Search Results

Search found 489 results on 20 pages for 'routed'.

Page 8/20 | < Previous Page | 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15  | Next Page >

• AnyConnect SSL VPN split tunneling for a single website?

  - by Daniel Lucas

  We have a Cisco ASA 5510. We use split tunneling for AnyConnect SSL VPN clients. All internal addresses are tunnelled. Everything else is routed through the client's own internet connection. We use a SaaS service that only responds to requests when they come from one of our own public IP addresses. Because of this, VPN users are unable to access it currently. Is there a way to specify that a specific website should be tunneled and all others should not? NOTE: Worst case we will use a web bookmark on the clientless portal to tranlate through our network, but I'd like to see if the above is possible first.

  Read the article

• Trying to test Domain Collapsing / Consoldiation validity for SEO purposes

  - by Roy Rico

  At work, we're trying to determine the effectiveness of domain collapsing for SEO purposes. Our current structure is to have multiple web apps served from different servers, such as PUBLIC URLS - directly accessed by users www1.somecompany.com/webapp1 www2.somecompany.com/webapp2 www3.somecompany.com/webapp3 I'm proposing to put an Apache proxy in front of these applications that will mask the different domains and route the requests to proper server PUBLIC URL--------routed/forwarded to-----PRIVATE URL www.somecompany.com/webapp1 <-----> www1.somecompany.com/webapp1 www.somecompany.com/webapp2 <-----> www2.somecompany.com/webapp2 www.somecompany.com/webapp3 <-----> www3.somecompany.com/webapp3 In terms of SEO/page rank value, does this help?

  Read the article

• Making internal website available publicly (Win 2008 Server)

  - by endigo

  I have an IIS 7 web site that is running on a Windows 2008 Server (64-bit) VMWare on a Windows 2008 Server (64-bit) Host on my local network. My router is a Firebox XEdge and it has port 80 directed to the IP of the server on VMWare. I can reach the web site from inside the network, but I cannot reach the site from outside the network. I have other web sites that are working through the Firebox, and I am confident that it is configured correctly. I suspect that Windows 2008 server is blocking routed or public addresses, but I have shut down the firewall on the Server that is running on VMWare and the AVG Anti-virus to no avail. How can I make my site available publicly.

  Read the article

• Isn't NAT a MUST when a LAN uses rfc 1918 private IPs?

  - by aks

  Isn't NAT a MUST when a LAN uses rfc 1918 private IPs? Can an organization assign its hosts with private IPs and still communicate with the external world without NAT? how can an internal host with a private IP (say 10.1.1.1) communicate with external world without NAT? I mean, how can the reply/response packet from the external world reach the original source as the packet with Dest IP = 10.1.1.1 will get lost as it can not be routed as many organizations can use the same IP. Why doesn't rfc 1918 (Address Allocation for Private Internets) make any mention of NAT?

  Read the article

• Always use one slow connection in preference of a "faster" one

  - by billc.cn

  In Windows, there's this automatic metric thing where the metric is selected according to the declared speed of the link. I now have a gigabit LAN routed to a 2MB DSL service and a HSDPA mobile broadband connection. The former is always chosen for Internet packets even though the latter is actually faster. I tried setting the mobile broadband's interface metric to 1 and raising its priority in the advanced settings of the adapter settings, but this does not seem to affect the metric of the default route. The default route to the Ethernet interface always have a lower metric than the mobile broadband interface. Am I missing something here?

  Read the article

• Linksys router with multiple external IP's

  - by Adrian Mester

  In an office I've got a network connection with 5 external IPs and a Linksys router (I'm not 100% percent sure of the model). I need 4 of those 5 IPs to be routed to a server, and the fifth to be shared between the other computers at the office. This can probably be done using a switch in front of the router. Connect the server and the router to the switch, and let the router handle the rest of the network. Is there a way to configure the router to route the 4 IPs to the server, and create an internal network the the other computers at the same time?

  Read the article

• Webserver on a rotating server with NAT IP or changing IPs

  - by hpsoftware

  i would have to elaborate my questions so please have patience Explaining the logic. if you are familiar with logmein then it installs a client software on your computer then it kinda keeps tracks where you computer is as long as it's connected to internet. So you can always access your computer no matter where it is whatever it's IP is you just go to logmein.com and then you can just access it. Now what i am asking 1. Let's assume i have a website hosted on my laptop let's call it webserver. so then i move around i have a new IP sometime even on a hotel network is it possible to do something like what logmein does so i can keep moving around my Webserver to new IP but it has some local client or something which keeps updating my IP or something i am sure i would need a gateway server somewhere which is connected to my domain name via DNS so somebody accessing my website www.mywebsite.com goes to my main server then gets routed to my laptop which could be anywhere but my gateway server is able to communicate to my webserver I will keep updating the case description based on comments to make more sense. please have patience with me. Regards

  Read the article

• faking NAT with a VMware distributed switch across multiple hosts

  - by romant

  I need to construct a NAT for certain machines within the network. Wish to do this with dvSwitch - as it seems the logical way of attacking the problem as in this scenario there's just under 30 hosts. In order for the NAT'ed VM's to have access to the 'real' network. I am providing a 'router' VM, which will have access to the WAN/outside network, and also act as the DHCP server for the NAT'ed machines. Problem Space When the machines connected to the NAT interface and the router are on the same host, then they get an IP from the router VM, and work perfectly (routed outside). Unfortunately machines on other Hosts that are connected to the dvSwitch do not get an IP and further tcpdump shows no network data getting through across the hosts within the dvSwitch. Has anyone achieved a NAT solution using a dvSwitch before that they could share?! Thank you. EDIT: Including the diagram.

  Read the article

• Connecting PPTP VPN with Ubuntu 9.10

  - by Christian P.

  I have an ubuntu machine that I wish to connect to a VPN and have traffic routed through that. So far I have installed the pptp-linux package and tried my hand at configuring it manually as well as using pptpsetup. I am using Ubuntu 9.10, but regardless of the method I get "Couldn't find MPPE kernel support". Searching a bit for the problem seems to reveal that Ubuntu DOES come with MPPE kernel support (and has done for quite some time). If anyone can figure this out, you'd be a real lifesaver!

  Read the article

• Dual-WAN router

  - by aix

  I am looking for a router that would fit the following requirements: Two WAN interfaces: the primary is PPPoE, the secondary will link to a GigE port on another router (a 100Mbps link will suffice); Two (ideally four) GigE LAN ports; No requirement for a firewall; No requirement for Wi-Fi; Inexpensive. The plan for the two WAN interfaces is as follows. All outbound traffic will go to the primary, with exceptions based on destination IP/subnet or possibly on src+dest IPs/subnets. Such exceptions should be routed to the secondary. It would be very nice if, should the primary go down, the secondary would automatically take over for all outbound traffic. I am reasonably sure that I can put something together based on dd-wrt. However, I'd like to hear from you what alternatives are out there (especially something easier to set up for my use case, even if it means paying more for the hardware.)

  Read the article

• Can we put random URL entries on DNS

  - by ring bearer

  Using microsoft DNS All/most of our local hosts ( with in ) are in following domain *.company.org So a host name will look like mymachine001.company.org Is it possible to set up wild card DNS entries of the form ? *.subd.company.com Note: The URL ends with .com, all other hosts so far ever set up in the DNS were of the format *.company.org what i am trying to achieve is the following. A user with in internal network types a url http://someprefix.subd.company.com in browser and enters. Since there is a wild card entry in DNS, the user gets routed to host mapped to *.subd.company.com in the DNS Note : at the same time, company.com has a public DNS entry and that is mapped to a physical IP in some other network (data center)

  Read the article

• How can I use a computer as a router and send all client traffic through anonymous proxies?

  - by Terrapin

  Is there a way that I can setup a spare box as a router on my network, and route client traffic through a proxy in order to hide my location? Specifically, I would like internet traffic to/from my Roku Box to be routed via proxy, but there is no proxy support built in to the Roku. So I would like wire my Roku directly my computer's second NIC, and force all traffic through a proxy. What kind of software and hardware setup will I need? Also, which anonymous proxy service are best for this purpose? I'm not interesting in full anonymity or encryption. I simply want to mask my location while providing the best possible throughput.

  Read the article

• Methodologies for performance-testing a WAN link

  - by Chopper3

  We have a pair of new diversely-routed 1Gbps Ethernet links between locations about 200 miles apart. The 'client' is a new reasonably-powerful machine (HP DL380 G6, dual E56xx Xeons, 48GB DDR3, R1 pair of 300GB 10krpm SAS disks, W2K8R2-x64) and the 'server' is a decent enough machine too (HP BL460c G6, dual E55xx Xeons, 72GB, R1 pair of 146GB 10krpm SAS disks, dual-port Emulex 4Gbps FC HBA linked to dual Cisco MDS9509s then onto dedicated HP EVA 8400 with 128 x 450GB 15krpm FC disks, RHEL 5.3-x64). Using SFTP from the client we're only seeing about 40Kbps of throughput using large (2GB) files. We've performed server to 'other local server' tests and see around 500Mbps through the local switches (Cat 6509s), we're going to do the same on the client side but that's a day or so away. What other testing methods would you use to prove to the link providers that the problem is theirs?

  Read the article

• Configure Postfix to use external MX servers for delivery of local mail if user is unknown

  - by mr.b

  I have a following setup: linux box with postfix configured to be responsible for example.com domain domain's MX servers are configured so that mail sent to example.com is sent to google mail servers several user accounts on linux machine exist (same machine also hosts example.com site) When someone from the outside attempts to send mail to address ending with @example.com, it gets routed to google mail (and there handled appropriately). When linux machine tries to send mail to outside world, mail is delivered correctly, as reverse dns and spf records are configured correctly, so linux machine is valid mail sender for example.com domain (along with google mail servers). However, here's the problem. When php application (hosted at linux box) tries to send mail to [email protected] (and someuser doesn't exist on linux box), it fails, since it doesn't even consult google mail servers, but postfix smtp locally concludes that "someuser" is unknown. So, the question is: how do I tell postfix to relay mails sent to @example.com domain to google mail servers (so, to servers specified in MX records), IF and only if a mailbox is not found locally.

  Read the article

• why do Vagrant docs suggest using public IP address 33.33.33.10 for local VMs?

  - by Gert

  I'm following a tutorial to set up vagrant (a tool to build and configure portable virtual machine images), and it seems that vagrant documentation suggests using IPv4 address 33.33.33.10 to configure a new box. That is a publicly routed IP adress, so I'm a bit confused why using this address is suggested. Since I don't own this network, I should not use an address from the 33.33.33.10/8 range. Am I correct in thinking that I should only use either a public address from a network I own, or an address from one of the private ranges as defined in RFC 1918? If so, why does Vagrant documentation suggest otherwise?

  Read the article

• Is there a free tool/package that can monitor web traffic and display URLS accessed? [closed]

  - by Anthony

  I couldn't find a similar question but then maybe I am searching for the wrong terms. A few years ago I used a router like device, I'm pretty sure it was a SonicWall, that did this on a clients site. Basically all traffic would be routed through this device and it allowed the manager/administrator to inspect web usage of the workers, determine how often certain resources were accessed and block them if necessary (much like content filter). It showed reports based on domain name reached etc. Facebbok.com, Bebo.com and so on. It also displayed the usual IP traffic information etc. it was a UTM also. I have tried Endian firewall, with it's NTOP install, but I don't think that will show URLs browsed. Maybe I just haven't found it in NTOP yet? I need this to troubleshoot connection and traffic issue at my home, with about twenty devices/users so didn't want to buy a dedicated solution and have spare hardware to use a community product.

  Read the article

• adding a route entry to linux routing table

  - by netg

  hi, I have two systems with ip address say 64.103.56.1(A)(Dev name -wlan0) and 64.103.225.18(B),now what i want is , everytime I ping B from my system A, it has to be routed via a router say with address 10.0.0.251(C)(I want this to be my next hop to reach B) , but this router is on a different subnetwork than the two systems.How do I do this? /* Things I tried: I used 'route add -host B gw C wlan0', and got an error saying " no such process exist or no such device found". Tried ping C and traceroute and found the gw addr at my side is some 63.103.236.3(D), so added another entry route add -host C gw D wlan0, I was able to do this without any error! */

  Read the article

• How to configure machines in a public subnet with two gateways?

  - by Shtééf

  We have a single public /24 subnet, with a BGP router as the primary gateway. Now I'm interested in configuring a second router for redundancy. How do I deal with multiple gateways on the servers in our public subnet? I found some other questions related to multiple gateways that seem to deal with NAT set-ups. In my situation, the servers all have public routed IP-addresses. So from what I can tell, it doesn't really matter which route incoming or outgoing packets take. But I figure the servers need some way of telling when one of the gateways is down, and route around it? Is this accomplished with protocols such as OSPF? And do I need to deploy this on all my servers?

  Read the article

• Yum through http proxy

  - by eodchop

  Hello, I have several Fedora 13 servers that have to connect through an http proxy for yum updates. All port 80 traffic has to be routed through this proxy. I have setup the proxy server in the network settings GUI. I can browse the internet just fine. I have also setup my proxy information in /etc/yum.conf as follows: proxy=http:proxy.largecorp.corp/accelerated_pac_base.pac proxy_user=user proxy_password=password I then added the export HTTP_PROXY="http:proxy.largecorp.corp/accelerated_pac_base.pac" to /etc/bashrc and sourced the file. When i run yum update: Loaded plugins:presto, refresh-packagekit Error: Cannot retrieve repository metadata (repomd.xml) fro repository: fedora. Please verify its path and try again. All of the repo urls are the defaults, as this is a fresh install.

  Read the article

• Load Balancing a UDP server

  - by Hellfrost

  Hello StackOverflow, I have a udp server, it is a central part in my business process. in order to handle the loads I'm expecting in the production environment I'll probably need 2 or 3 instances of the server. The server is almost entirely stateless, it mostly collects data, and the layer above it knows how to handle the minimal amount of stale data that can arise from the the multiple server instances. My question is, how can I implement load balancing between the servers? I would prefer to distribute the requests as evenly as possible between the servers. I would also would like to have some fidelity, I mean if client X was routed to server y, then I want all of X's subsequent requests to go to server Y, as long as it is sensible and not overloads Y. By the way it is a .NET system... what would you recommend?

  Read the article

• Distinguishing between UI command & domain commands

  - by SonOfPirate

  I am building a WPF client application using the MVVM pattern that provides an interface on top of an existing set of business logic residing in a library which is shared with other applications. The business library followed a domain-driven architecture using CQRS to separate the read and write models (no event sourcing). The combination of technologies and patterns has brought up an interesting conundrum: The MVVM pattern uses the command pattern for handling user-interaction with the view models. .NET provides an ICommand interface which is implemented by most MVVM frameworks, like MVVM Light's RelayCommand and Prism's DelegateCommand. For example, the view model would expose a number of command objects as properties that are bound to the UI and respond when the user performs actions like clicking buttons. Many implementations of the CQRS use the command pattern to isolate and encapsulate individual behaviors. In my business library, we have implemented the write model as command / command-handler pairs. As such, when we want to do some work, such as create a new order, we 'issue' a command (CreateOrderCommand) which is routed to the command-handler responsible for executing the command. This is great, clearly explained in many sources and I am good with it. However, take this scenario: I have a ToolbarViewModel which exposes a CreateNewOrderCommand property. This ICommand object is bound to a button in the UI. When clicked, the UI command creates and issues a new CreateOrderCommand object to the domain which is handled by the CreateOrderCommandHandler. This is difficult to explain to other developers and I am finding myself getting tongue-tied because everything is a command. I'm sure I'm not the first developer to have patterns overlap like this where the naming/terminology also overlap. How have you approached distinguishing your commands used in the UI from those used in the domain? (Edit: I should mention that the business library is UI-agnostic, i.e. no UI technology-specific code exists, or will exists, in this library.)

  Read the article

• Proxying fake domain to a localhost port

  - by Trevor Burnham

  I'd like to do much the same thing described at Redirect Domain Name to Localhost for web app development purposes, but with the twist that I'd like requests to fakedomain.com:80 to be routed to localhost:8080, say, so that I don't have to actually use my development machine's port 80. I'd welcome answers that take the form of: Small changes to configuration files like /etc/hosts, and/or An easy-to-configure proxy server I could run Note: Pow takes the approach of setting a firewall rule to forward all incoming traffic on port 80 to port 20559. That may be an acceptable solution, but ideally, I'd like to forward only a specific domain + port combination.

  Read the article

• Virtualhost Wildcard Subdomains

  - by Khuram

  We have one static IP on which we have routed our company website. We have setup a local machine on windows with WAMP to run our testing server. We want virtual hosts to test our different apps. However, when creating subdomains, we have a new project which uses wildcard subdomains. How can we create the wildcard subdomains in VirtualHosts. We use, NameVirtualHost * <VirtualHost *> ServerAdmin admin@test DocumentRoot "E:/Wamp/www/corporate" ServerName companysite.com </VirtualHost> <VirtualHost *> ServerAdmin admin@test DocumentRoot "E:/Wamp/www/project" ServerName project.companysite.com </VirtualHost> <VirtualHost *> ServerAdmin admin@test DocumentRoot "E:/Wamp/www/project" ServerName *.project.companysite.com </VirtualHost> However, the last * wildcard does not work. Any help?

  Read the article

• Odd internet packet routing

  - by NachoChip

  I want to know is there anyway to explicitly control the packet routing. I try to connect my computer in HK from San Francisco. It is extremely slow and I use tracert to see what is going on. It seems the packet get routed from HK to Europe and then to New York and then to San Francisco. In US, I am using Astound Cable. Is there any suggestion I can force the packet to not go around the world before it reach my computer? Or it is all ISP dependent?

  Read the article

• Attempting to caue packet loss with netem doesn't work - possibly because of NAT (but delay does work)

  - by tomdee

  I have traffic from a WIFI access point routed via an Ubuntu box. I have two network interfaces which are NATed *filter :INPUT ACCEPT [11:690] :FORWARD ACCEPT [0:0] :OUTPUT ACCEPT [37:6224] -A FORWARD -s 192.168.2.0/24 -i eth1 -o eth0 -m conntrack --ctstate NEW -j ACCEPT -A FORWARD -m conntrack --ctstate RELATED,ESTABLISHED -j ACCEPT COMMIT # Completed on Thu Mar 15 13:37:21 2012 # Generated by iptables-save v1.4.10 on Thu Mar 15 13:37:21 2012 *nat :PREROUTING ACCEPT [0:0] :INPUT ACCEPT [0:0] :OUTPUT ACCEPT [0:0] :POSTROUTING ACCEPT [0:0] -A POSTROUTING -j MASQUERADE COMMIT If I run a ping app on an Android device connected to the WIFI network I can happily ping google. If I use netem to introduce some delay tc qdisc change dev eth0 root netem delay 100ms I can clearly see pings taking longer. If I use netem to introduce some packet loss tc qdisc change dev ifb0 root netem loss 50% then I see no change. Packet loss does work fine for locally generated traffic, just not for traffic coming in over the network that's being NATed. Any ideas how to sort this out?

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15  | Next Page >