Search Results

Search found 18781 results on 752 pages for 'ip port'.

Page 94/752 | < Previous Page | 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101  | Next Page >

• postfix cannot send email

  - by AKLP

  I'd like to mention that im really new to this so please bear with me. I'm trying to setup a forum software to send emails via postfix but I think my server has the port 25 blocked. I tried running these: works: ping alt2.gmail-smtp-in.l.google.com don't work: telnet alt2.gmail-smtp-in.l.google.com 25 telnet 66.249.93.114 25 tried flushing iptables and then using these rules but didn't work either: sudo iptables --flush sudo iptables -P INPUT ACCEPT sudo iptables -P OUTPUT ACCEPT sudo iptables -P FORWARD ACCEPT sudo iptables -F sudo iptables -X doing a telnet on 25 port to localhost url works but nothing when telnet'ing in none local urls. mail.log: Oct 17 01:20:24 webhost postfix/smtp[3642]: connect to alt2.gmail-smtp-in.l.google.com[2607:f8b0:400e:c03::1a]:25: Connection timed out Oct 17 01:20:24 webhost postfix/smtp[3643]: connect to alt2.gmail-smtp-in.l.google.com[2607:f8b0:400e:c03::1a]:25: Connection timed out Oct 17 01:20:24 webhost postfix/smtp[3642]: 4744380032: to=<[email protected]>, relay=none, delay=2892, delays=2741/0.03/150/0, dsn=4.4.1, status=deferred (connect to alt2.gmail-smtp-in.l.google.com[2607:f$

  Read the article

• What router hardware or software should be used when multiple public IPs are routed into the same LAN?

  - by lcbrevard

  I am looking for recommendations to replace a set of consumer grade (Linksys, Netgear, Belkin) routers with something that can handle more traffic while routing more than one static public IP into the same LAN address space. We have a block of static public IPs, 5 usable, with Comcast Business. Currently four of them are in use for: General office access Web server Mail and DNS servers Download and backup web server for separate business All systems (a mixture of physical and virtual) are in the same LAN address space (10.x.y.0/24) to enable easy access between them inside the office. There are 30 or more systems in use depending on which virtual machines are currently active. We have a mixture of Windows, Linux, FreeBSD, and Solaris. Currently a separate consumer grade router is used for each of the four static addresses, with its WAN address set to the specific static address and a different gateway address for each: uses 10.x.y.1 - various ports are forwarded to various LAN IPs on systems with gateway 10.x.y.1 uses 10.x.y.254 - port 80 is forwarded to a server with gateway 10.x.y.254 uses 10.x.y.253 - ports for mail and dns are forwarded to a server with gateway 10.x.y.253 uses 10.x.y.252 - ports as needed are forwarded to server with gateway 10.x.y.252 Only router 1. is allowed to serve DHCP and address reservation based on the MAC is used for most of the internal "server" IP addresses so they are at fixed values. [Some are set static due to limitations in the address reservation capabilities of router 1.] And, yes, this really does work! But... I am looking for: better DHCP with more capable address reservation higher capacity so I don't have to periodically power cycle the routers One obvious improvement would be to have a real DHCP server and not use a consumer grade router for that purpose. I am torn between buying a "professional" router such as Cisco or Juniper or Sonic Wall verus learning to configure some spare hardware to perform this function. The price goes up extremely rapidly with capabilities for commercial routers! Worse, some routers require licensing based on the number of clients - a disaster in our environment with so many virtual machines. Sorry for such a long posting but I am getting tired of having to power cycle routers and deal with shifting IP addresses afterwards!

  Read the article

• multiple servers porting to each other

  - by JackLeo

  hello, here is the details: theres is who "servers": VPS with ubuntu 10.10x32 and home pc, win7 on win7 apatche2.2 is running with webpage on VPS game server is running DNS forwards www subdomain to PC, and everything else to VPS (all via ip) I can not configure DNS directly, my providers do Wanted result: DNS forwards everything to VPS, VPS redirects *:80 to PC when viewing page stored in PC domain is shown normaly Questions: How to achieve that using as minimal resources as possible? Is it possible just tel my DNS provider to fix it that :80 port is in different ip? P.S. its for my friend, i do have some apatche and VDS configuration exp. More of a programmer i am. so trow everything you can ;)

  Read the article

• Is it possible to host a web server from behind a NAT

  - by iamrohitbanga

  My PC is behind a NAT router that has a public IP address. If I want to host a website then I believe I need a domain name which I can purchase from some site which would pledge to resolve all DNS requests for that domain name and send the IP address of my NAT router (assuming I do not want to host my domain name on their servers). Now I want to host a web server on my computer. What changes should be done to the NAT router's configuration to forward all HTTP requests for example.com to my PC in the internal network. Is the above strategy correct? Is it commonly used?

  Read the article

• Exchange server listening on port 25 but clients dont recieve emails

  - by Josh R

  My exchange server is listening on port 25, that is I can telnet into it and send an email but Outlook 2010/2007, OWA, and ActiveSync are not pulling down emails. Outlook 2010 specifically says Connected To Exchange Server and Updating Inbox but it never updates the inbox. Also, OWA shows some of the newer mail messages, but when I double click on one to open it up in OWA, it times out. Any idea what could be causing this? Also Exchange Transport and Information Store are started. Thanks!

  Read the article

• Forward public port to localhost

  - by Dan

  I have a process running on my Ubuntu 12.04 server that insists on binding to a public IP address. I only want it accessible from localhost, and NOT the outside world. I've been trying to work out a way to forward 1.2.3.4:8888 to 127.0.0.1:8888. I saw something about iptables not wanting to forward connections to loopback, and I haven't been able to make it work with xinetd either. It's also important that the connection not only be available on localhost, but be inaccessible on the interface it's trying to run on. Is this even possible?

  Read the article

• blocking port 80 via iptables

  - by JoyIan Yee-Hernandez

  I'm having problems with iptables. I am trying to block port 80 from the outside, basically plan is we just need to Tunnel via SSH then we can get on the GUI etc. on a server I have this in my rule: Chain OUTPUT (policy ACCEPT 28145 packets, 14M bytes) pkts bytes target prot opt in out source destination 0 0 DROP tcp -- * eth1 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 tcp dpt:80 state NEW,ESTABLISHED And Chain INPUT (policy DROP 41 packets, 6041 bytes) 0 0 DROP tcp -- eth1 * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 tcp dpt:80 state NEW,ESTABLISHED Any guys wanna share some insights?

  Read the article

• Someone used my postfix smtp (port 25) to send spam mails to me

  - by Andreas

  This week, someone started to send spam-mails through my postfix-smtp access (I verified by logging in through telnet from an arbitrary pc and sending mails with any ids myself) on my server, with recipient and target being [email protected]. Since I have a catchall and mail-fowarding to my google account, I received all those (many) mails. After a lot of configuration (I lost track of what change did what, going through dozends of topics here and over the net) that hole seems fixed. Still, what hapened? Does port 25 need to be open and accepting for my catchall to work? What configuration did I do wrong? I remember the first thing I changed (that had an effect) was the inet_interface setting in main.cf, only later to find out that if this does not say "all", my mail to mydomain.com does not get forwarded any more.

  Read the article

• Ubuntu + SSL ports + AVAST

  - by jurajvt

  I have an interesting problem with communication via standard SSL ports. Fresh installed Ubuntu 14.04 server + Postfix + Dovecot, SASL authentication provided by Dovecot, self-signed certificate generated trough the Dovecot script mkcert.sh. Redirected ports on ZyWALL USG 200. I can send and receive e-mails from outside with standard ports 25 and 110, but not over 587. I am connecting to my server from machine with Windows 8.1 + VMWare Player + Ubuntu 14.04 Desktop + ssh. On Windows host I have installed Avast! antivirus. When I am trying to telnet from virtual machine to server over 587, it refused connection. But when I turn on Avast! it let me in to message Connected to... Same with nmap. When Avast! is turned on it is show me all SSL ports. When I turned it off, only standard ports appeared. OpenSSL shows me CONNECTED(00000003). But outside virtual machine directly in Windows 8.1 using nmap with zenmap there are not opened SSL ports in both Avast! states. From other external linux machines are problems with touching SSL ports same - refused. I have turned on submission in master.cf and 587 port is correctly listening on 0.0.0.0 in process master.pid which belongs to Postfix. I can telnet, or nmap over port 587 to my domain directly from server. Other ports like 995, 993 are OK on localhost, too. It is true, that I can't send emails via 587 anyway (Avast! turned on/off), but I can see ports opened. It is possible, that I have simply bad certificate and Avast! has right one, so with turned it on I can see opened ports? EDIT: To be more clear, I can't see or using port 587 everywhere from outside (tried Thunderbird, telnet, openssl, nmap, putty, swaks; both from Linux or Windows machines) and that is my problem. It was only by chance that I saw opened ports when Avast! is turned on.

  Read the article

• iptables redirect single website traffic to port 8080

  - by Luke John Southard

  My goal is to be able to make a connection to one, and only one, website through a proxy. Everything else should be dropped. I have been able to do this successfully without a proxy with this code: ./iptables -I INPUT 1 -i lo -j ACCEPT ./iptabels -A OUTPUT -p udp --dport 53 -j ACCEPT ./iptables -A OUTPUT -p tcp -d www.website.com --dport 80 -j ACCEPT ./iptables -A INPUT -m conntrack --cstate ESTABLISHED,RELATED -j ACCEPT ./iptables -P INPUT DROP ./iptables -P OUTPUT DROP How could I do the same thing except redirect the traffic to port 8080 somewhere? I've been trying to redirect in the PREROUTING chain in the nat table. I'm unsure if this is the proper place to do that tho. Thanks for your help!

  Read the article

• 2 virtual domains: one on port 80 one on port 8080, how?

  - by Simone

  I've been struggling with this, basically what I want is this: A virtual domain to run on the 80 another virtual domain to run FROM 80 TO 8080 what I've done so far is trying different combinations with apache, but all i got is having all the virtual domains pointing to port 80 this is my conf: <VirtualHost domain1.com:80> DocumentRoot /var/www/domain1 <Directory "/var/www/domain1"> allow from all Options +Indexes </Directory> ServerName domain1.com </VirtualHost> <VirtualHost server.domain2.com:80> DocumentRoot /var/www <Directory "/var/www"> allow from all Options +Indexes </Directory> ServerName server.domain2.com ServerAlias www.server.domain2.com ProxyPass / http://server.domain2.com:8080/ </VirtualHost> suggestions? :(

  Read the article

• What is the network address (x.x.x.0) used for?

  - by Shtééf

  It appears to be common practice to not use the first address in a subnet, that is the IP 192.168.0.0/24, or a more exotic example would be 172.20.20.64/29. The ipcalc tool I frequently use follows the same practice: $ ipcalc -n -b 172.20.20.64/29 Address: 172.20.20.64 Netmask: 255.255.255.248 = 29 Wildcard: 0.0.0.7 => Network: 172.20.20.64/29 HostMin: 172.20.20.65 HostMax: 172.20.20.70 Broadcast: 172.20.20.71 Hosts/Net: 6 Class B, Private Internet But why is that HostMin is not simply 64 in this case? The 64 address is a valid address, right? And whatever the answer, does the same apply to IPv6? Perhaps slightly related: it also appears possible to use a TCP port 0 and an UDP port 0. Are these valid or used anywhere?

  Read the article

• How do I set up my home server to go directly to a port other than 80

  - by Kevin

  I'm using dyndns, a lynksis wt54g router, and tomcat 7 with spring to set up a web server. This is my first time to attempt this. I'm sure this is a very common question, but I don't know enough to find the answer after quite a bit searching. Dyndns is successfully forwarding to my ip. The main problem is, the router admin login is coming up when my url is used. I'm hosting my site on port 8080. I have port forwarding set up for port 8080 but my request times out when I attempt to use my url like this www.myurl1234.com:8080. I don't want users to have to type the port anyway. I also tried changing the management port to 82 and hosting on port 80, but I still get the router admin login when I use my url. Where am I going wrong? Can I set it up so that www.myurl1234.com goes straight to port 8080?

  Read the article

• Cannot send email from EC2 instance on port 587

  - by Tahsin Mostafiz

  I have written a mail service for our flask application that uses Celery and RabbitMQ to send emails (using gmail). I have got the celery consumer and producer communicating okay but I cannot get to send send emails. I am getting a socket.error: [Errno 101] Network is unreachable. I think this means that AWS is blocking port 587 - even though in my security group I opened both ports 587 and 25 (inbound and outbound). Any reason why this is happening? Any help will be highly appreciated.

  Read the article

• OS X Server: SMTP Server problem

  - by plucked

  Hi, I have problem to setup my mail server. My system is a OS X 10.6.2. Server. I configured the mail server so far, but I cannot connect to the smtp server correctly. Correctly means that I can connect via telnet (and do the "HELO") from another server within the same serverrack, but not from outside. But when I try to telnet my http server, it works fine from outside. I already checked my firewall rules with "sudo ipfw list" and the port 25 is not blocked in any case. What could be the problem with connecting to port 25 via telnet from outside of the serverrack? Cheers

  Read the article

• Exchange 2007 OWA not listening on SSL port

  - by krs1

  I have an Exchange 2007 server that went down after a power failure. It has OWA access via SSL both externally and internally. OWA is working fine from the internal notwork, however I am getting a timeout when I attempt to connect externally. I pulled up wireshark and noticed that the server actually redirects to SSL. For some reason the server is not listening on the SSL port, and this seems to be causing the timeout. I normally do only development work, but I'm stuck with this since my sysadmin took off for the week and isn't answering my phone calls. As far as I know it shouldn't be a firewall issue. Aside from me not wanting to work on the damn thing, what should I look for?

  Read the article

• IIS7 - multiple ports for websites, some working, some not.

  - by glasnt

  I have multiple IIS7 websites hanging off 1 IP, using different ports. All three sites use Z.A.B.C:XX, where XX is {100, 200, 300} * There's no web.config settings not making :300 not work, the bindings are set ok. I can even change the ports so 200 becomes 300, but the original 300 still doesn't work. They are all shown by IP, so it's not DNS. There's no SSL setting differences between them. I can't see anything in metabase.xml that would make one behave differently to another. Are there any other settings in IIS7 that I might not be finding, that would fix the issue? * not the real values.

  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

• USB port not working

  - by sharza

  Everytime I put pendrive in the USB port(all ports in my computer) it doesnt work especially when plug the USB Flash Drive, but after several hours it work again. But When I try to open this pen drive data on other computers, I'm able to open & work ... So definitely there is no problem with my pen drive. and I've enabled USB keyboard & mouse in Bios. I using windows xp and using USB 2.0 Please help ...

  Read the article

• Non-blocking service to receive messages on port via UDP

  - by stUrb

  I want to build a service on my Linux VPS which listens to a certain UDP port and does something with the (text)message which is captured. This processing consists of appending the message to a locally stored txt-file and send it as http, with a post variable to another server. I've looked into Nginx but as far is can see this server can only be bound to receive http packets. Although it is asynchronous. What is the best way to achieve this listening-service on linux? And which has the capabilities to do the above mentioned processing?

  Read the article

• Request to server x Reply from server y

  - by klaasio

  I need some advice from you guys: I'm dealing with a custom loadbalancer/software for which we will use 2 main servers and about 8 slave servers. In short: User sends request to main server, main server will receive and handle the requests, sends a request to a slave server and slave server should send data DIRECTLY to the "user". User - Main server Main server - Slave server Slave server - User The reason for which data should be send directly to the user and not through the main server is because of bandwidth and low budget. Now I have the following idea's: -IPinIP, but that is not possible in Layer7 (so far i know there some expensive routers for that) -IP Spoof, using C/C++ we will make it look like the reply came from main server. But I was thinking, perhaps the reply "slave server - User" could just come from a different IP without causing issues in the firewall from the user or his anti-virus. I don't know so well about "home" firewalls/routers and/or anti-virus software. I guess the user machine wouldn't handle it well?

  Read the article

• Centos 6.2, Apache 2 and Listen port for socket connection

  - by salvosav

  I'm trying to make a socket connection between a client and my server through a php script. To do this, I opened a port on iptables, and configure a virtual host with apache to redirect all traffic from my door to the folder that contains the file index.php, which is my script. Doing some tests the door is open, but using command netstat -ltn , I see ':::35100'. Looking on the net I understand if in this way is only listen inward and not outward. But I don't understand how can I turn this ':::35100 '-' in this '0.0.0.0:35100 '. Or, better yet, how to add this rule. Any ideas? thanks

  Read the article

• Isolated Network Set-Up

  - by Isaac Kleinman

  I am looking to set up a small network for a client which would be isolated from his primary network. (I'm hoping to set-up the additional network as VMs on the primary network.) I've instructed the client to request a bunch of static ip addresses from his ISP, but I'm not sure how to proceed with setting this up. What hardware will I need and how do I go about the configuration? Heavy security is not my concern. All that's really required is that web requests from the two networks be presented to the outside world with different ip addresses.

  Read the article

• Server over VPN?

  - by zib_redlektab

  I don't know that much about VPN, so it could be that this is utterly impossible. Here's hoping, though. I would like to forward a port from my router to a machine connected to the network via VPN. That way, I could run a simple server on my laptop, and it would continue to work at the same address no matter where I am. The trick is that I don't want people connecting to the server to have to join the VPN. It should be completely transparent to the end-user. If it's not possible with VPN, is there some other technology that would make this possible? Basically just forwarding a port to a remote machine, one without a static IP.

  Read the article

• The remote server returned an error: 227 Entering Passive Mode

  - by hmloo

  Today while uploading file to FTP sever, the codes throw an error - "The remote server returned an error: 227 Entering Passive Mode", after research, I got some knowledge in FTP working principle. FTP may run in active or passive mode, which determines how the data connection is established. Active mode: command connection: client >1024  -> server 21 data connection:    client >1024  <-  server 20 passive mode: command connection: client > 1024 -> server 21 data connection:    client > 1024 <- server > 1024 In active mode, the client connects from a random unprivileged port (N > 1023) to the FTP server's command port(default port 21). If the client needs to transfer data, the client will use PORT command to tell the server:"hi, I opened port XXXX, please connect to me." and then server will use port 20 to initiate the data connection to that client port number. In passive mode, the client connects from a random unprivileged port (N > 1023) to the FTP server's command port(default port 21). If the client needs to transfer data, the sever will tell the client:"hi, I opened port XXXX , please connect to me." and then client will initiate the data connection to that sever port number. In a nutshell, active mode is used to have the server connect to the client, and passive mode is used to have the client connect to the server. So if your FTP server is configured to work in active mode only or the firewalls between your client and the server are blocking the data port range, then you will get error message, to fix this issue, just set System.Net.FtpWebRequest property UsePassive = false. Hope this helps! Thanks for reading!

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101  | Next Page >