get the message: The plain HTTP request was sent to HTTPS port. Here's my haproxy.cfg so far, which was mainly assembled from other posts: global log 127.0.0.1 local0 log 127.0.0.1 local1 notice # log 127.0.0.1 local0 user haproxy group haproxy daemon maxconn 20000 defaults log global option dontlognull balance leastconn clitimeout 60000 srvtimeout 60000 contimeout 5000 retries 3 option redispatch listen front bind :80 bind :443 ssl crt /etc/pki/tls/certs/cert.pem mode http option http-server-close option forwardfor reqadd X-Forwarded-Proto:\ https if { is_ssl } reqadd X-Proto:\ SSL if { is_ssl } server web01 192.168.25.34 check inter 1s server web02 192.168.25.32 check inter 1s stats enable stats uri /stats stats realm HAProxy\ Statistics stats auth admin:********* Any idea why SSL traffic isn't being passed correctly? Also, any other changes you would recommend? I still need to configure logging, so don't worry about that section. Thanks in advance your help.

    Read the article

  • HAproxy with MySQL Master-Master Replication incredibly slow

    - by Yayap
    I have two MySQL servers in multi-master mode, with an HAproxy machine for simple load balancing/redundancy. When I am connected to one of the servers directly and try to update about 100,000 entries, it is completed including replication in about half a minute. When connecting through the proxy it takes usually over three whole minutes. Is it normal to have that type of latency? Is something amiss with my proxy configuration (included below)? This is getting really frustrating as I assumed the proxy would do some sort of load balancing, or at least have little to no overhead. #--------------------------------------------------------------------- # Example configuration for a possible web application. See the # full configuration options online. # # http://haproxy.1wt.eu/download/1.4/doc/configuration.txt # #--------------------------------------------------------------------- #--------------------------------------------------------------------- # Global settings #--------------------------------------------------------------------- global # to have these messages end up in /var/log/haproxy.log you will # need to: # # 1) configure syslog to accept network log events. This is done # by adding the '-r' option to the SYSLOGD_OPTIONS in # /etc/sysconfig/syslog # # 2) configure local2 events to go to the /var/log/haproxy.log # file. A line like the following can be added to # /etc/sysconfig/syslog # # local2.* /var/log/haproxy.log # log 127.0.0.1 local2 # chroot /var/lib/haproxy # pidfile /var/run/haproxy.pid maxconn 4096 user haproxy group haproxy daemon #debug #quiet # turn on stats unix socket stats socket /var/lib/haproxy/stats #--------------------------------------------------------------------- # common defaults that all the 'listen' and 'backend' sections will # use if not designated in their block #--------------------------------------------------------------------- defaults mode tcp log global #option tcplog option dontlognull option tcp-smart-accept option tcp-smart-connect #option http-server-close #option forwardfor except 127.0.0.0/8 #option redispatch retries 3 #timeout http-request 10s #timeout queue 1m timeout connect 400 timeout client 500 timeout server 300 #timeout http-keep-alive 10s #timeout check 10s maxconn 2000 listen mysql-cluster 0.0.0.0:3306 mode tcp balance roundrobin option tcpka option httpchk server db01 192.168.15.118:3306 weight 1 inter 1s rise 1 fall 1 server db02 192.168.15.119:3306 weight 1 inter 1s rise 1 fall 1

    Read the article

  • VLAN ACLs and when to go Layer 3

    - by wuckachucka
    I want to: a) segment several departments into VLANs with the hopes of restricting access between them completely (Sales never needs to talk to Support's workstations or printers and vice-versa) or b) certain IP addresses and TCP/UDP ports across VLANS -- i.e. permitting the Sales VLAN to access the CRM Web Server in the Server VLAN on port 443 only. Port-wise, I'll need a 48-port switch and another 24-port switch to go with the two existing 24-port Layer 2 switches (Linksys); I'm looking at going with D-Links or HP Procurves as Cisco is out of our price range. Question #1: From what I understand (and please correct me if I'm wrong), if the Servers (VLAN10) and Sales (VLAN20) are all on the same 48-port switch (or two stacked 24-port switches), afaik, the switch "knows" what VLANs and ports each device belongs to and will switch packets between them; I can also apply ACLs to restrict access between VLANs at this point. Is this correct? Question #2: Now lets say that Support (VLAN30) is on a different switch (one of the Linksys) switches. I'm assuming I'll need to trunk (tag) switch #2's VLANs across to switch #1, so switch #1 sees switch #2's VLAN30 (and vice-versa). Once Switch #1 can "see" VLAN30, I'm assuming I can then apply ACLs as stated in Question #1. Is this correct? Question #3: Once Switch #1 can see all the VLANs, can I achieve the seemingly "Layer 3" ACL filtering of restricting access to Server VLAN on only certain TCP/UDP ports and IP addresses (say, only permitting 3389 to the Terminal Server, 192.168.10.4/32). I say "seemingly" because some of the Layer 2 switches mention the ability to restrict ports and IP addresses through the ACLs; I (perhaps mistakenly) thought that in order to have Layer 3 ACLs (packet filtering), I'd need to have at least one Layer 3 switch acting as a core router. If my assumptions are incorrect, at which point do you need a Layer 3 switch for inter-VLAN routing vs. inter-VLAN switching? Is it generally only when you need that higher-level packet filtering ability between your departments?

    Read the article

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

< Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >