Search Results

Search found 5084 results on 204 pages for 'policy routing'.

Page 4/204 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

  • URL Routing in ASP.NET 4.0

    In the .NET Framework 3.5 SP1, Microsoft introduced ASP.NET Routing, which decouples the URL of a resource from the physical file on the web server. With ASP.NET Routing you, the developer, define routing rules map route patterns to a class that generates the content. For example, you might indicate that the URL Categories/CategoryName maps to a class that takes the CategoryName and generates HTML that lists that category's products in a grid. With such a mapping, users could view products for the Beverages category by visiting www.yoursite.com/Categories/Beverages. In .NET 3.5 SP1, ASP.NET Routing was primarily designed for ASP.NET MVC applications, although as discussed in Using ASP.NET Routing Without ASP.NET MVC it is possible to implement ASP.NET Routing in a Web Forms application, as well. However, implementing ASP.NET Routing in a Web Forms application involves a bit of seemingly excessive legwork. In a Web Forms scenario we typically want to map a routing pattern to an actual ASP.NET page. To do so we need to create a route handler class that is invoked when the routing URL is requested and, in a sense, dispatches the request to the appropriate ASP.NET page. For instance, to map a route to a physical file, such as mapping Categories/CategoryName to ShowProductsByCategory.aspx - requires three steps: (1) Define the mapping in Global.asax, which maps a route pattern to a route handler class; (2) Create the route handler class, which is responsible for parsing the URL, storing any route parameters into some location that is accessible to the target page (such as HttpContext.Items), and returning an instance of the target page or HTTP Handler that handles the requested route; and (3) writing code in the target page to grab the route parameters and use them in rendering its content. Given how much effort it took to just read the preceding sentence (let alone write it) you can imagine that implementing ASP.NET Routing in a Web Forms application is not necessarily the most straightforward task. The good news is that ASP.NET 4.0 has greatly simplified ASP.NET Routing for Web Form applications by adding a number of classes and helper methods that can be used to encapsulate the aforementioned complexity. With ASP.NET 4.0 it's easier to define the routing rules and there's no need to create a custom route handling class. This article details these enhancements. Read on to learn more! Read More >

    Read the article

  • Dissecting ASP.NET Routing

    The ASP.NET Routing framework allows developers to decouple the URL of a resource from the physical file on the web server. Specifically, the developer defines routing rules, which map URL patterns to a class or ASP.NET page that generates the content. For instance, you could create a URL pattern of the form Categories/CategoryName and map it to the ASP.NET page ShowCategoryDetails.aspx; the ShowCategoryDetails.aspx page would display details about the category CategoryName. With such a mapping, users could view category about the Beverages category by visiting www.yoursite.com/Categories/Beverages. In short, ASP.NET Routing allows for readable, SEO-friendly URLs. ASP.NET Routing was first introduced in ASP.NET 3.5 SP1 and was enhanced further in ASP.NET 4.0. ASP.NET Routing is a key component of ASP.NET MVC, but can also be used with Web Forms. Two previous articles here on 4Guys showed how to get started using ASP.NET Routing: Using ASP.NET Routing Without ASP.NET MVC and URL Routing in ASP.NET 4.0. This article aims to explore ASP.NET Routing in greater depth. We'll explore how ASP.NET Routing works underneath the covers to decode a URL pattern and hand it off the the appropriate class or ASP.NET page. Read on to learn more! Read More >

    Read the article

  • Dissecting ASP.NET Routing

    The ASP.NET Routing framework allows developers to decouple the URL of a resource from the physical file on the web server. Specifically, the developer defines routing rules, which map URL patterns to a class or ASP.NET page that generates the content. For instance, you could create a URL pattern of the form Categories/CategoryName and map it to the ASP.NET page ShowCategoryDetails.aspx; the ShowCategoryDetails.aspx page would display details about the category CategoryName. With such a mapping, users could view category about the Beverages category by visiting www.yoursite.com/Categories/Beverages. In short, ASP.NET Routing allows for readable, SEO-friendly URLs. ASP.NET Routing was first introduced in ASP.NET 3.5 SP1 and was enhanced further in ASP.NET 4.0. ASP.NET Routing is a key component of ASP.NET MVC, but can also be used with Web Forms. Two previous articles here on 4Guys showed how to get started using ASP.NET Routing: Using ASP.NET Routing Without ASP.NET MVC and URL Routing in ASP.NET 4.0. This article aims to explore ASP.NET Routing in greater depth. We'll explore how ASP.NET Routing works underneath the covers to decode a URL pattern and hand it off the the appropriate class or ASP.NET page. Read on to learn more! Read More >Did you know that DotNetSlackers also publishes .net articles written by top known .net Authors? We already have over 80 articles in several categories including Silverlight. Take a look: here.

    Read the article

  • URL Routing in ASP.NET 4.0

    In the .NET Framework 3.5 SP1, Microsoft introduced ASP.NET Routing, which decouples the URL of a resource from the physical file on the web server. With ASP.NET Routing you, the developer, define routing rules map route patterns to a class that generates the content. For example, you might indicate that the URL Categories/CategoryName maps to a class that takes the CategoryName and generates HTML that lists that category's products in a grid. With such a mapping, users could view products for the Beverages category by visiting www.yoursite.com/Categories/Beverages. In .NET 3.5 SP1, ASP.NET Routing was primarily designed for ASP.NET MVC applications, although as discussed in Using ASP.NET Routing Without ASP.NET MVC it is possible to implement ASP.NET Routing in a Web Forms application, as well. However, implementing ASP.NET Routing in a Web Forms application involves a bit of seemingly excessive legwork. In a Web Forms scenario we typically want to map a routing pattern to an actual ASP.NET page. To do so we need to create a route handler class that is invoked when the routing URL is requested and, in a sense, dispatches the request to the appropriate ASP.NET page. For instance, to map a route to a physical file, such as mapping Categories/CategoryName to ShowProductsByCategory.aspx - requires three steps: (1) Define the mapping in Global.asax, which maps a route pattern to a route handler class; (2) Create the route handler class, which is responsible for parsing the URL, storing any route parameters into some location that is accessible to the target page (such as HttpContext.Items), and returning an instance of the target page or HTTP Handler that handles the requested route; and (3) writing code in the target page to grab the route parameters and use them in rendering its content. Given how much effort it took to just read the preceding sentence (let alone write it) you can imagine that implementing ASP.NET Routing in a Web Forms application is not necessarily the most straightforward task. The good news is that ASP.NET 4.0 has greatly simplified ASP.NET Routing for Web Form applications by adding a number of classes and helper methods that can be used to encapsulate the aforementioned complexity. With ASP.NET 4.0 it's easier to define the routing rules and there's no need to create a custom route handling class. This article details these enhancements. Read on to learn more! Read More >

    Read the article

  • Problems installing Windows service via Group Policy in a domain

    - by CraneStyle
    I'm reasonably new to Group Policy administration and I'm trying to deploy an MSI installer via Active Directory to install a service. In reality, I'm a software developer trying to test how my service will be installed in a domain environment. My test environment: Server 2003 Domain Controller About 10 machines (between XP SP3, and server 2008) all joined to my domain. No real other setup, or active directory configuration has been done apart from things like getting DNS right. I suspect that I may be missing a step in Group Policy that says I need to grant an explicit permission somewhere, but I have no idea where that might be or what it will say. What I've done: I followed the documentation from Microsoft in How to Deploy Software via Group Policy, so I believe all those steps are correct (I used the UNC path, verified NTFS permissions, I have verified the computers and users are members of groups that are assigned to receive the policy etc). If I deploy the software via the Computer Configuration, when I reboot the target machine I get the following: When the computer starts up it logs Event ID 108, and says "Failed to apply changes to software installation settings. Software changes could not be applied. A previous log entry with details should exist. The error was: An operations error occurred." There are no previous log entries to check, which is weird because if it ever actually tried to invoke the windows installer it should log any sort of failure of my application's installer. If I open a command prompt and manually run: msiexec /qb /i \\[host]\[share]\installer.msi It installs the service just fine. If I deploy the software via the User Configuration, when I log that user in the Event Log says that software changes were applied successfully, but my service isn't installed. However, when deployed via the User configuration even though it's not installed when I go to Control Panel - Add/Remove Programs and click on Add New Programs my service installer is being advertised and I can install/remove it from there. (this does not happen when it's assigned to computers) Hopefully that wall of text was enough information to get me going, thanks all for the help.

    Read the article

  • Trouble creating a Java policy server for a simple Flash app

    - by simonwulf
    I'm trying to create a simple Flash chat application for educational purposes, but I'm stuck trying to send a policy file from my Java server to the Flash app (after several hours of googling with little luck). The policy file request reaches the server that sends a harcoded policy xml back to the app, but the Flash app doesn't seem to react to it at all until it gives me a security sandbox error. I'm loading the policy file using the following code in the client: Security.loadPolicyFile("xmlsocket://myhostname:" + PORT); The server recognizes the request as "<policy-file-request/" and responds by sending the following xml string to the client: public static final String POLICY_XML = "<?xml version=\"1.0\"?>" + "<cross-domain-policy>" + "<allow-access-from domain=\"*\" to-ports=\"*\" />" + "</cross-domain-policy>"; The code used to send it looks like this: try { _dataOut.write(PolicyServer.POLICY_XML + (char)0x00); _dataOut.flush(); System.out.println("Policy sent to client: " + PolicyServer.POLICY_XML); } catch (Exception e) { trace(e); } Did I mess something up with the xml or is there something else I might have overlooked?

    Read the article

  • IPv6 routing to another interface

    - by Robert
    I'm trying to get an IPv6 enabled router to forward data from one interface to the other and I'm having issues. When following this example (http://www.cisco.com/en/US/tech/tk872/technologies_configuration_example09186a0080ba6106.shtml) I am able to get full connectivity between all 3 routers in my simulator. However when I try to use only 1 router; I can't get connectivity to the other interfacs on the same router. My PC is directly attached to FA 0/1 and it can ping the router's interface. However it can not ping any other interface on the router(which unless I'm missing something it should be able to do). The router on the other hand can ping everything. I thought static routes might help; but the router already has routes for everything. I'm thinking the packet should come in; router looks up the destination in it's ipv6 routing table and then realizes it's for itself, and should respond. I thought maybe it couldn't respond directly; so I tried pinging a device like 2001:0000:0000:1000::2, but i don't get a response. I'm running on IOS 12.4. I'm missing something(hopefully simple), but I just can't see what it is. With only 1 router; how do I enable my PC to talk to the other subnets? Thank you in advance, Robert Topology: R1 FA 0/0: 2001:0000:0000:0000::1/52 FA 0/1: 2001:0000:0000:1000::1/52 FA 1/0: 2001:0000:0000:2000::1/52 Loopback 0: 2001:0000:0000:3000::1/52 PC: 2001:0000:0000:2000::2/52 PC plugs directly into FA 1/0 on the router. --- Configuration --- ipv6 cef ipv6 unicast routing interface Loopback0 no ip address ipv6 address 2001:0000:0000:3000::1/52 ipv6 enable ! interface FastEthernet0/0 no ip address duplex auto speed auto ipv6 address 2001:0000:0000::1/52 ipv6 enable ! interface FastEthernet0/1 no ip address duplex auto speed auto ipv6 address 2001:0000:0000:1000::1/52 ipv6 enable ! interface FastEthernet1/0 no ip address duplex auto speed auto ipv6 address 2001:0000:0000:2000::1/52 ipv6 enable --- end of config --- --- routing table --- IPV6Lab#show ipv6 route IPv6 Routing Table - 10 entries Codes: C - Connected, L - Local, S - Static, R - RIP, B - BGP U - Per-user Static route I1 - ISIS L1, I2 - ISIS L2, IA - ISIS interarea, IS - ISIS summary O - OSPF intra, OI - OSPF inter, OE1 - OSPF ext 1, OE2 - OSPF ext 2 ON1 - OSPF NSSA ext 1, ON2 - OSPF NSSA ext 2 C 2001:0000:0000::/52 [0/0] via ::, FastEthernet0/0 L 2001:0000:0000::1/128 [0/0] via ::, FastEthernet0/0 C 2001:0000:0000:1000::/52 [0/0] via ::, FastEthernet0/1 L 2001:0000:0000:1000::1/128 [0/0] via ::, FastEthernet0/1 C 2001:0000:0000:2000::/52 [0/0] via ::, FastEthernet1/0 L 2001:0000:0000:2000::1/128 [0/0] via ::, FastEthernet1/0 C 2001:0000:0000:3000::/52 [0/0] via ::, Loopback0 L 2001:0000:0000:3000::1/128 [0/0] via ::, Loopback0 L FE80::/10 [0/0] via ::, Null0 L FF00::/8 [0/0] via ::, Null0 --- end of routing table ---

    Read the article

  • Windows Update when Group Policy Forbids

    - by David Beckman
    I am in the administrators group for my local Windows XP machine and I would like to get updates via http://update.microsoft.com/[1]. However, this is prevented via the group policy: Network policy settings prevent you from using this website to get updates for your computer. Is there anyway to override this specific policy for my machine or my user? [1] Several installed applications are Microsoft based, but are not part of the machine standard (eg Visual studio). As such, I am not getting the updates for these applications. I could periodically go to the various application sites and look for hotfixes, but that is beyond tedious.

    Read the article

  • Active Directory - Lightweight Directory Services and Domain Password Policy

    - by Craig Beuker
    Greetings all, We have an active directory domain which enforces a strict password policy. Hooray! Now, for the project we are working on, we are going to be storing users of our website Microsoft's AD-LDS service as well as using that for authentication of our web users. By default, it is my understanding that AD-LDS inherits its password policy from the domain of the machine it's installed on. Is there any way to break that link such that we can define a lighter password policy (or none if we so choose) for users in AD-LDS without affecting our domain? Note: AD-LDS is going to be hosted on a machine which is part of the domain. Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • Software restriction policies set in the registry don't update Local Group Policy

    - by Jon Rhoades
    The joys of a Samba domain... First off Domain Group policy can't be used until Samba 4 arrives. We need to setup Software Restriction Policies (SRPs) on most of the computers in our Samba domain and I would dearly like to automate this. (We are moving away from just disabling the Windows installer). The traditional way is to set SRPs using Local Group Policy (LGP) Computer Conf-Windows Settings-SRP but this involves visiting every machine as it can't be set using in NTConfig.pol. It is possible to attempt to create the SRPs directly in the registry: [HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Policies\Microsoft\Windows\Safer\CodeIdentifiers\262144\Paths\{30628f61-eb47-4d87-823b-6683a09eda87}] "LastModified"=hex(b):40,a2,94,09,b5,5d,ca,01 "Description"="" "SaferFlags"=dword:00000000 "ItemData"="C:\\location\\subfolder" SaferFlags DWORD seems to be what turns it on or off, but although this seems to work it does not update the Local Group Policy - SRPs still show as "No SRPs Defined". Where does the LGP store this setting - is it even in the registry and more importantly - Is there a cleverer way of setting up SRPs?

    Read the article

  • Blocking password policy (expiry) for a particular OU in AD

    - by Kip
    Hey SF Folks, Situation is this: I need to have a particular container in my AD environment which blocks password expiry policy, but accepts all other policies. Is this something that would work by simply adding in a GPO at the sub-ou level (the ou in question is a child of ou's where GPO's including password stuff is set). These accounts (and this ou) already exist and will have the default domain policy as well as other policies applied and they should continue to receive policy settings as per those GPO's, with the exception of the Password Expiry. We have tried the password do not expire tickbox and that seems not to have worked. Thanks in advance. Kip

    Read the article

  • Group policy issues

    - by Alex Berry
    We are having an issue on one of our clients relatively new sbs installs. The domain consists of a single SBS 2011 server with 4 windows 7 clients and 3 xp clients. Most of the time everything is fine however roughly every 3 days windows 7 clients start timing out when trying to receive computer group policy. This results in hour long delays before getting to the login screen in the morning. This is accompanied by event ID 6006, win login errors stating it took 3599 seconds to process policy. Once they've booted they can log in without issue however gpupdate fails again on computer policy and gpresult comes back with access denied, even when run as domain admin... At this point if we restart the server the network is fine for 3 days. I thought perhaps it might be ipv6 or smb2, but disabling ipv6 on the clients doesn't help and the clients can browse the sysvol folder freely on smb2 anyway. Does anyone have any ideas or routes I can take to further diagnose the issue? Thanks in advance :)

    Read the article

  • Enable group policy for everything but the SBS?

    - by Jerry Dodge
    I have created a new group policy to disable IPv6 on all machines. There is only the one default OU, no special configuration. However, this policy shall not apply to the SBS its self (nor the other DC at another location on a different subnet) because those machines do depend on IPv6. All the rest do not. I did see a recommendation to create a new OU and put that machine under it, but many other comments say that is extremely messy and not recommended - makes it high maintenance when it comes to changing other group policies. How can I apply this single group policy to every machine except for the domain controllers? PS - Yes, I understand IPv6 will soon be the new standard, but until then, we have no intention to implement it, and it in fact is causing us many issues when enabled.

    Read the article

  • 503 Error After Microsoft Request Routing Is Installed - 32 bit 64 bit madness

    - by KenB
    I have a requirement to install the Microsoft Request Routing component for IIS 7.5 running on a Windows 2008 R2 SP1 64Bit machine. After installing Microsoft Request Routing via the Web Platform installer our ASP.NET 4.0 application gets a "HTTP Error 503. The service is unavailable." The Windows event log error details says: The Module DLL 'C:\Program Files\IIS\Application Request Routing\requestRouter.dll' could not be loaded due to a configuration problem. The current configuration only supports loading images built for a AMD64 processor architecture. The data field contains the error number. To learn more about this issue, including how to troubleshooting this kind of processor architecture mismatch error, see http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=29349. I can make this error go away by changing the application pool to run in 32 bit mode by changing the "Enable 32-Bit Applications" setting to true. However I would prefer not to have to do that to resolve the issue. My questions are: Why is the Microsoft Request Routing feature trying to load a 32 bit version, isn't there a 64 bit version for it? How do I resolve this issue without having to change my application pool to a 32 bit mode?

    Read the article

  • Slow Routing Over LAN (Wired)

    - by reverendj1
    I'm having issues with my router acting very slow (Adtran Netvanta 3458). We have two networks, let's call them A and B. When I run netperf from two servers on network A (no routing) I get speeds along the lines of 900 Mbps. Which makes sense, since we have all 1Gbps switches. When testing A to B (or vice-versa) I get speeds along the lines of 22Mbps. I have also tested connecting my laptop to the switchports on the router, and testing two servers on network A (no routing) and got speeds around 90 Mbps. Which makes sense since the switchports on the router are 100Mbps. Does anyone have any idea why routing would be so slow? We bought the router over a year ago, and we think it has been doing this since then, but we never actually tested it before. (network B isn't really used much, so we didn't notice much) We were implementing a site-to-site VPN and noticed it was ridiculously slow, so we started testing basic routing performance. I have ruled out cabling and router CPU/memory utilization. Adtran looked at my config, but didn't see anything wrong with it.

    Read the article

  • Trouble getting Flash socket policy file to work.

    - by Alex
    Basically I'm using Flash to connect to a Java server. Despite my Java application replying to the , in the Flash debug log it lists (not sure about the order as there are lots): * Security Sandbox Violation * Connection to 192.168.1.86:4049 halted - not permitted from http://127.0.0.1:8888/Current/wander.swf Warning: Timeout on xmlsocket://192.168.1.86:4049 (at 3 seconds) while waiting for socket policy file. This should not cause any problems, but see http://www.adobe.com/go/strict_policy_files for an explanation. Error: Request for resource at xmlsocket://192.168.1.86:4049 by requestor from http://127.0.0.1:8888/Current/wander.swf is denied due to lack of policy file permissions. What I don't understand is, the server (port 4049) receives the request, outputs the policy file and then closes the connection, surely it shouldn't time out? The policy file I'm using is: <?xml version="1.0"?> <cross-domain-policy><allow-access-from domain="*" to-ports="*" /> </cross-domain-policy>

    Read the article

  • Documenting a policy based design

    - by academicRobot
    I'm re-working some prototype code into a policy based design in C++, and I'm wondering what the best practice is for documenting the design. My current plan is to document: Policy hierarchy Overview of each policy Description of each type/value/function in each policy I was thinking of putting this into a doxygen module, but this looks like it will be a bit awkward since formatting will have to be done by hand without code to base the doc on (that is, documenting the policies rather than the implementation of the policies). So my questions are: Are there other aspects of the design that should be documented? Are there any tricks to doing this efficiently in doxygen? Is there a tool other than doxygen thats better suited to this? What are some examples of well documented policy based design? This is my first serious attempt at policy based design. I think I have a working grasp of the principles, but whatever naivety I expose in this question is fair game for an answer too.

    Read the article

  • Configuring Site Policy in SharePoint 2013 using server code

    - by panjkov
    When you create Site Policy in SharePoint, you can configure its options using browser, which is particularly convenient when you have that policy configured for publishing in Content Type Hub. But, when you need to configure multiple sites with same policy, and you for any reason have to deploy multiple instances of same site policy, this browser-based editing process is not something that you would want to use. In that case, some way of configuring policy options automatically would be helpful...(read more)

    Read the article

  • Windows XP/7: custom routing for VPN connection

    - by Peter Becker
    We are dealing with a badly configured VPN connection from a vendor, which set up the default gateway but doesn't route traffic anywhere beyond their VPN zone. I managed to do some ad-hoc routing to configure a computer in a way that it can reach the vendor's VPN, our local network as well as the internet. I then tried to turn this into a script, but that failed since the interface number of the VPN changes on every connection. Is there a way in Windows XP and/or Windows 7 to configure custom routing on the client side of a VPN connection? What I would like to do is to have a script running just after the connection comes up that changes the routing table (similar to an ifup script on UNIX).

    Read the article

  • Is Internet routing (BGP) fully automated?

    - by Adal
    If all the routing tables on the Internet would be erased simultaneously, will the routers be able to rediscover them automatically? I'm having an argument with a colleague who says that the RIPE routing tables are essential, but I remember reading that if the tables disappeared, the BGP protocol will allow routers to rediscover working routes between nodes by querying their neighbors which in turn will query their neighbors until a working route will be detected. Then that route will be used to repopulate the routing tables. After a while, all the routes will be restored (not necessarily the optimal routes). Is that correct?

    Read the article

  • Change the default route without affecting existing TCP connections

    - by Patrick Horn
    Let's say I have two public network addresses on my server: one NAT through an ISP (192.168.99.0/24), and a VPN through a different ISP (192.168.1.0/24), already configured with a per-host route to the VPN server through my ISP. Here is my initial routing table. I am currently routing through my ISP on subnet 192.168.99.0/24. $ route -n Kernel IP routing table Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref Use Iface 0.0.0.0 192.168.99.1 0.0.0.0 UG 0 0 0 eth1 55.66.77.88 192.168.99.1 255.255.255.255 UGH 0 0 0 eth1 192.168.99.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth1 192.168.1.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 tap0 Now, I want new TCP connections to switch to my 192.168.1.0/24 so I type the following: $ route add -net 0.0.0.0 gw 192.168.1.1 dev tap0 When I do this, it causes some long-standing TCP connections to hang. Is there a way to I safely change the default interface for new connections, while allowing existing TCP connections to use the old route (i.e. do I need enable some sort of stateful routing table)? I am okay with a solution that only works with established TCP connections, and I don't care how hacky it is. For example, if there is a way to add temporary iptables rules for existing connections to force them over the old route. But there has to be some way to do this. EDIT: Just a note about a simple "route add -host ... " for existing connections: this solution would work if I am fine with leaving a subset of IPs on the old interface. However, in my application, this actually doesn't solve my problem because I want to allow new connections to come on the new interface even if they have the same source IP. I'm now looking at using the "ip route" command to set source-based routing rules.

    Read the article

  • Routing Essentials

    - by zharvey
    I'm a programmer trying to fill a big hole in my understanding of networking basics. I've been reading a good book (Networking Bible by Sosinki) but I have been finding that there is a lot of "assumed" information contained, where terms/concepts are thrown at the reader without a proper introduction to them. I understand that a "route" is a path through a network. But I am struggling with visualizing some routing-based concepts. Namely: How do routes actually manifest themselves in the hardware? Are they just a list of IP addresses that get computed at the network layer, and then executed by the transport? What kind of data exists in a so-caleld routing table? Is a routing-table just the mechanism for holding these lists of IP address (read above)? What are the performance pros/cons for having a static route, as opposed to a dynamic route?

    Read the article

  • Group Policy: Not working after few days

    - by Kabir Rao
    Hi, I have implemented a group policy as per the suggestion http://serverfault.com/questions/121065/change-local-computer-policy-on-windows-2003-terminal-server . it worked fine when i tested..but after two days it is not working...can somebody help. Thanks, Kabir

    Read the article

  • Log files for group policy application deployment

    - by Cyril
    I'm looking into using group policy to deploy a couple of applications. I want to have the log of each installation written to a shared folder on a file server for tracking purposes. I can create the log if I pass the appropriate parameters. For example: msiexec /i Package.msi /l*vx c:\Package.log However using group policy for the deployment, you can't pass any parameters to the installation file. Is there anyway to specify the log file location in the process of creating the msi package?

    Read the article

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