Search Results

Search found 1671 results on 67 pages for 'packets'.

Page 58/67 | < Previous Page | 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65  | Next Page >

• Unable to connect via NetBIOS Name

  - by grom

  I can't connect to machines/shares by NetBIOS names. Below is console output showing the problem. C:\>nbtstat -n Local Area Connection: Node IpAddress: [192.168.1.100] Scope Id: [] NetBIOS Local Name Table Name Type Status --------------------------------------------- BEAST <00> UNIQUE Registered WORKGROUP <00> GROUP Registered BEAST <20> UNIQUE Registered WORKGROUP <1E> GROUP Registered WORKGROUP <1D> UNIQUE Registered ..__MSBROWSE__.<01> GROUP Registered C:\>nbtstat -A 192.168.1.3 Local Area Connection: Node IpAddress: [192.168.1.100] Scope Id: [] NetBIOS Remote Machine Name Table Name Type Status --------------------------------------------- BRCLAPTOP <00> UNIQUE Registered WORKGROUP <00> GROUP Registered BRCLAPTOP <20> UNIQUE Registered WORKGROUP <1E> GROUP Registered MAC Address = 00-1C-BF-14-B8-6E C:\>ping beast Pinging beast [fe80::59b8:179f:b90b:a63f%11] with 32 bytes of data: Reply from fe80::59b8:179f:b90b:a63f%11: time<1ms Reply from fe80::59b8:179f:b90b:a63f%11: time<1ms Reply from fe80::59b8:179f:b90b:a63f%11: time<1ms Reply from fe80::59b8:179f:b90b:a63f%11: time<1ms Ping statistics for fe80::59b8:179f:b90b:a63f%11: Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss), Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds: Minimum = 0ms, Maximum = 0ms, Average = 0ms C:\>ping brclaptop Ping request could not find host brclaptop. Please check the name and try again. C:\>nbtstat -a brclaptop Local Area Connection: Node IpAddress: [192.168.1.100] Scope Id: [] Host not found.

  Read the article

• Access server using IP on another interface

  - by Markos

  I am using Windows Server 2012 instead of a router for my home network. Currently I am using RRAS and computers from local network can access Internet correctly. Here is a map of the current setup: [PC1] ---| |---- (lan ip)[Server](wan ip)--> internet [PC2] ---| I have applications running on Server, such as IIS and others. All can be accessed from internet using wan ip and from lan using lan ip. I have a domain, lets say its my-domain.com, which is resolved to my wan ip. What I want is to enable my LAN computers to be able to connect to services on my server using the very same address as internet users: eg http://my-domain.com/. However this does not work for my lan computers. What I understand is that I need to set up some kind of loopback route in a way that packets comming to LAN interface get routed to WAN interface. But I haven't found how to achieve this (in fact, I don't know WHAT to search for). Feel free to ask for additional informations and I will try to update the question.

  Read the article

• What's going on with traceroute?

  - by Kevin

  The following is what happens when I run traceroute from a certain location: # traceroute google.com traceroute to google.com (74.125.227.39), 30 hops max, 60 byte packets 1 gateway.local.enactpc.com (10.0.0.1) 0.138 ms 0.101 ms 0.084 ms 2 * * * 3 * * * 4 * * * 5 * * * 6 * * * 7 * * * 8 * * * 9 * * * 10 * * * 11 * * * 12 * * * 13 * * * 14 * * * 15 * * * 16 * * * 17 * * * 18 * * * 19 * * * 20 * * * 21 * * * 22 * * * 23 * * * 24 * * * 25 * * * 26 * * * 27 * * * 28 * * * 29 * * * 30 * * * Absolutely nothing of interest... Now, originally I thought this was just a fact of the location's network set up. (I assume they block pings or something...) However, watch what happens when I use nmap to run a traceroute... # nmap -sP --traceroute google.com Starting Nmap 5.21 ( http://nmap.org ) at 2012-09-25 22:18 CDT Nmap scan report for google.com (74.125.227.40) Host is up (0.034s latency). Hostname google.com resolves to 11 IPs. Only scanned 74.125.227.40 rDNS record for 74.125.227.40: dfw06s06-in-f8.1e100.net TRACEROUTE (using proto 1/icmp) HOP RTT ADDRESS 1 0.19 ms gateway.local.enactpc.com (10.0.0.1) 2 1.93 ms 99-20-92-1.lightspeed.austtx.sbcglobal.net (99.20.92.1) 3 25.61 ms 99-20-92-2.lightspeed.austtx.sbcglobal.net (99.20.92.2) 4 ... 6 7 23.68 ms 12.83.68.137 8 31.30 ms gar23.dlstx.ip.att.net (12.122.85.73) 9 ... 10 31.82 ms 72.14.233.65 11 32.27 ms 209.85.250.77 12 32.98 ms dfw06s06-in-f8.1e100.net (74.125.227.40) Nmap done: 1 IP address (1 host up) scanned in 3.29 seconds When using nmap I get A LOT more results than with traceroute, why? Note, I checked, and the difference in target IP addresses is not related...

  Read the article

• Routing / binding 128 IPs to one server

  - by Andrew

  I have a Ubuntu server with 128 ip's (static external ips 86.xx.xx.16), and I want to crawl pages thru different ip's. The gateway is xx.xxx.xxx.1, the main ip is xx.xxx.xxx.16, and the other 128 ip's are xx.xxx.xxx.129/255. I tried this configuration in /etc/network/interfaces but I doesn't work. It work if I remove the gateway for the aliases eth0:0 and eth0:1. I think this is routing problem. auto lo iface lo inet loopback auto eth0 auto eth0:0 auto eth0:1 iface eth0 inet static address xx.xxx.xxx.16 netmask 255.255.255.128 gateway xx.xxx.xxx.1 iface eth0:0 inet static address xx.xxx.xxx.129 netmask 255.255.255.128 gateway xx.xxx.xxx.1 iface eth0:1 inet static address xx.xxx.xxx.130 netmask 255.255.255.128 gateway xx.xxx.xxx.1 Also, please tell me how to "reset" every changes that I made in networking and routing. Update: I removed the gateway and now it works. I can reach the website thru all 128 ip's. But when I try to bind a socket connection in php to a specific ip I get no answer. socket_bind($sock, "xx.xxx.xx.xxx"); socket_connect($sock, 'google.com', 80); I tryed to use a sniffer to see the packets, and I see the packet sent from binded ip to google.com but the "connection" can't be established. I don't know anything about "route" command, but I have a feeling that this is the solution.

  Read the article

• Port knocking via SSH tunnels

  - by j0ker

  I have a server running in my university's internal network. There is only one SSH daemon running which is secured by port knocking with knockd. Works fine if I try to connect from within the internal network. But since the server has no external IP, I have to tunnel into the internal network every time I want to access the server from outside. And since tunneling only works for a single port I cannot do the port knocking as easily as from an internal client. In fact, I don't get it to work at all. What I'm trying is opening tunnels for all the different ports that have to be knocked. Then I send TCP-SYN packets into the tunnels. But that doesn't work even for a single port. If I establish the tunnel on the first port in the knock sequence and send a packet through it, it doesn't reach the server. There is no entry in the log file of knockd, while there should be something like 123.45.67.89: openSSH: Stage 1 (as shown with internal knocks). So I guess, the problem doesn't exist within my knocking script but is a more general one. Are there any known problems with what I'm trying to do? Is it even possible or am I missing something? Thanks in advance!

  Read the article

• Linux port-based routing using iptables/ip route

  - by user42055

  I have the following setup: 192.168.0.4 192.168.0.6 192.168.0.1 +-----------+ +---------+ +----------+ |WORKSTATION|------| LINUX |------| GATEWAY | +-----------+ +---------+ +----------+ 192.168.150.10 | 192.168.150.9 +---------+ | VPN | +---------+ 192.168.150.1 WORKSTATION has a default route of 192.168.0.6 LINUX has a default route of 192.168.0.1 I am trying to use the gateway as the default route, but route port 80 traffic via the VPN. Based on what I read at http://www.linuxhorizon.ro/iproute2.html I have tried this: echo "1 VPN" >> /etc/iproute2/rt_tables sysctl net.ipv4.conf.eth0.rp_filter = 0 sysctl net.ipv4.conf.tun0.rp_filter = 0 sysctl net.ipv4.conf.all.rp_filter = 0 iptables -A PREROUTING -t mangle -i eth0 -p tcp --dport 80 -j MARK --set-mark 0x1 ip route add default via 192.168.150.9 dev tun0 table VPN ip rule add from all fwmark 0x1 table VPN When I run "tcpdump -i eth0 port 80" on LINUX, and open a webpage on WORKSTATION, I don't see the traffic go through LINUX at all. When I run a ping from WORKSTATION, I get this back from some packets: 92 bytes from 192.168.0.6: Redirect Host(New addr: 192.168.0.1) Vr HL TOS Len ID Flg off TTL Pro cks Src Dst 4 5 00 0054 de91 0 0000 3f 01 4ed3 192.168.0.4 139.134.2.18 Is this why my routing is not working ? Do I need to put GATEWAY and LINUX on different subnets to prevent WORKSTATION being redirected to GATEWAY ? Do I need to use NAT at all, or can I do this with routing alone (which is what I want) ?

  Read the article

• Wake on Lan Remote not waking PC while the PC does receive the packet.

  - by Nycrea

  Over the last couple of weeks, I have been trying to set up WOL from a remote location. When I use my laptop to wake the machine locally, it works just fine. (for some reason, when I try to wake from my phone with an app called "WOL wake on lan" it does not work locally either, but I'll get to that later) Anyway, when the machine is turned on, and I let it 'listen' for incoming magic packets (with a program called "WOL magic packet sender") on my specified port, it does receive them, though when turned off, the machine does not wake. When sending from phone, either locally or via 3G remotely, it does receive but does not wake as well. Because the machine does receive them when turned on and listening, but does not wake when turned off, I am convinced the cause of the problem is my receiving PC, rather than the router or the sender. Some extra info: The receiving machine is a PC running Windows 7 64bit. My router is the Netgear JWNR2000v2. I have the port I use forwarded to my PC's static IP in the router. If anyone could help, or just share your own story with the same problem, maybe we can work this out. Thanks a lot in advance.

  Read the article

• Looking for a small, portable, port-mirroring ethernet switch.

  - by user37244

  I recently had a mac go haywire, taking half a minute or more to get www.google.com loaded. Getting its owner to give up the machine for repair was like pulling teeth - they were insisting that it must be something to do with the network, since so much had changed with the local configuration at about the same time their box went haywire. I eventually set up a port mirror to a box that I could remote to so I could show that the mac was only irregularly getting packets onto the network. Demonstrating this faced an additional challenge: the latency of the remote desktop software I was using meant that I had to point to timestamps instead of just the moment the packet flashed up on the screen as my evidence. This particular user was the reason this was so challenging this time around, but I would like to have a box that I can cart from desk to desk to use wireshark on my laptop at any station where I need it. 3com, cisco, netgear, etc. (ad nauseum), all make switches that can be configured for port mirroring, but in my case, the smaller, the better. For the sake of my sanity, I'll probably end up running it off a battery anyway. If my laptop had two ethernet ports, this would be easy. So, whaddya recommand for a device that requires 0 configuration at each powerup (though I'm fine with poking at it for a while to set it up initially.) Small, light, and cheap enough to get it past purchasing? Thanks,

  Read the article

• Manual NAT on Checkpoint (Redirect all http requests to a local web server)

  - by kulakli

  Hi, We have a proxy server in internal network and I want to redirect all internet http requests to a web server in local network. It'll be like a Network Billboard that say "No direct connection is available. Set up your proxy etc." For example: A user starts the computer Opens the browser Trys to open www.google.com Should see web server output on local network Trys another web site on internet Should see web server output on local network Sets up proxy Trys to connect to a web site Web site should be loaded I have added a simple manual NAT rule to address translation in Checkpoint firewall but it simply does not work. Here is my address translation rule Source Destination Service T.Source T.Destination T.Service MY_PC A_GOOGLE_IP ALL ORIGINAL INT_WEB_SRV ORIGINAL Then when I ping A_GOOGLE_IP, replies come from INT_WEB_SRV, as I expected. However, when I try to connect A_GOOGLE_IP from browser (http://A_GOOGLE_IP), No replies come from SYN_SENT and falls into timeout. When I look at the firewall log of INT_WEB_SRV, I can see the incoming connection requests from MY_PC is accepted and NO denies. By the way, there is no problem to see INT_WEB_SRV (http://INT_WEB_SRV) from browser. My understanding is, my nat rule at checkpoint NGX R60 does not include return packets. I definitely need some help. Regards, Burak

  Read the article

• How can I setup OpenVPN with IPv4 and IPv6 using a tap device?

  - by Lekensteyn

  I've managed to setup OpenVPN for full IPv4 connectivity using tap0. Now I want to do the same for IPv6. Addresses and network setup (note that my real prefix is replaced by 2001:db8): 2001:db8::100:0:0/96 my assigned IPv6 range 2001:db8::100:abc:0/112 OpenVPN IPv6 range 2001:db8::100:abc:1 tap0 (on server) (set as gateway on client) 2001:db8::100:abc:2 tap0 (on client) 2001:db8::1:2:3:4 gateway for server Home laptop (tap0: 2001:db8::100:abc:2/112 gateway 2001:db8::100:abc:1/112) | | | (running Kubuntu 10.10; OpenVPN 2.1.0-3ubuntu1) | wifi | | router | | OpenVPN INTERNET | eth0 | /tap0 VPS (eth0:2001:db8::1:2:3:4/64 gateway 2001:db8::1) (tap0: 2001:db8::100:abc:1/112) (running Debian 6; OpenVPN 2.1.3-2) The server has both native IPv4 and IPv6 connectivity, the client has only IPv4. I can ping6 to and from my server over OpenVPN, but not to other machines (for example, ipv6.google.com). net.ipv6.conf.all.forwarding is set to 1, I've tried disabling net.ipv6.conf.all.accept_ra as well, without luck. Using tcpdump on both the server and client, I can see that packets are actually transferred over tap0 to eth0. The router (2001:db8::1) send a neighbor solicitation for the client (2001:db8::100:abc:2) to eth0 after it receives the ICMP6 echo-request. The server does not respond to that solicitation, which causes the ICMP6 echo-request not be routed to the destination. How can I make this IPv6 connection work?

  Read the article

• tc u32 --- how to match L2 protocols in recent kernels?

  - by brownian

  I have a nice shaper, with hashed filtering, built at a linux bridge. In short, br0 connects external and internal physical interfaces, VLAN tagged packets are bridged "transparently" (I mean, no VLAN interfaces are there). Now, different kernels do it differently. I can be wrong with exact kernel verions ranges, please forgive me. Thanks. 2.6.26 So, in debian, 2.6.26 and up (up to 2.6.32, I believe) --- this works: tc filter add dev internal protocol 802.1q parent 1:0 prio 100 \ u32 ht 1:64 match ip dst 192.168.1.100 flowid 1:200 Here, "kernel" matches two bytes in "protocol" field with 0x8100, but counts the beginning of ip packet as a "zero position" (sorry for my English, if I'm a bit unclear). 2.6.32 Again, in debian (I've not built vanilla kernel), 2.6.32-5 --- this works: tc filter add dev internal protocol 802.1q parent 1:0 prio 100 \ u32 ht 1:64 match ip dst 192.168.1.100 at 20 flowid 1:200 Here, "kernel" matches the same for protocol, but counts offset from the beginning of this protocol's header --- I have to add 4 bytes to offset (20, not 16 for dst address). It's ok, seems more logical, as for me. 3.2.11, the latest stable now This works --- as if there is no 802.1q tag at all: tc filter add dev internal protocol ip parent 1:0 prio 100 \ u32 ht 1:64 match ip dst 192.168.1.100 flowid 1:200 The problem is that I couldn't find a way to match 802.1q tag so far. Matching 802.1q tag at past I could do this before as follows: tc filter add dev internal protocol 802.1q parent 1:0 prio 100 \ u32 match u16 0x0ed8 0x0fff at -4 flowid 1:300 Now I'm unable to match 802.1q tag with at 0, at -2, at -4, at -6 or like that. The main issue that I have zero hits count --- this filter is not being checked at all, "wrong protocol", in other words. Please, anyone, help me :-) Thanks!

  Read the article

• NAT and P2P router crash

  - by returnFromException

  So..i had this argument with my networks teacher. He said that some people complains about router crashes due to many entrys on NAT tables on a router. I didnt understand and i asked: "If the application uses the same port, why does the router crash?. It should have only one entry (pc-ip,pcport;public-ip,public-port)". And he said: "it doesnt matter its using the same port". I got the idea that NAT creates an entry for every packet that passes trought it. Iam assuming NAT with overloading as you might have guessed. So the questions are: 1-How does nat entrys are created? On a packet basis or connection basis? I mean: suppose i send a udp packet..does the router create an entry? 2-When i start a TCP connection, does the router create a persistant nat entry until the connection closes? 3-Was my teacher right? The NAT table can overload assuming an aplication on the same port sending packets? Thanks in advance.

  Read the article

• How can I make IPv6 on OpenVPN work using a tap device?

  - by Lekensteyn

  I've managed to setup OpenVPN for full IPv4 connectivity using tap0. Now I want to do the same for IPv6. Addresses and network setup (note that my real prefix is replaced by 2001:db8): 2001:db8::100:0:0/96 my assigned IPv6 range 2001:db8::100:abc:0/112 OpenVPN IPv6 range 2001:db8::100:abc:1 tap0 server side (set as gateway on client) 2001:db8::100:abc:2 tap0 client side 2001:db8::1:2:3:4 gateway for server Home laptop (tap0: 2001:db8::100:abc:2/112 gateway 2001:db8::100:abc:1/112) | | | (running Kubuntu 10.10; OpenVPN 2.1.0-3ubuntu1) | wifi | | router | | OpenVPN INTERNET | eth0 | /tap0 VPS (eth0:2001:db8::1:2:3:4/64 gateway 2001:db8::1) (tap0: 2001:db8::100:abc:1/112) (running Debian 6; OpenVPN 2.1.3-2) The server has both native IPv4 and IPv6 connectivity, the client has only IPv4. I can ping6 to and from my server over OpenVPN, but not to other machines (for example, ipv6.google.com). Using tcpdump on both the server and client, I can see that packets are actually transferred over tap0 to eth0. The router (2001:db8::1) send a neighbor solicitation for the client (2001:db8::100:abc:2) to eth0 after it receives the ICMP6 echo-request. The server does not respond to that solicitation, which causes the ICMP6 echo-request not be routed to the destination. How can I make this IPv6 connection work?

  Read the article

• Alfa AWUSO36H 1W dysfunctional driver

  - by BrainStorm

  I recently purchased an Alfa AWUSO36H 1W wireless USB adapter for my notebook, in order to improve signal strength and quality. I'm currently using Linux Mint 11, and the it uses the RTL8187 driver for this adapter, I'm also using a 4dbi antenna, though I have others. The problem is that this adapter does exactly the opposite of what it should, actually my internal Broadcom BCM4313 adapter works way better than the alfa. Browsing is slow, some network applications don't even work, pings against Google.com on the internal adapter runs smooth, while in the alfa it gets like 25% packets lost or more! I'm less them 50 feet from my AP, the internal adapter gets 44/70 link quality, and the alfa gets around 60/70 (iwconfig output). Also the system always sets alfa power to 20dbm(100mw), then I have to do sudo iw set reg B0 to make it 30dbm(1000mw), but apparently no significant change. I've installed wireless-compat drivers, no change either. And worst of all, in Windows 7 it works way more smoothly for browsing, though I couldn't test it properly there. I hope its a driver problem, even if it's a pain to find/compile Linux drivers for a starter, I prefer it to a hardware problem where I would need to buy another adapter, since I have no money left (except for the cantenna pieces).

  Read the article

• Puzzling TCP performance over 3G / UMTS

  - by lemonsqueeze

  I'm using 3G as my primary internet connection, and TCP over this thing is getting more puzzling every day. For example: Downloading from kernel.org is crazy fast: $wget http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v3.0/linux-3.6.8.tar.bz2 increases to ~500kB/s after a few secs ! Some servers are incredibly slow, for instance www.graphic-pc.com:Same thing, downloading a big file with wget it starts at ~30kB/s for a split second, then collapses to 5-10k or even worse. Web browsing is decent but somewhat unreliable. Randomly, a page will take really long to load or even fail to load, but a reload can succeed almost immediately. Now, by chance i started playing with OpenVPN over UDP on top of the 3G connection, and OMG suddenly everything's extremely fast !Same www.graphic-pc.com now shoots at 100-200kB/s ! What's going on here ??? How come it is so much better with the VPN than without ?? And why does graphic-pc.com crawl when kernel.org flies ?Something to do with my tcp stack (or the server), or some buggy router in between ?? Notes: Setup is laptop running Ubuntu Lucid and a Huawei 3G dongle (So direct pppd connection). I can reproduce this pretty much any time during the day and I'm not moving, so it's clearly not cell environment or internet congestion. (although kernel.org without VPN sometimes does worse in the evening, 60kB or so - but still 500kB with VPN !) For 2) wireshark shows retransmitted packets, dup ack's, even out of order sometimes. I've tried playing with different /proc/sys/net/ipv4 parameters (tcp_rmem, window_scaling, tcp_congestion...) doesn't seem to make a difference. Update: Tried under windows 7 (no VPN) with some interesting results: tcp settings : default tcp_optimizer kernel.org : 10 kB/s 20 kB/s graphic-pc.com: 8 kB/s 70 kB/s ! tcp_optimizer turned on ctcp among other things. Have to check what os graphic-pc.com is running, my bet is linux's tcp_westwood and ms ctcp don't mix well here...

  Read the article

• what are valid 'ack' values?

  - by WileECanisLatrans

  having an issue with a vendor who claims the cause of a problem is an invalid 'ack' value in the tcp data. I'm using java so I didn't write this layer. I used snoop to capture the traffic on the wire and am using wireshark to display the data. Here is what is happening. After receiving a multi-packet(5) message I see a multi-pack(3) response. The first packet in the response has a value for 'ack' that is different than the 'ack' value in the other two packets. The vendor claims this data is suspect. I've provided sample data below. I'm not a tcp expert so I don't know if this is a problem or not. I've tried to find something on valid ack values and it seems to me the value should be 80018 but that doesn't mean the 78345 is wrong. I found this on the web and it seems to apply but I'm not sure: "the ack value of any data segment is considered valid as long as it does not acknowledge data ahead of the next segment to send". Thanks for your help. My understanding is the vendor has written their own tcp layer. * source seq ack len * vendor 75465 10924 0 * vendor 75465 10924 1440 * vendor 76905 10924 1440 * vendor 78345 10924 1440 * vendor 79785 10924 233 * me 10924 78345 0 * me 10924 80018 0 * me 10924 80018 197

  Read the article

• ssh works fine when using public interface, but slow when using private interface

  - by Kevin M

  My Linux(UbuntuEEE) to Linux(CentOS) ssh takes a long time to log in(~15 seconds) when using the private interface, but not when using the public one. I have a Linux box acting as my router. As such, it has multiple interfaces(75.xxx.xxx.xxx, 192.168.1.1). I can ssh in from the internal interface(192.168.1.65 to .1), but it will take a while. I can ssh into the public address, and it goes quickly(~1 second). I have another box that I can ssh into the inside interface from and it goes quickly. iptables is set to accept packets coming into the interface immediately. sshd's UseDNS is normally on; I get the same problem if I turn it off and restart sshd. I normally use public-key authentication; I have done a mv ~/.ssh/ ~/ssh/ and it will ask me for a password after going slowly. After logging in(using either interface), speed is quick. ssh client version(via ssh -v):OpenSSH_4.7p1 Debian-8ubuntu1.2, OpenSSL 0.9.8g 19 Oct 2007 ssh server version(via rpm -qv openssh_server):openssh-server-4.3p2-29.el5

  Read the article

• Not able to access Silverlight.net and ONLY Silverlight.net - All other domains work!

  - by Sootah

  Alrighty folks, I have an extremely odd problem. I am able to surf the web fine with one odd (and really annoying at the moment) exception: Microsoft's Silverlight.net. Every other site that I go to works just fine. This is quite frustrating because I'm in the middle of programming a web app in Silverlight 4.0, and whenever I do a search for any code examples, tutorials, or whatnot at least 50% of the results are hosted in the silverlight.net forums. The error message that I get is: Oops! Google Chrome could not find www.silverlight.net It doesn't work in my other browsers either (both IE and FireFox). What's odd, is that while the error message would lead me to assume it's a DNS error, I can ping the URL just fine. C:\Users\The Doot>ping silverlight.net Reply from 206.72.125.201: bytes=32 time=106ms TTL=106 Reply from 206.72.125.201: bytes=32 time=106ms TTL=106 Reply from 206.72.125.201: bytes=32 time=106ms TTL=106 Reply from 206.72.125.201: bytes=32 time=106ms TTL=106 Ping statistics for 206.72.125.201: Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss), Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds: Minimum = 103ms, Maximum = 110ms, Average = 106ms I've checked my HOSTS file, and there's nothing that refers to ANY Microsoft URL in there. What could be causing this!?? More importantly, how do I fix it? Just for kicks, I've even included the results of a traceroute here for your enjoyment. OS: Windows 7 Ultimate Thanks in advance! -Sootah

  Read the article

• Access server using IP on another interface

  - by Markos

  I am using Windows Server 2012 instead of a router for my home network. Currently I am using RRAS and computers from local network can access Internet correctly. Here is a map of the current setup: [PC1] ---| |---- (lan ip)[Server](wan ip)--> internet [PC2] ---| I have applications running on Server, such as IIS and others. All can be accessed from internet using wan ip and from lan using lan ip. I have a domain, lets say its my-domain.com, which is resolved to my wan ip. What I want is to enable my LAN computers to be able to connect to services on my server using the very same address as internet users: eg http://my-domain.com/. However this does not work for my lan computers. What I understand is that I need to set up some kind of loopback route in a way that packets comming to LAN interface get routed to WAN interface. But I haven't found how to achieve this (in fact, I don't know WHAT to search for). Feel free to ask for additional informations and I will try to update the question.

  Read the article

• VMWare use of Gratuitous ARP REPLY

  - by trs80

  I have an ESXi cluster that hosts several Windows Server VMs and around 30 Windows workstation VMs. Packet captures show a high number of ARP replies of the form: -sender_ip: VM IP -sender_mac: VM virtual MAC -target_ip: 0.0.0.0 -target_mac: Switch interface MAC The specific addresses aren't really a concern -- they're all legitimate and we're not having any problems with communications (most of the questions surrounding GARP and VMWare have to do with ping issues, a problem we don't have). I'm looking for an explanation of the traffic pattern in an environment that functions as expected. So the question is why would I see a high number of unsolicited ARP replies? Is this a mechanism VMWare uses for some purpose? What is it? Is there an alternative? EDIT: Quick diagram: [esxi]--[switch vlan]--[inline IDS]--[fw]--(rest of network) The IDS is complaining about these unsolicited ARPs. Several IDS vendors trigger on ARP replies without a prior request, or for ARP replies that have a target IP of 0.0.0.0. The target MAC in these replies is the VLAN interface on the switch. Capture points: -The IDS grabs the offending packets -The FW can see the same ones -A VM on the ESXi host does not see these, although there is an ARP request for a specific IP on the ESXi host that has source_ip=0.0.0.0 and source_mac=[switch vlan interface]. I can't share the captures, unfortunately. Really I'm interested in finding out if this is normal for an ESXi deployment.

  Read the article

• TCP dies on a Linux laptop

  - by Roman Cheplyaka

  Once in several days I have the following problem. My laptop (Debian GNU/Linux testing) suddenly becomes unable to work with TCP connections to the internet. The following things continue to work fine: UDP (DNS), ICMP (ping) — I get instant response TCP connections to other machines in the local network (e.g. I can ssh to a neighbour laptop) everything is ok for other machines in my LAN But when I try TCP connections from my laptop, they time out (no response to SYN packets). Here's a typical curl output: % curl -v google.com * About to connect() to google.com port 80 (#0) * Trying 173.194.39.105... * Connection timed out * Trying 173.194.39.110... * Connection timed out * Trying 173.194.39.97... * Connection timed out * Trying 173.194.39.102... * Timeout * Trying 173.194.39.98... * Timeout * Trying 173.194.39.96... * Timeout * Trying 173.194.39.103... * Timeout * Trying 173.194.39.99... * Timeout * Trying 173.194.39.101... * Timeout * Trying 173.194.39.104... * Timeout * Trying 173.194.39.100... * Timeout * Trying 2a00:1450:400d:803::1009... * Failed to connect to 2a00:1450:400d:803::1009: Network is unreachable * Success * couldn't connect to host * Closing connection #0 curl: (7) Failed to connect to 2a00:1450:400d:803::1009: Network is unreachable Restarting the connection and/or reloading the network card kernel module doesn't help. The only thing that helps is reboot. Clearly something is wrong with my system (everything else works fine), but I have no idea what exactly. I don't know how to reproduce this, but as I said, it happens every several days. My setup is a wireless router that is connected to the ISP via PPPoE. Any advice?

  Read the article

• Network topology for both direct and routed traffic between two nodes

  - by IndigoFire

  Despite it's small size, this is the most difficult network design problem I've faced. There are three nodes in this network: PC running Windows XP with an internal WiFi adapter.Base station with both WiFi and a Wireless Modem (WiModem)Mobile device with both WiFi and WiModem The modem is a low-bandwidth but high-reliability connection. We'd like to use WiFi for high-bandwidth stuff like file transfers when the mobile is nearby, and the modem for control information. Here's the tricky part: we'd like the wifi traffic to go directly from the mobile to the PC, as rebroadcasting packets on the same WiFi channel takes up double the bandwidth. We can do that with a manual configuration by giving the both the PC and the base station two IP addresses for their WiFi interfaces: one on a subnet shared with the mobile, and one on their own subnet. The routes on the PC are set up so that any traffic going to the mobile via WiModem goes through the secondary IP address so that return traffic from the mobile also goes through the WiModem. Here's what that looks like: PC WiFi 1: 192.168.2.10/24 WiFi 2: 192.168.3.10/24 Default route: 192.168.2.1 Base Station WiFi 1: 192.168.2.1/24 WiFi 2: 192.168.3.1/24 WiModem: 192.168.4.1/24 Mobile WiFi: 192.168.3.20/24 WiModem: 192.168.4.20/24 We'd like to move to having the base station automatically configure the mobile and PC, as the manual setup is problematic when you start having multiple mobiles and PCs. This means that the PC can only have 1 IP address and needs to be treated as being pretty simple. Is it possible to have a setup driven by DHCP on the base station that is efficient with bandwidth?

  Read the article

• Configure linux machine as bridge/switch and end device

  - by leemes

  At my home, I have two desktop PCs in two rooms. The router / DSL modem is in one of these rooms. Now I want to configure a home server (having 2 LAN ports, running 24/7) in the corridor between the two rooms, using only one LAN cable at each door. This gives me the following physical configuration: (door) (door) .----/-/----. .-----/-/----------._ FritzBox | | | .----´´ DSL Router PC1 Server | PC2 As just said, the server has 2 network interfaces and is running Ubuntu. What I need now is a network configuration which enables both the server and PC1 to connect to the router. I think the server needs to serve as a bridge or switch. Currently, all computers are configured having static IP addresses. If I'm understanding it correctly, a bridge / switch doesn't have its own IP address, but as the server needs to be configured as an own end device, it needs to have one. My first question is, do I have to configure both interfaces separately, giving both the same static IP address? My next question is, how do I bridge the two physical networks into one? I have basic understanding (but am always confused again and again) of bridges and switches, but I don't know how to configure it in software. I only know that it's possible to do so :) The third question is: Is it possible to configure this in a way that network packets from/to PC1 to/from the router only go through hardware or only consume low CPU in the server? Can you help me? Thanks in advance!

  Read the article

• Measure Upload Speed between a client and our server

  - by tresstylez

  We host a SAAS application specially customized for multiple clients. For one customer in particular -- they are reporting sporadic performance issues from various locations on their network, in particular UPLOADING documents through a form on our website. The client claims they have "bandwidth to spare" and that utilization of their "pipe" is so low that it MUST be our application, but our application has MANY clients and all features are working fine for all other clients. Interestingly enough -- DOWNLOADS (ie. just accessing the website, or downloading documents) is working fine. Speed test shows that they should get 1.2Mbps UP. So, a 3MB file should take 20 secs to upload. It takes 60+ seconds on their network. Sometimes even small files take OVER 10 minutes to upload or they timeout. Pings and Traceroutes don't show any abnormally long hops or response times. They claim other SAAS applications they use allow them to upload just fine. Both IT teams are working together to resolve this issue. What kind of data can I request from the clients to begin ruling things out. Seems like we need to somehow measure LATENCY of the networks involved or even at the switch level, we need to understand if packets are getting dropped somewhere and why. Where should I start? Any help is appreciated. I'll provide more info upon requests

  Read the article

• pdns-recursor allocates resources to non-existing queries

  - by azzid

  I've got a lab-server running pdns-recursor. I set it up to experiment with rate limiting, so it has been resolving requests openly from the whole internet for weeks. My idea was that sooner or later it would get abused, giving me a real user case to experiment with. To keep track of the usage I set up nagios to monitor the number of concurrent-queries to the server. Today I got notice from nagios that my specified limit had been reached. I logged in to start trimming away the malicious questions I was expecting, however, when I started looking at it I couldn't see the expected traffic. What I found is that even though I have over 20 concurrent-queries registered by the server I see no requests in the logs. The following command describes the situation well: $ sudo rec_control get concurrent-queries; sudo rec_control top-remotes 22 Over last 0 queries: How can there be 22 concurrent-queries when the server has 0 queries registered? EDIT: Figured it out! To get top-remotes working I needed to set ################################# # remotes-ringbuffer-entries maximum number of packets to store statistics for # remotes-ringbuffer-entries=100000 It defaults to 0 storing no information to base top-remotes statistics on.

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65  | Next Page >