Search Results

Search found 13968 results on 559 pages for 'device dependent routing'.

Page 75/559 | < Previous Page | 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82  | Next Page >

  • Redirecting and Remapping with mod_rewrite

    - by Droid646197
    First of all, am new to doing back-end server admin.. I have a main website being served on at certain IP. I have a blog address that lives on another IP, which was used on wordpress.com. When a user typed in blog.domain.com it would resolve to the Wordpress.com site. Since coming on board (two months) they wanted me to bring the blog in house. So, I set up a wordpress install at domain.com/blog. I would like blog.domain.com (different ip) to resolve to domain.com/blog but still using blog.domain.com is this possible with Apache and mod_rewrite?

    Read the article

  • Configure server on network to analyze traffic

    - by Strajan Sebastian
    I have the following network: http://i.stack.imgur.com/rapkH.jpg I want to send all the traffic from the devices that connect to the 192.168.0.1 router to the 192.168.10.1 router(and eventually to the Internet), by passing through the server and an additional router. Almost 2 days have passed and I can't figure what is wrong. While searching on the Internet for some similar configuration I found some articles that are somehow related to my needs, but the proposed solutions don't seem to work for me. This is a similar article: iptables forwarding between two interface I done the following steps for the configuration process: Set static IP address 192.168.1.90 for the eth0 on the server from the 192.168.1.1 router Set static IP address 192.168.0.90 for the eth1 on the server from the 192.168.0.1 router Forwarded all the traffic from 192.168.0.1 router to the server on eth1 interface witch seems to be working. The router firmware has some option to redirect all the traffic from all the ports to a specified address. Added the following rules on the server(Only the following, there aren't any additional rules): iptables -t nat -A POSTROUTING -o eth1 -j MASQUERADE iptables -A FORWARD -i eth1 -o eth0 -m state -–state RELATED,ESTABLISHED -j ACCEPT iptables -A FORWARD -i eth0 -o eth1 -j ACCEPT I also tried changing iptables -A FORWARD -i eth1 -o eth0 -m state -–state RELATED,ESTABLISHED -j ACCEPT into iptables -A FORWARD -i eth1 -o eth0 -j ACCEPT but still is not working. After adding the following to enable the packet forwarding for the server that is running CentOS: echo 1 /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_forward sysctl -w net.ipv4.ip_forward = 1 After a server restart and extra an extra check to see that all the configuration from above are still available I tried to see again if I can ping from a computer connected to 192.168.0.1/24 LAN the router from 192.168.1.1 but it didn't worked. The server has tshark(console wireshark) installed and I found that while sending a ping from a computer connected to 192.168.0.1 router to 192.168.1.1 the 192.168.0.90(eth1) receives the ping but it doesn't forward it to the eth0 interface as the rule tells: iptables -A FORWARD -i eth1 -o eth0 -j ACCEPT and don't now why this is happening. Questions: The iptables seem that don't work as I am expecting. Is there a need to add in the NAT table from iptables rules to redirect the traffic to the proper location, or is something else wrong with what I've done? I want to use tshark to view the traffic on the server because I think that is the best at doing this. Do you know something better that tshark to capture the traffic and maybe analyze it?

    Read the article

  • How do I override apt-get removing dependent packages?

    - by iainH
    I want to replace postfix with exim4 on my Ubuntu test server to reflect the setup I have on my production server, but apt-get and aptitude (quite understandably) insist on removing several packages that depend upon having a mail stack. However, in this case I am prepared to override apt-get's undoubted good sense as exim should fulfil all the requirements of the dependent packages, providing mail and sendmail functionality for my applications. I don't want to remove the dependent packages as there is months of effort invested and, although backed up, will be a pain to reconstruct properly.

    Read the article

  • UVC device Logitech WebCam 9000 pro

    - by Pavel
    There is such a good webcam in universe that acts as a "USB Video Class" (UVC - video USB standart interface) - the logitech webcam 9000. UVC offer unified interface allowing to control it or grab a picture from it by any UVC-driver. You need one universal driver and you support all the UVC devices (webcams, video-cameras, video-grabbing-cards etc). For example, in linux - if you have UVC driver - you don't need to think about specific webcam driver for UVC webcam. UVC has unified way that webcam transmit its awailable resolutions and other capabilities, so i see 1600x1200 resolution without any problem. I wonder if windows 7 has UVC. I mean "universal UVC" (-; It says "USB Video Class", but doesn't give resolutions larger than 640x480 and webcam's controls, like 'sharpness', 'focus' and other as linux's driver does...

    Read the article

  • Ubuntu 12.04 as router with 2 nic

    - by Blue Gene
    I have been trying this setup for weeks and still can not make this to work... ubuntu 12.04 64 bit with 2 nic nic1: eth0:192.168.2.33 -static ip with internet access (connected to modem) nic2: eth1:192.168.1.2 -static ip connected to LAN. enabled ip_forward on ubuntu box net_ip_forward = 1 on the LAN with ip address 192.168.1.5 specified gateway as 192.168.1.2 and able to ping gateway.But can not ping public address.What am i missing? on router box: route -n Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref Use Iface 0.0.0.0 192.168.2.1 0.0.0.0 UG 100 0 0 eth0 192.168.1.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth1 192.168.2.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth0 tried ip route add 192.168.2.0/24 via 192.168.1.2 dev eth0 route -n on LAN 192.168.1.5 Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref Use Iface 0.0.0.0 192.168.1.2 0.0.0.0 UG 100 0 0 eth0 192.168.1.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth0 192.168.2.0 192.168.1.2 255.255.255.0 UG 0 0 0 eth0 iptables default policy is to accept all. tracepath 8.8.8.8 from LAN 1: 192.168.1.5 0.060ms pmtu 1500 1: 192.168.1.2 3.367ms 1: 192.168.1.2 3.764ms 2: no reply Is there a way to make this work,other than NAT ing.

    Read the article

  • What are the methods of separating network spaces in a LAN?

    - by dash17291
    Please detail me the methods. My thoughts: put the servers in separate (sub)networks the servers are forced to go through the firewall but no NAT is required assign more IP addresses to the internal interface of the server choosing gateway addresses from the clients and servers IP address ranges split DNS Netfilter/{iptables, ipset} could be heavily involved, I'm talking about Linux servers. See for example: Destination NAT Onto the Same Network from internal clients Please do not explain what is NAT or DNS. This is a theoretical question, but my poor English knowledge prevent me to describe it in a fancy fashion.

    Read the article

  • Reducing volume of an audio device on windows 7

    - by bdonlan
    I have a USB headset with a very loud amplifier, but low granularity in its gain control. In order to get comfortable audio, I have to reduce the individual application levels in the mixer to '1', and the master mixer to around '10'. Of course, new applications start out at '10', and immediately blast out my ears. Is there a way to add a filter to cut down the volume some so I can get better control of it? That is, reduce the volume of '100' so I can work within a reasonable range.

    Read the article

  • Binding keys from specific device in X.org

    - by Michal Cihar
    I have a remote control for presentations, which generates Next/Prior key events in X.org (Page up/down). I'd like to use these for navigating in playlist (using MPD, but it probably does not matter). The problem is that I want to make this control work all the time (without application having focus) and I don't want to lose Page up/down functionality from normal keyboard. Is there some application which would allow me to bind actions to events from specific keyboard? Or is there simple way to implement such thing on my own?

    Read the article

  • Why does my ping command (Windows) results alternate between "timeout" and "network is not reachable"?

    - by Sopalajo de Arrierez
    My Windows is in Spanish, so I will have to paste console outputs in that language (I think that translating without knowing the exact terms used in english versions could give worse results than leaving it as it appears on screen). This is the issue: when pinging a non-existent IP from a WinXP-SP3 machine (clean Windows install, just formatted), I get sometimes a "Timeout" result, and sometimes a "network is not reachable" message. This is the result of: ping 192.168.210.1 Haciendo ping a 192.168.210.1 con 32 bytes de datos: Tiempo de espera agotado para esta solicitud. Respuesta desde 80.58.67.86: Red de destino inaccesible. Respuesta desde 80.58.67.86: Red de destino inaccesible. Tiempo de espera agotado para esta solicitud. Estadísticas de ping para 192.168.210.1: Paquetes: enviados = 4, recibidos = 2, perdidos = 2 (50% perdidos), Tiempos aproximados de ida y vuelta en milisegundos: Mínimo = 0ms, Máximo = 0ms, Media = 0ms 192.168.210.1 does not exist on the network. DHCP client is enabled, and the computer gets assigned those network config by the router. My IP: 192.168.11.2 Netmask: 255.255.255.0 Gateway: 192.168.11.1 DNS: 80.58.0.33/194.224.52.36 This is the output from "route print command": =========================================================================== Rutas activas: Destino de red Máscara de red Puerta de acceso Interfaz Métrica 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 192.168.11.1 192.168.11.2 20 127.0.0.0 255.0.0.0 127.0.0.1 127.0.0.1 1 192.168.11.0 255.255.255.0 192.168.11.2 192.168.11.2 20 192.168.11.2 255.255.255.255 127.0.0.1 127.0.0.1 20 192.168.11.255 255.255.255.255 192.168.11.2 192.168.11.2 20 224.0.0.0 240.0.0.0 192.168.11.2 192.168.11.2 20 255.255.255.255 255.255.255.255 192.168.11.2 192.168.11.2 1 255.255.255.255 255.255.255.255 192.168.11.2 3 1 Puerta de enlace predeterminada: 192.168.11.1 =========================================================================== Rutas persistentes: ninguno The output of: ping 1.1.1.1 Haciendo ping a 1.1.1.1 con 32 bytes de datos: Tiempo de espera agotado para esta solicitud. Tiempo de espera agotado para esta solicitud. Tiempo de espera agotado para esta solicitud. Tiempo de espera agotado para esta solicitud. Estadísticas de ping para 1.1.1.1: Paquetes: enviados = 4, recibidos = 0, perdidos = 4 1.1.1.1 does not exist on the network. and the output of: ping 10.1.1.1 Haciendo ping a 10.1.1.1 con 32 bytes de datos: Respuesta desde 80.58.67.86: Red de destino inaccesible. Tiempo de espera agotado para esta solicitud. Tiempo de espera agotado para esta solicitud. Respuesta desde 80.58.67.86: Red de destino inaccesible. Estadísticas de ping para 10.1.1.1: Paquetes: enviados = 4, recibidos = 2, perdidos = 2 (50% perdidos), 10.1.1.1 does not exist on the network. I can do some aproximate translation of what you demand if necessary. I have another computers in the same network (WinXP-SP3 and Win7-SP1), and they have, too, this problem. Gateway (Router): Buffalo WHR-HP-GN (official Buffalo firmware, not DD-WRT). I have some Linux (Debian/Kali) machine in my network, so I tested things on it: ping 192.168.210.1 PING 192.168.210.1 (192.168.210.1) 56(84) bytes of data. From 80.58.67.86 icmp_seq=1 Packet filtered From 80.58.67.86 icmp_seq=2 Packet filtered From 80.58.67.86 icmp_seq=3 Packet filtered From 80.58.67.86 icmp_seq=4 Packet filtered to the non-existing 1.1.1.1 : ping 1.1.1.1 PING 1.1.1.1 (1.1.1.1) 56(84) bytes of data. ^C --- 1.1.1.1 ping statistics --- 153 packets transmitted, 0 received, 100% packet loss, time 153215ms (no response after waiting a few minutes). and the non-existing 10.1.1.1: ping 10.1.1.1 PING 10.1.1.1 (10.1.1.1) 56(84) bytes of data. From 80.58.67.86 icmp_seq=20 Packet filtered From 80.58.67.86 icmp_seq=22 Packet filtered From 80.58.67.86 icmp_seq=23 Packet filtered From 80.58.67.86 icmp_seq=24 Packet filtered From 80.58.67.86 icmp_seq=25 Packet filtered What is going on here? I am posing this question mainly for learning purposes, but there is another reason: when all pings are returning "timeout", it creates an %ERRORLEVEL% value of 1, but if there is someone of "Network is not reachable" type, %ERRORLEVEL% goes to 0 (no error), and this could be inappropriate for a shell script (we can not use ping to detect, for example, if the network is down due to loss of contact with the gateway).

    Read the article

  • Two distinct mount points with one device

    - by user1761555
    After being disappointed with Ubuntu's release update feature, I finally decided to have separate mount points for / and /home. Towards this, I reformatted my HDD giving most of my drive to sda1(meant to be /home) and allocated about 40GB to rootfs (/). Unfortunately, I would also like to have a /projects which is to be located on sda1. Currently, sda1 is being mounted as /dev/sda1 on /home type ext4 (rw) I've tried looking online for a solution to this problem..however, I'm not sure as to what to look for! Is it possible to mount the 'home' directory of sda1 as /home and 'projects' directory of sda1 as /projects?

    Read the article

  • Problem with connecting two different networks

    - by tanascius
    I have two networks: 192.168.13.0/24 (blue) and 192.168.15.0/24 (green). Computer A is connected to the 13-net, only. Computer B has two interfaces, one in each network. There is third computer that acts like a router and connects the 13-net to the 15-net (only in this direction). Now, I'd like to ping 192.168.15.100 from computer A to B. Unfortunately there is never a reply. But when I use a hub instead of a switch it works. In my opinion the ping packet travels through the switch to the router (which is the default route/gateway for A). The router sends the packet back to the switch to B. Probably B receives it on its 15-net interface but answers with it's 15th interface? Is this possible? The problem is, that B may have only a gateway 192.168.13.50 - but I am not really sure of it (B is a embedded system with limited configuration possibilities). Can anyone explain what happens here? Thank you!

    Read the article

  • Internet connection resets (wifi), no device has wifi for moment

    - by Gizmo
    I have a few devices setup and I noticed this happens with both my old and new router (two different vendors&models) This happens occasionally, and I tried wireshark today and this cought my attention: No. Time Source Destination Protocol Length Info 69 6.464423000 LiteonTe_7f:64:30 Broadcast ARP 42 Who has 192.168.2.4? Tell 0.0.0.0 73 7.451146000 LiteonTe_59:65:94 Arcadyan_e1:8c:cf ARP 42 Who has 192.168.2.254? Tell 192.168.2.1 85 9.450443000 LiteonTe_59:65:94 Arcadyan_e1:8c:cf ARP 42 Who has 192.168.2.254? Tell 192.168.2.1 91 10.521000000 LiteonTe_59:65:94 Broadcast ARP 42 Who has 192.168.2.254? Tell 192.168.2.1 93 10.860953000 LiteonTe_7f:64:30 Broadcast ARP 42 Who has 192.168.2.254? Tell 192.168.2.4 97 11.099463000 LiteonTe_7f:64:30 Broadcast ARP 42 Who has 192.168.2.254? Tell 192.168.2.4 where 192.168.2.254 is the gateway/router, 192.168.2.1 my laptop ip and 192.168.2.4 my sisters laptop.. what's happening here?

    Read the article

  • What is "Disable class based route addition" good for?

    - by JRoppert
    In the advanced TCP/IP settings of a VPN connection, i found a checkbox labeled with "Disable class based route addition". The checkbox is only enabled as long as "Use default gateway on remote network" is switched off. What is "Disable class based route addition" good for? Detailed instructions to find the settings: Open Properties of VPN connection Go to Networking tab Open Properties of "Internet Protocol Version 4 (TCP/IPv4)" (and/or TCP/IPv6) Click "Advanced..." Button Change to "IP Settings" tab Here you can find the checkboxes mentioned above

    Read the article

  • one of my web hostings is down - only for me - why ?

    - by Thomas Traub
    My first post here, I am reading / learning a lot, thanks ;). I've got a mysterious issue (for me) and would really appreciate to get it solved. I've rent a reseller package with bibihost.com and it's now the second time that all my domaines the hoster's site are unavailable from my connection (my Mac and my iPhone), (in browser, per FTP, ping, ab, and traceroute) This has never before happened to me with other web addresses. traceroute get's always stuck at a specific server 40g.vss-1-6k.routers.chtix.eu (91.121.131.29) The sites are all up for everyone else, I've checked with downforeveryoneorjustme.com, a homegrown script loaded to another server and montastic.com My question(s) : Why am I blocked ? Is there anything I can do about it ? If I cannot solve this issue I have to change the hoster, but I really would like to know what's going on. my domaines on this server : tienstiens.fr tomlegrand.com

    Read the article

  • Cannot play sound: device being used by another application

    - by Ecom Evolution
    I tried to change my speaker setup and every time I click "test" I get this error message on Windows 7 SP1. I tried running "sndvol" to view the applications list but the list is empty. Since I tried to test the new speaker setup, I'm now left without sound for all applications and can't get sound even if I switch back. I have not updated my sound drivers so I don't know what could have changed. What could be causing this?

    Read the article

  • An device with an unknown MAC address is connected to my router

    - by Yar
    There is a computer that is not mine that is accessible on my network. I can even access its filesystem via AFP. What I want to know is how the computer could get on my network. My network is secured like this: Does that mean that they've used password cracking tools? The pass is not easy to guess but not hard to figure out via brute-force hacking, I guess. If I am being hacked, should I switch to WPA?

    Read the article

  • It is okay to set MASQUERADE at 2 network interfaces in a Linux server?

    - by Patrick L
    There is a Linux server with 3 network interfaces, eth0, eth1, eth2. IP forwarding has been turn on in this server. eth0 is connected to 10.0.1.0/24. Its IP is 10.0.1.1. eth1 is connected to 172.16.1.0/24. Its IP is 172.16.1.1. Server A can ping router C at 172.16.1.2. eth2 is connected to 192.168.1.0/24. Its IP is 192.168.1.1. Server A can ping server B at 192.168.1.2. Router C is able to route to 172.16.2.0/24 and 172.16.3.0/24. [10.0.1.0/24] | 172.16.2.0/24------| | [C]------172.16.1.0/24------[A]------192.168.1.0/24------[B] 172.16.3.0/24------| We have set MASQUERADE at eth0. When server B (192.168.1.2) connect to 10.0.1.0/24, IP MASQUERADE will happen at eth0. Can we set MASQUERADE at eth1? Is it okay to set MASQUERADE at more than 1 network interfaces in Linux?

    Read the article

  • OpenVPN and brouting issue

    - by JavierMartinz
    I have a Guest XEN Machine in which I want to connect by OpenVPN to other network. But I have this problem: when I want to connect to that OpenVPN I get a lot of TLS handshake errors because I think that the packages did not come rightly. When, at the end, the guest machine achieve to connect (after several tries) I can't ping the other machines of the OpenVPN network. Except sometimes, where if I ping 20 times MAYBE i get ping-answer in 1-2 times. I think that this problem is related about how the HOST Xen machine 'filters' the packages to the bridge. I mean, I think that all the outgoing guest machines packages are good but the incoming traffic to the guests is not recognized well. How could I detect/solve the problem? Im using Debian Linux in both machines

    Read the article

  • identify a router that cuts certain port

    - by Sergiks
    Is there a way to identify which particular router between me and some server blocks connections on certain port? I am in a hotel in Thailand, where they have recently changed some settings in their equipment, and now I cannot reach any of my servers in Europe and USA by SSH / port 22. More traditional ports like 80 or 21 are open. traceroute command shows each particular router in the middle. But is there a way to identify one that filters out port 22?

    Read the article

  • Setting up a server that routes local traffic through vpn, while still being able to access internet directly

    - by Kazuo
    The goal is to setup a local server that routes local traffic through an uncontrolled remote vpn service while still being able to access the internet directly (not tunneled via vpn) and provide services through that direct connection. It is supposed to look like this: http://i.stack.imgur.com/74dGC.png Note: There is another router with modem between the local server and the internet. What is the easiest (best?) way to get this network setup working? I'm planning to setup the connection between the local router and the local server with simple ip forwarding. The problem now is that all the server's traffic is routed through the vpn tunnel as soon as I connect the server's openvpn client to the remote service so there is no direct internet connection available. My first idea was to setup a virtual machine (lxc container or something) and run the vpn client and local networking stuff in the vm. So that the vm receives all the incoming traffic from the local router and tunnels it through the vpn. This, as far as I understand, should not affect the physical server's network connection and should allow it to provide services to the internet. Before I start trying to set this up (I don't have much experience in networking), is there any easier or better way to do this? I would be thankful for every suggestion. Edit: Let's say the interface connected to the internet is eth0 and the interface connected to the local router is eth1. Another idea would be to create a virtual interface eth0:0 and specifiy it as openvpn's local endpoint and then force any traffic coming from eth1 through eth0:0. I'm not sure how I would force the traffic through eth0:0, though (possibly by adding routes).

    Read the article

  • Route gaming data over wireless and everything else through LAN?

    - by Alex
    I have two internet connections available to me. One is via LAN.. not a great ping, but fast downloads. The other is via USB wireless adapter.. good ping, but slow downloads. I want to connect to both of them simultaneously. I want to be able to specify which data or application will use the wireless connection and route everything else through the lan connection. Is this possible, and how would I do it? Windows 7 x64 is my operating system. Here is the data from route print: http://pastebin.com/vsjQRpSM I'm still unsure of how to use this to make all of my data go through the nvidia lan interface, even after reading route /? Also, if I'm able to achieve that, will it override the ForceBindIP?

    Read the article

  • Can I set up two NICs bridged together and still SSH into the bridging machine?

    - by squinlan
    I have a ubuntu box setup with two NICs. I can bridge them together just fine, but I haven't been able to setup a way to SSH into the box once the connections are bridged together. Here's my /etc/network/interfaces: auto lo iface lo inet loopback auto eth1 iface eth1 inet manual auto eth0 iface eth0 inet manual auto br0 iface br0 inet static address 192.168.33.213 netmask 255.255.255.0 gateway 192.168.33.1 bridge_ports eth0 eth1 bridge_stp off bridge_fd 0 bridge_maxwait 0 This works just fine for bridging, but I'm not able to SSH into the box. I tried setting up another interface on one of the NICs: auto eth0:1 iface eth0:1 inet static address 192.168.33.215 netmask 255.255.255.0 gateway 192.168.33.1 But this really didn't help. Is it possible to ssh into a machine that has all of its NICs bridged? If it is, how?

    Read the article

  • How to route traffic via another machine before the default gateway

    - by Rich
    At the moment I have a router on 192.168.0.1, a Linux box on 192.168.0.2 and desktop clients from 192.168.0.3. Everything works with 192.168.0.1 as the default gateway. I'd like to send the traffic from the desktop clients via the Linux box before it goes out through the router so I can sniff the traffic (some of these are wireless connections). Can I set the default gateway to 192.168.0.2 on the desktop clients and then perhaps add some iptables rules to forward this traffic through 192.168.0.1? Quite happy to change the client desktops to another subnet if that makes it easier. Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • Can't connect to server from certain machines

    - by Joel Coel
    On a small college campus we have a VLAN setup for the computer labs. These machines get assigned IP addresses in the 192.168.7.xxx range. In the server room, all of the server are on the default VLAN and assigned an IP address in the 10.1.1.xxx range. For the most part this works, but the lab machines are unable to connect to one of the servers. They can't even ping it. They can talk to other servers on the same switch as this server just fine. At first I thought it might be a vlan issue, but I changed the server port vlan to match other known-working ports with no effect. Any ideas?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82  | Next Page >