Search Results

Search found 3538 results on 142 pages for 'tcp hijacking'.

Page 70/142 | < Previous Page | 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77  | Next Page >

• Rsyslogd not listening on port

  - by amorfis

  I installed rsyslogd on ubuntu server, started it and everything looks fine, but the port the server should listen on is not opened. ubuntu@node7:~$ sudo service rsyslog restart rsyslog stop/waiting rsyslog start/running, process 14114 Netstat shows it is not listening: ubuntu@node7:~$ netstat -tlan Active Internet connections (servers and established) Proto Recv-Q Send-Q Local Address Foreign Address State tcp 0 0 0.0.0.0:22 0.0.0.0:* LISTEN tcp 0 320 172.22.0.17:22 10.8.8.38:61335 ESTABLISHED tcp6 0 0 :::22 :::* LISTEN tcp6 0 0 :::2776 :::* LISTEN tcp6 0 0 :::2777 :::* LISTEN tcp6 0 0 172.22.0.17:2777 172.22.0.11:56554 ESTABLISHED tcp6 0 0 172.22.0.17:2776 172.22.0.11:39780 ESTABLISHED This is how /etc/rsyslog.conf looks like (most comments omitted): ubuntu@node7:~$ cat /etc/rsyslog.conf ################# #### MODULES #### ################# $ModLoad imuxsock # provides support for local system logging $ModLoad imklog # provides kernel logging support (previously done by rklogd) $ModLoad imtcp $InputTCPServerRun 514 ########################### #### GLOBAL DIRECTIVES #### ########################### $ActionFileDefaultTemplate RSYSLOG_TraditionalFileFormat $RepeatedMsgReduction on $WorkDirectory /var/spool/rsyslog $FileOwner syslog $FileGroup adm $FileCreateMode 0640 $DirCreateMode 0755 $Umask 0022 $PrivDropToUser syslog $PrivDropToGroup adm $IncludeConfig /etc/rsyslog.d/*.conf In /etc/rsyslog.d/35-server-per-host.conf I have following lines, and I suspect this can be the cause. What does it mean? # Stop processing of all non-local messages. You can process remote messages # on levels less than 35. :fromhost-ip,!isequal,"127.0.0.1" ~ and if it is, how could I change it to have server listening and receiving and logging messages? UPDATE: I commented out suspected line, but still it's not listening on port 514

  Read the article

• Getting 502 instead of 503 when all backend servers are down running HAProxy behind Apache

  - by scarba05

  I'm testing running HAProxy as a dedicated load balancer behind Apache 2.2, replacing our current configuration where we use Apache's load balancer. In our current, Apache only, set-up if all the backend (origin) servers are down Apache will serve a 503 service unavailable message. With HAProxy I get a 502 bad gateway response. I'm using a simple reverse proxy rewrite rule in Apache RewriteRule ^/(.*) http://127.0.0.1:8000/$1 [last,proxy] In HAProxy I have the following (running in default tcp mode) defaults log global option tcp-smart-accept timeout connect 7s timeout client 60s timeout queue 120s timeout server 60s listen my_server 127.0.0.1:8000 balance leastconn server backend1 127.0.0.1:8001 check observe layer4 maxconn 2 server backend1 127.0.0.1:8001 check observe layer4 maxconn 2 Testing connecting directly to the load balancer when the backend servers are down: [root@dev ~]# wget http://127.0.0.1:8000/ test.html --2012-05-28 11:45:28-- http://127.0.0.1:8000/ Connecting to 127.0.0.1:8000... connected. HTTP request sent, awaiting response... No data received. So presumably this is down to the fact that HAProxy accepts the connection and then closes it.

  Read the article

• CryptSvc not matched by Windows 7 Firewall rule

  - by theultramage

  I am using Windows Firewall in conjunction with a third-party tool to get notified about new outbound connection attempts (Windows Firewall Notifier or Windows Firewall Control). The way these tools do it is by setting the firewall to deny by default, and to add an auditing policy to log blocked connections into the Security event log. Then they watch the log, and display notification about newly added entries. netsh advfirewall set allprofiles firewallpolicy blockinbound,blockoutbound auditpol /set /subcategory:{0CCE9226-69AE-11D9-BED3-505054503030} /failure:enable With this configuration in place, I now need to craft outbound allow rules for applications and system services. Here is the rule for CryptSvc, the service frequently used for certificate validation and revocation checking: netsh advfirewall firewall add rule name="Windows Cryptographic Services" action=allow enable=yes profile=any program="%SystemRoot%\system32\svchost.exe" service="CryptSvc" dir=out protocol=tcp remoteport=80,443 The problem is, this rule does not work. Unless I change the scope to "all programs and services" (which is really unhealthy), connection denied events like the following will keep appearing in the security log: Event 5157, Microsoft Windows security auditing. The Windows Filtering Platform has blocked a connection. Application Information: Process ID: 1476 (<- svchost.exe with CryptSvc and nothing else) Application Name: \device\harddiskvolume1\windows\system32\svchost.exe Network Information: Direction: Outbound Source Address: 192.168.0.1 Source Port: 49616 Destination Address: 2.16.52.16 Destination Port: 80 Protocol: 6 (<- TCP) To make sure it's CryptSvc, I have let the connection through and reviewed its traffic; I also configured CryptSvc to run in its own svchost instance to make it more obvious: ;sc config CryptSvc type= share sc config CryptSvc type= own So... why is it not matching the firewall rule, and how to fix that?

  Read the article

• Can I setup NAT for the same service, two public IPs on different routers to the same private IP?

  - by James

  This might be needlessly complex, but here goes. I've got two Firebox x550e devices. The first has a local IP of 10.0.0.1, public IP 64.x.x.x. The second has a local IP of 10.0.0.10, public IP 70.x.x.x. There is an FTP server on our LAN with a private IP of 10.0.0.55. I've set up NAT rules in each of the Fireboxes, on the first firebox it is 64.x.x.x-10.0.0.55 tcp 21, on the second 70.x.x.x-10.0.0.55 tcp 21. The first rule works fine. I can ftp to 64.x.x.x and everything's good. The second rule doesn't work. ftp to 70.x.x.x results in a connection timeout. The second firebox logs say the connection is being allowed through. The default gateway on the FTP server is 10.0.0.1 (the first firebox) If I change the default gateway on the server to 10.0.0.10, the rule on the second firebox starts working, but the rule from the first firebox stops. Is there some way to make this work for both rules?

  Read the article

• Remote Desktop *from* Windows 2008 R2 Server

  - by freefaller

  Summary: how do I create an RDC connection from a Windows 2008 server to another server? Our client will only allow us to connect to their server via a static IP address (which is fair enough), but unfortunately as we're a very small company we don't have one in the office. As a work around, we had the connection working through our old Windows 2003 server (dynamic-cloud from 1and1). .. however we have just rebuilt the server to run under Windows 2008 R2 (don't ask, but it was necessary), and now I simply cannot get the connection working. I have added an "Outbound Rule" to Windows Firewall with Advanced Security (TCP, All local ports, 3389 remote port - I have also tried the other way around). I have added a packet filter IP security rule with the same details. The 1and1 firewall rules (through their online control panel) allows for 3389 TCP and UDP. But it is simply not connecting (yes, the server is definitely on and able to accept connections) with the general error of... Remote Desktop can’t connect to the remote computer for one of these reasons: 1) Remote access to the server is not enabled 2) The remote computer is turned off 3) The remote computer is not available on the network Is there anything obvious I've missed - or something I can use to find out where the request is being blocked? The new server is using the exact same IP address as before, so I don't believe that would be an issue. Unless it's trying to use an IPv6 address rather than the old IPv4 address that it was before? I apologise that I am not a network person by trade, but I know more than anybody else in my office!!

  Read the article

• Throughput; capacity planning help for C10K like design

  - by z8000

  I am designing a network service in which clients connect and stay connected -- the model is not far off from IRC less the s2s connections. I could use some help understanding how to do capacity planning, in particular with the system resource costs associated with handling messages from/to clients. There's an article that tried to get 1 million clients connected to the same server [1]. Of course, most of these clients were completely idle in the test. If the clients sent a message every 5 seconds or so the system would surely be brought to its knees. But... How do you do less hand-waving and you know, measure such a breaking point? We're talking about messages being sent by a client over a TCP socket, into the kernel, and read by an application. The data is shuffled around in memory from one buffer to another. Do I need to consider memory throughput ("5 GT/s" [2], etc.)? I'm pretty sure I have the ability to measure the basic memory requirements due to TCP/IP buffers, expected bandwidth, and CPU resources required to process messages. I'm a little dim on what I'm calling "thoughput". Help! Also, does anyone really do this? Or, do most people sort of hand-wave and see what the real world offers, and then react appropriately? [1] http://www.metabrew.com/article/a-million-user-comet-application-with-mochiweb-part-3/ [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GT/s

  Read the article

• xt_TCPMSS: bad length messages

  - by Matic

  Hey! I'm getting loads of messages like: Jun 23 10:24:20 awakening kernel: [ 1691.596823] xt_TCPMSS: bad length (1492 bytes) Jun 23 10:24:21 awakening kernel: [ 1692.663362] xt_TCPMSS: bad length (1448 bytes) Jun 23 10:24:21 awakening kernel: [ 1692.663495] xt_TCPMSS: bad length (1448 bytes) Jun 23 10:24:21 awakening kernel: [ 1692.663588] xt_TCPMSS: bad length (1448 bytes) Jun 23 10:24:21 awakening kernel: [ 1692.663671] xt_TCPMSS: bad length (1440 bytes) Jun 23 10:24:26 awakening kernel: [ 1697.062914] xt_TCPMSS: bad length (474 bytes) Jun 23 10:24:26 awakening kernel: [ 1697.305525] xt_TCPMSS: bad length (1492 bytes) Jun 23 10:24:27 awakening kernel: [ 1698.946633] xt_TCPMSS: bad length (1492 bytes) Jun 23 10:24:36 awakening kernel: [ 1707.481198] xt_TCPMSS: bad length (1492 bytes) Jun 23 10:24:37 awakening kernel: [ 1708.723526] xt_TCPMSS: bad length (805 bytes) Jun 23 10:24:38 awakening kernel: [ 1709.599461] xt_TCPMSS: bad length (805 bytes) Jun 23 10:24:41 awakening kernel: [ 1712.211052] xt_TCPMSS: bad length (1492 bytes) Jun 23 10:24:41 awakening kernel: [ 1712.260588] xt_TCPMSS: bad length (1492 bytes) Jun 23 10:24:41 awakening kernel: [ 1712.976058] xt_TCPMSS: bad length (1492 bytes) Jun 23 10:24:43 awakening kernel: [ 1714.225209] xt_TCPMSS: bad length (1492 bytes) Jun 23 10:24:43 awakening kernel: [ 1714.914961] xt_TCPMSS: bad length (1492 bytes) Jun 23 10:24:55 awakening kernel: [ 1726.192696] xt_TCPMSS: bad length (1480 bytes) Jun 23 10:24:55 awakening kernel: [ 1726.192825] xt_TCPMSS: bad length (1480 bytes) In my dmesg/syslog. This linux machine is among other things used as an internet gateway. Connection is over PPPoE. I have the following line in my iptables script: $IPT -A FORWARD -p tcp --tcp-flags SYN,RST SYN -j TCPMSS --clamp-mss-to-pmtu # PPPoE fix The frequency of this messages increased 10x when I upgraded from Debian lenny with 2.6.27 to squeeze with 2.6.32 few days ago. Why am I seeing this messages and how can I fix them?

  Read the article

• How to route to a secondary interface on the same physical ethernet?

  - by sjose3612611

  INTERNET<->(wan)BRIDGED_DEVICE(lan)<->ETH_ROUTER<->LAN Problem: Need to access web server on BRIDGED_DEVICE's LAN from INTERNET via ROUTER (BRIDGED_DEVICE's web server cannot be accessed form INTERNET since it has no Public management IP). Cannot configure bridged device. It has a static IP on its LAN to which its web server binds. Attempt: Create a secondary/alias WAN Interface on ETH_ROUTER (e.g Primary: eth0.1 (for internet access) and Secondary: eth0.2 (for accessing web server on BRIDGED_DEVICE), (No VLANs). eth0.1 has a public IP; eth0.2 has a static private IP in the BRIDGED_DEVICE's subnet (e.g 10.0.X.Y). Iptables on ETH_ROUTER: Added a port forward (DNAT) from eth0.1 to eth0.2: iptables -t nat -I PREROUTING -i eth0.1 -p tcp --dport 80 -j DNAT --to-destination 10.0.X.Y iptables -t nat -I POSTROUTING -o eth0.2 -s 10.0.X.0/24 -j MASQUERADE Stateful firewall w/ overall drop policy on FORWARD chain, hence: iptables -I FORWARD -i eth0.1 -d 10.0.X.Y -p tcp --dport 80 -j ACCEPT Can ping from ETH_ROUTER to BRIDGED_DEVICE but unable to reach the web server from Internet. I see packet cont increasing for the DNAT rule but not sure where it disappears in the ETH_ROUTER after that. ETH_ROUTER is the only device that can be configured to achieve this. If familiar with this scenario, please suggest what I may be missing or doing wrong here or suggest techniques to debug?

  Read the article

• Load balancing a Windows File Share using HA-Proxy

  - by NathanE

  After pulling my hair out over DFS I just had this weird and potentially dangerous idea come into my head whereby, just possibly, I might be able to use HA-Proxy to load balance a file share between servers. I've done some remedial packet traces and it does appear that TCP port 445 is the only thing involved in using Windows file sharing. I've always thought for many years that UDP 139, 135 etc were also involved in at least establishing the connection - but apparently not! So I setup a basic test: listen SMBTest *:445 mode tcp server Smb1 172.16.61.201:445 server Smb2 172.16.61.202:445 And you'll never guess what... it works??? (!) Now obviously there is the whole concern about synchronisation between the file servers (of course). That could easily be taken care of with a little bit of Robocopy script. And considering I only need a HA read-only file share there wouldn't be any issues with regard to file locking etc. Can anyone tell me if what I'm playing with here is fire? I really didn't think it would work at all and now I'm a little shocked. What would be the downsides? Could this be relied upon for a production environment?

  Read the article

• Squid with mikrotik router

  - by niren

  I tried to connect squid3 in my network to use high anonymity proxy. This is how my network is right now WAN LINK | ------------- ----------------------------- | Mikrotik Box | | Ubuntu Server with squid3 | ------------- ----------------------------- | / | / ---------------------- | Switch ( Cheap one ) | ---------------------- | | | Client1 Client2 Client3 etc. after this setup I changed squid.conf in Ubuntu server as http_port 8080 acl localhost src xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx(Ubuntu server IP) acl to_localhost dst xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx(Mikrotik router gateway) I assume that redirected http from Mikrotik router will be redirect again to Mikrotik router. uncomment access log /var/log/squid3/access.log add visible_hostname myname save squid.conf and restart squid3 server. Then I have added nat rule in Mikrotik router ip/firewall/nat 1. add chain=dstnat src_address=xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx(ununtu server IP) dst-port=80 protocol=tcp action=accept 2. add chain=dstnat src_address=xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx/28(LAN address) dst-port=80 protocol=tcp action=dst-nat to-address=xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx(ununtu server IP) to-port=8080 now I can not able to access internet from client1 system, If I remove these two nat rule then I can access internet. what is wrong I have made?

  Read the article

• Balancing internal services using a Cisco CSS 11501

  - by Ladadadada

  First, the background to the problem: I have a Cisco CSS11501 that I am using to load balance a few web servers. These web servers have two network interfaces, one internal and one external and we are sending the requests to the internal interface. We have the CSS configured to do NAT because our webservers need to see the client's IP address. Because the TCP packets hit the webservers with a source address on the Internet, the webserver tries to send the packet back to the client over the external interface and not through the load balancer. In order to stop these requests being sent back out to the Internet via the external interface, we added a routing rule on these boxes so that all traffic with a source address on the internet will use the load balancer as the gateway. This part works fine. What I would also like to to is use the CSS as a load balancer for internal services such as our MySQL slaves. When I do this, I run into a similar problem; the TCP connection goes from the web server to the load balancer and then from the load balancer to the MySQL slave but the CSS spoofs a source address of the original webserver. The MySQL slave then tries to send the response directly to the webserver via the internal network and not via the load balancer. The ideal solution would be to tell the CSS not to do source address spoofing on the internal network and only do it for requests originating on the Internet. Is this possible ? Failing that, is there a way of directing the load balanced traffic back through the load balancer while keeping the other traffic (say SSH) purely on the internal network ? Is there another way of using the CSS11501 to load balance internal services ?

  Read the article

• Multiple IP's using one NIC connectivity problem - Windows

  - by Vincent

  I have a frame relay network that is directly connected to a GPRS network. I also have a ADSL high speed network and recently I have been trying to achieve the following network configuration using windows 7 (Also tried XP) with no success to date. On one server I have two NIC's NIC1 I would like the following two static IP address's 10.0.1.110 and 10.0.1.200 the cisco router has a default gateway of 10.0.1.1 the ADSL is DHCP. NIC1 and the cisco router do not have access to the internet. NIC2 is setup for DHCP with a primary DNS and secondary DNS configured to enable internet connectivity. With NIC1 all incoming TCP connections are from IP address's starting with 10.192.x.x I cannot establish a TCP connection to both 10.0.1.110 and 10.0.1.200. Its either one or the other. I have a static route implemented in windows of: route -p 10.192.0.0 mask 255.255.0.0 10.0.1.1 metric 1 I have tried leaving out the gateway in the NIC1 and many other combinations with no success. Can anyone please help? What am I doing wrong?

  Read the article

• How to find the real IP to which IPVS is routing a virtual IP

  - by Wayne Conrad

  I'm trying to find a problem server hiding behind a virtual IP (using LVS/ipvs). I've got a test program that sends requests to the virtual IP until it gets the bad response, but how can I tell to which real IP a request to the virtual IP got routed? On the box doing the virtual IP magic, here's the virtual IP configuration (for the service I care about): IP Virtual Server version 1.2.1 (size=4096) Prot LocalAddress:Port Scheduler Flags -> RemoteAddress:Port Forward Weight ActiveConn InActConn ... TCP 10.1.0.254:5025 nq -> 10.1.0.5:5025 Route 1 0 1 -> 10.1.0.6:5025 Route 1 0 5 -> 10.1.0.7:5025 Route 1 0 2 -> 10.1.0.9:5025 Local 1 0 3 -> 10.1.0.11:5025 Route 1 0 3 ... My client program is sending TCP requests to 10.1.0.254:5025, usually getting a good response but sometimes a bad response. With this few servers, I could send my request to each server in turn until I discover the culprit, but I wonder if that technique will scale as we add servers. What means exist for me to find out where requests got routed? Kernel: Linux 2.6.32 OS: Debian testing (whatever that's called these days). ipvsadm is version 1.25, compiled with ipvs v1.2.1

  Read the article

• Allow opening a new tab with Ctrl+T on all websites in Firefox

  - by Martin J.H.

  In Firefox, certain websites and plugins (Adobe PDF Plugin) appear to "capture" the Control key, so that when I try to open a new tab using "Ctrl+t", nothing happens - or worse, something unexpected happens. Examples: On the Codecademy site, while editing code, Ctrl+T either does nothing, or (when Flash is disabled) switches the position of the two characters next to the cursor. When viewing PDF's with the Adobe PDF Plugin, Ctrl+T does nothing. Is there a way to disable this "feature"? I would like "Ctrl+t" to always "talk" to Firefox! Edit: After searching superuser deeper, this question is very similar to the questions: "How to prevent keystroke grabbing/hijacking by websites in Firefox?" "How do I prevent pages I visit from overriding selected Firefox shortcut keys?". The answers to these questions are interesting and relevant, but do not give a method on how to disable combinatinos such as "Ctrl+t". Maybe a modified Greasemonkey script is the easiest solultion. Edit 2 - Attempt at a solution The following UserScript (Use GreaseMonkey to install it) successfully captures Ctrl+t on some sites (Google Search site, for instance - PopUp "Gotcha" appears), but not on the Codecademy site. I found another question pertaining to this subject here: "How to forbid keyboard shortcut stealing by websites in Firefox". It was raised in 2010, and the consensus was: It can't be done. // ==UserScript== // @name Disable Ctrl T interceptions // @description Stop websites from highjacking keyboard shortcuts // // @run-at document-start // @include * // @grant none // ==/UserScript== // Keycode for 't'. Add more to disable other ctrl+X interceptions keycodes = [84]; var lastPressedButton = [0]; document.addEventListener('keydown', function(e) { //uncomment to find out the keycode for any given key // alert(e.keyCode ); if (keycodes.indexOf(e.keyCode) != -1 && e.ctrlKey) { e.cancelBubble = true; e.stopImmediatePropagation(); alert("Gotcha!"); } return false; });

  Read the article

• Is there a Windows 7 compatible IPSec VPN client that allows protocol and port specific rules?

  - by Sani Huttunen

  As the title says, I need to find a IPSec VPN client for Windows 7. On XP and Vista we've used SafeNet SoftRemote in which you can set up rules for specific protocols and ports. But SoftRemote isn't compatible with Windows 7. 172.xxx.xxx.1 TCP 1433 172.xxx.xxx.2 TCP 1433 172.xxx.xxx.10 ALL ... Since the VPN gateway is configured this way the client must mirror these settings. I've tried TheGreenBow, NCP Secure Entry, Cisco VPN Client and Shrew Soft VPN but none of these allows you to configure by protocol and port. Does anyone have any other suggestions? EDIT: Forgot to mention that agressive mode is also a requirement. --UPDATE-- I've got some news... I've managed to get SoftRemote to work on Windows 7 x64 through Windows XP Mode. After scouring all corners of the Internet for idéas I had enough information to construct a working solution. This solution will probably benefit other clients as well! You'll find a post here with detailed instructions of how I went about.

  Read the article

• Change OpenVZ route to pass through ip failover

  - by Kevin Campion

  I have one dedicaced server with its own IP and another IP (failover) who refer to the first. I will wish to change the gateway of a Proxmox virtual machine (openvz) who runs on this dedicaced server to go through the failover IP rather than the ip of host main server. Once connected to a virtual machine, when I do a traceroute VE# traceroute www.google.fr traceroute to www.google.fr (209.85.229.104), 30 hops max, 60 byte packets 1 MY_SERVER_NAME.ovh.net (xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx FIRST_IP_MAIN_SERVER) 0.021 ms 0.010 ms 0.009 ms The first line tells me the ip of host main server. I would like that the traceroute display the second IP failover. VE# route Kernel IP routing table Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref Use Iface 192.0.2.1 * 255.255.255.255 UH 0 0 0 venet0 default 192.0.2.1 0.0.0.0 UG 0 0 0 venet0 With iptables HOST# iptables -t nat -L Chain POSTROUTING (policy ACCEPT) target prot opt source destination MASQUERADE all -- anywhere anywhere MASQUERADE all -- anywhere anywhere SNAT tcp -- anywhere 10.10.101.2 tcp dpt:www state NEW,RELATED,ESTABLISHED,UNTRACKED to:SECOND_IP_FAILOVER SNAT all -- 10.10.101.2 anywhere to:SECOND_IP_FAILOVER 10.10.101.2 is the virtual machine IP (interface venet0) Any ideas ?

  Read the article

• CentOS iscsi initiator has session but there is no block device

  - by jcalfee314

  I have installed the scsi-target-utils package on CentOS and I used it to perform a discovery. The discovery did give me an active session. I restarted the iscsi service but I do not see any new devices (fdisk -l). I see in /var/log/messages that my connection is operational now. I'm not sure how to debug this further. Can someone direct me into fixing this? discovery: iscsiadm -m discovery -t sendtargets -p 192.168.0.155 returns: 192.168.0.155:3260,-1 iqn.2009-02.com.twinstrata:cloudarray:sn-1d07c1b62d4ec8f3 Just to verify it actually worked: iscsiadm -m session returns tcp: [1] 192.168.0.155:3260,1 iqn.2009-02.com.twinstrata:cloudarray:sn-1d07c1b62d4ec8f3 restarting as the directions say to do: service iscsi restart output written to /var/log/message Stopping iscsi: Sep 20 12:14:22 localhost kernel: connection1:0: detected conn error (1020) [ OK ] Starting iscsi: Sep 20 12:14:22 localhost kernel: scsi1 : iSCSI Initiator over TCP/IP Sep 20 12:14:22 localhost iscsid: Connection1:0 to [target: iqn.2009-02.com.twinstrata:cloudarray:sn-1d07c1b62d4ec8f3, portal: 192.168.0.155,3260] through [iface: default] is shutdown. Sep 20 12:14:22 localhost iscsid: Could not set session2 priority. READ/WRITE throughout and latency could be affected. [ OK ] [root@db iscsi]# Sep 20 12:14:23 localhost iscsid: Connection2:0 to [target: iqn.2009-02.com.twinstrata:cloudarray:sn-1d07c1b62d4ec8f3, portal: 192.168.0.155,3260] through [iface: default] is operational now Ran a login command: iscsiadm -m node -T iqn.2009-02.com.twinstrata:cloudarray:sn-1d07c1b62d4ec8f3 -p 192.168.0.155 -l No errors, no logging occurred. Next I compared the output from "fdisk -l|egrep dev" both with the iscsi session and without. There is no difference. I suppose I could just look in /etc/mtab. Any ideas on how I can get an iscsi device?

  Read the article

• how to debug when xinetd says : got signal 17 (child exited)

  - by Faizan Shaik

  I am trying to start services vsftpd and sshd using xinetd. my config files are as follows. /etc/xinetd.conf defaults { instances = 60 log_type = FILE /var/log/xinetdlog log_on_success = HOST PID log_on_failure = HOST cps = 25 30 only_from = localhost } includedir /etc/xinetd.d /etc/xinetd.d/ftp service ftp { disable = no server = /usr/sbin/vsftpd server_args = -l user = root socket_type = stream protocol = tcp wait = no instances = 4 flags = REUSE nice = 10 log_on_success += DURATION HOST USERID only_from = 127.0.0.1 10.0.0.0/24 } /etc/xinetd.d/ssh service ssh { disable = no log_on_failure += USERID server = /usr/sbin/sshd user = root socket_type = stream protocol = tcp wait = no instances = 20 flags = REUSE only_from = 127.0.0.1 10.0.0.0/24 } Even though i've included only_from attribute, vsftp server as well as ssh server are refusing connection from localhost. while vsftp and ssh servers are working fine individually when i check with "service vsftpd start" and "service ssh start". when i did debug using "xinetd -d" throug terminal i got the output as 13/10/20@00:06:08: DEBUG: 3592 {cnf_start_services} Started service: ftp 13/10/20@00:06:08: DEBUG: 3592 {cnf_start_services} Started service: ssh 13/10/20@00:06:08: DEBUG: 3592 {cnf_start_services} mask_max = 8, services_started = 2 13/10/20@00:06:08: NOTICE: 3592 {main} xinetd Version 2.3.14 started with libwrap loadavg options compiled in. 13/10/20@00:06:08: NOTICE: 3592 {main} Started working: 2 available services 13/10/20@00:06:08: DEBUG: 3592 {main_loop} active_services = 2 13/10/20@00:06:16: DEBUG: 3592 {main_loop} select returned 1 13/10/20@00:06:16: DEBUG: 3592 {server_start} Starting service ftp 13/10/20@00:06:16: DEBUG: 3592 {main_loop} active_services = 2 13/10/20@00:06:16: DEBUG: 3607 {exec_server} duping 9 13/10/20@00:06:16: DEBUG: 3592 {main_loop} active_services = 2 13/10/20@00:06:16: DEBUG: 3592 {main_loop} select returned 1 13/10/20@00:06:16: DEBUG: 3592 {check_pipe} Got signal 17 (Child exited) 13/10/20@00:06:16: DEBUG: 3592 {child_exit} waitpid returned = 3607 13/10/20@00:06:16: DEBUG: 3592 {server_end} ftp server 3607 exited 13/10/20@00:06:16: DEBUG: 3592 {svc_postmortem} Checking log size of ftp service 13/10/20@00:06:16: INFO: 3592 {conn_free} freeing connection 13/10/20@00:06:16: DEBUG: 3592 {child_exit} waitpid returned = -1 both services are getting started but neither of them is working. after banging for 3-4 hours i still don't have any clue about this error. Any help would be appreciated. thanks!

  Read the article

• Translating IPTables rule to UFW

  - by Dario Fumagalli

  we are using an Ubuntu 12.04 x64 LTS VPS. Firewall being used is UFW. I have setup a Varnish + LEMP setup. along with other things, including an Openswan IPSEC VPN from our office to the VPS data center. A second in house Ubuntu box is to act as MySQL slave and fetch data from the VPS through the VPN. Master's ppp0 is seen as 10.1.2.1 from the slave, they ping etc. I have done the various required tasks but I can't get the client (slave) MySQL (nor telnet 10.1.2.1 3306) to access the master through the VPN unless I issue this fairly obvious IPTables command: iptables -A INPUT -s 10.1.2.0/24 -p tcp --dport 3306 -j ACCEPT I willingly forced the accepted input to come from the last octet. With this rule everything works just fine! However I want to translate this command to UFW syntax so to keep everything in one place. Now I admit being inexperienced with UFW, I prepared rules like: ufw allow proto tcp from 10.1.2.0/24 port mysql and 2-3 variations involving specifying 3306 instead of mysql, specifying a target IP (MySQL's my.cnf at the moment is configured as 0.0.0.0) and similar but I just don't seem to be able to replicate the simple iptables rule in a functional way. Anyone could kindly give me a suggestion that is not to dump UFW? Thanks in advance.

  Read the article

• ports only available from the outside network

  - by ChrisJ

  This is a counter-intuitive problem for me. I have a new Win 2003 server on a static IP address w.x.y.z. Tomcat 7, PostgreSQL 9.1, and Subversion are installed. All of it appears to be working fine from the server itself. We can also access the Tomcat manager, web applications, and run "svn ls svn://w.x.y.z/" from outside our network. However, when I try from another machine in the office, phpPgAdmin and svn cannot establish connections with the server. http://w.x.y.z:5432/phppgadmin cannot connect. The svn command from above returns: svn: E730061: Unable to connect to a repository at URL 'svn://w.x.y.z/' svn: E730061: Can't connect to host 'w.x.y.z': No connection could be made because the target machine actively refused it. Tomcat manager and the other web apps we have deployed work fine. Netstat -a from the server shows this: Proto Local Address Foreign Address State TCP SERVERNAME:3690 SERVERNAME:0 LISTENING TCP SERVERNAME:5432 SERVERNAME:0 LISTENING Windows Firewall was off, but just in case I also tried to enable it and open ports 3690 (svn) and 5432 (postgres). No change. I don't have access to the router/switch because it just doesn't work that way in Port-au-Prince and our sysadmin is on R&R. Is there anything that might be causing the problem from the server side?

  Read the article

• Postfix "loops back to myself" error on relay to another IP address on same machine

  - by Nic Wolff

  I'm trying to relay all mail for one domain "ourdomain.tld" from Postfix running on port 2525 of one interface to another SMTP server running on port 25 of another interface on the same machine. However, when a message is received for that domain, we're getting a "mail for loops back to myself" error. Below are netstat and postconf, the contents of our /etc/postfix/transport file, and the error that Postfix is logging. (The high bytes of each IP address are XXXed out.) Am I missing something obvious? Thanks - # netstat -ln -A inet Proto Recv-Q Send-Q Local Address Foreign Address State ... tcp 0 0 XXX.XXX.138.209:25 0.0.0.0:* LISTEN tcp 0 0 XXX.XXX.138.210:2525 0.0.0.0:* LISTEN # postconf -d | grep mail_version mail_version = 2.8.4 # postconf -n alias_maps = hash:/etc/aliases allow_mail_to_commands = alias,forward bounce_queue_lifetime = 0 command_directory = /usr/sbin config_directory = /etc/postfix daemon_directory = /usr/libexec/postfix data_directory = /var/lib/postfix debug_peer_level = 2 default_privs = nobody default_process_limit = 200 html_directory = no inet_interfaces = XXX.XXX.138.210 local_recipient_maps = local_transport = error:local mail delivery is disabled mail_owner = postfix mailbox_size_limit = 0 mailq_path = /usr/bin/mailq manpage_directory = /usr/local/man message_size_limit = 10240000 mydestination = mydomain = ourdomain.tld myhostname = ourdomain.tld mynetworks = XXX.XXX.119.0/24, XXX.XXX.138.0/24, XXX.XXX.136.128/25 myorigin = ourdomain.tld newaliases_path = /usr/bin/newaliases queue_directory = /var/spool/postfix readme_directory = /etc/postfix recipient_delimiter = + relay_domains = ourdomain.tld relay_recipient_maps = sample_directory = /etc/postfix sendmail_path = /usr/sbin/sendmail setgid_group = postdrop smtpd_authorized_verp_clients = $mynetworks smtpd_recipient_limit = 10000 transport_maps = hash:/etc/postfix/transport unknown_local_recipient_reject_code = 450 # cat /etc/postfix/transport ourdomain.tld relay:[XXX.XXX.138.209]:25 # tail -f /var/log/maillog ... Aug 2 23:58:36 va4 postfix/smtp[9846]: 9858A758404: to=<nicwolff@... >, relay=XXX.XXX.138.209[XXX.XXX.138.209]:25, delay=1.1, delays=0.08/0.01/1/0, dsn=5.4.6, status=bounced (mail for [XXX.XXX.138.209]:25 loops back to myself)

  Read the article

• Server 2012, Jumbo Frames - should I expect problems?

  - by TomTom

  Ok, this sound might stupid - but is there any negative on just enabling jumbo frames in practice? From what I understand: Any switch or ethernet adapter that sees a jumbo frame it can not handle will just drop it. TCP is not a problem as max frame size is negotiated in the setinuo phase. UCP is a theoretical problem as a server may just send a LARGE UDP packet that gets dropped on the way. Practically though, as UDP is packet based, I do not really think any software WOULD send a UDP packet larger than 1500 bytes net without app level configuration changes - at least this is how I do my programming, as it is quite hard to get a decent MTU size for that without testing yourself, so you fall back in programming to max 1500 packets. The network in question is a standard small business network - we upgraded now from a non managed 24 port switch to a 52 port switch with 4 10g ports (netgear - quite cheap) and will mov a file server to 10g for also ISCSI serving. All my equipment on the Ethernet level can handle minimum 9000 bytes and due to local firewalls I really want to get packets larger (less firewall processing), but the network is also NAT'ed to the internet. On top, different machines move around (download) large files (multi gigabyte area) quite often for processing. The question is - can I expect problems when I just enable jumbo frames? Again, this is not totally ignorance - I just don't see programs sending more than 1500 byte UDP packets (if that is a practical problem please tell me) and for TCP the MTU is negotiated anyway. if there is a problem I can move to a dedicated VLAN, but this has it's own shares of problems as basically most workstations must then be on both VLAN's.

  Read the article

• Is iptable capable of this or should I go with mod_proxy?

  - by Jesper

  I'm trying to configure my network to receive an incoming connection on one device and then redirect it to another device on a specific port. Right now I'm on about port 80 and a device running apache. The problem I'm facing is that when the forwarding is done it also sets the source ip to the first device instead of the source ip the user that connects to the service has. Let me illustrate it: [Internet User] = 7.7.7.7 connects to [Device 1] = 1.1.1.1:80 [Device 1] forwards it to [Device 2] = 1.1.1.2:80 [Device 2] outputs response that [Internet User] sees So on [Device 2] I will naturally see [Device 1]s IP in the logs, but I wanna see if there is a way to connect the internet user through [Device 1] to [Device 2] while seeing the real source IP in the logs on [Device 2]. Is that possible? My rule-set looks like this at the moment: (on Device 1) iptables -P FORWARD ACCEPT iptables -t nat -I PREROUTING -j DNAT -p tcp --dport 80 --to-destination 1.1.1.2:80 iptables -t nat -I POSTROUTING -j SNAT -p tcp -d 1.1.1.2 --to-source 1.1.1.1 On [Device 2] it accepts all incoming on port 80 from [Device 1] as well as accepts all related and established connections. So, would there be any way to get the real source onto [Device 2]? Let me know if you need more information!

  Read the article

• Correctly setting up UFW on Ubuntu Server 10 LTS which has Nginx, FastCGI and MySQL?

  - by littlejim84

  Hello. I'm wanting to get my firewall on my new webserver to be as secure as it needs to be. After I did research for iptables, I came across UFW (Uncomplicated FireWall). This looks like a better way for me to setup a firewall on Ubuntu Server 10 LTS and seeing that it's part of the install, it seems to make sense. My server will have Nginx, FastCGI and MySQL on it. I also want to be allow SSH access (obviously). So I'm curious to know exactly how I should set up UFW and is there anything else I need to take into consideration? After doing research, I found an article that explains it this way: # turn on ufw ufw enable # log all activity (you'll be glad you have this later) ufw logging on # allow port 80 for tcp (web stuff) ufw allow 80/tcp # allow our ssh port ufw allow 5555 # deny everything else ufw default deny # open the ssh config file and edit the port number from 22 to 5555, ctrl-x to exit nano /etc/ssh/sshd_config # restart ssh (don't forget to ssh with port 5555, not 22 from now on) /etc/init.d/ssh reload This all seems to make sense to me. But is it all correct? I want to back this up with any other opinions or advice to ensure I do this right on my server. Many thanks!

  Read the article

• ISA 2000 and COD MW2 Steam

  - by twlichty

  OK, so maybe not the "proper use" of network resources, but we enjoy the odd COD game during lunch hours. When we played COD4, we had a dedicated server setup at the back of the server room. With MW2, we need to be able to connect to steam to be able to play multi-player. I've found this support article here: https://support.steampowered.com/kb%5Farticle.php?ref=8571-GLVN-8711 Which outlines all the ports I need to open. I went through and created the following rules in ISA 2000 (I'm stuck with 2000 for now). Protocol Definition: Steam Primary connection: Port 27000, UDP, Send Receive Secondary Connection: Port range 27001-27030 Send Receive Protocol Definition: Steam TCP In Primary connection: 27014, TCP, Inbound Secondary Connection: Port range: 27015-27050, Inbound Protocol Definition: Steam 4380 Primary connection: 4380, UDP, Send Receive When I start steam on my local workstation (I did add an exception to the Vista Firewall to allow steam), the steam client sits on "Updating Steam" for 5 minutes then errors out with: You must connect to the internet first. Any ideas? I assume I missed something. Thanks for your help.

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77  | Next Page >