Search Results

Search found 3413 results on 137 pages for 'addresses'.

Page 107/137 | < Previous Page | 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114  | Next Page >

  • What's going on with traceroute?

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

    Read the article

  • WOL doesn't work if set to anything other than `a` but this setting makes it boot all the time

    - by Elton Carvalho
    I manage a small "cluster" of 4 Xeon machines with Intel boards in my lab. They are all plugged to a 5-port 3-Com switch with static IP addresses like 10.0.0.x. They are all running OpenSuse 11.4 and their /home/ is served by one of the machines (node00) via NFS. They are plugged to an UPS that can keep them on for ca. 15 minutes, but there are lots of electric shortages due to "unscheduled maintenace" that are longer than this. So they end up being powered down without notice. If I set the BIOS to turn them on after power shortages, the issue is that they all boot at the same time and, if node00 decides to run fsck in the /home/ partition, it does not finish booting before the others try to NFS mount their /home/. I am trying to make wake on lan work, so I can choose to boot the NFS clients only after the server has successfully booted. The problem is that when I run ethtool I get an output like this: Supports Wake-on: pumbag Wake-on: g Theoretically, it is set to wake on MagicPacket(tm), according to the manual. But sending the WOL packet using wol -i 10.0.0.255 $MACADDR does not wake up the box after I shut it down with halt. The ethernet link led blinks after I send the packet, so it appears to be getting to the machine. However, if I set it up with ethtool -s eth1 wol bag, the machine always wakes up right after halting, even if I don't send the Magic packet. This means that the device can wake up with LAN activity, but seems to be ignoring the magic packet. Setting wol ag does not wake the box with the MagicPacket. Does setting wol a mean that it should boot with any broadcast message? How can I diagnose the issue of the machine not waking up with the MagicPacket even though I am sending it and it's set up to wake up with it? Thanks in advance!

    Read the article

  • Connecting to unsecured wireless network

    - by Sanchez
    I would like to know what information is public and can be intercepted in a non-open, but unsecured wireless network. Moreover, is there anything I can do to make it more "secure", other than using https connection whenever possible. In more details, I recently discovered (with surprise) that the wireless network in my school is actually unsecured. Although not everyone can connect to it (you need a student ID), I am told that certain softwares like Wireshark would be able to intercept the data. Since I have been using the network for all private purposes (email, facebook etc), I do feel quite insecure now and would like to understand the situation a bit better. I installed Wireshark and tried to play with it but all I can see are something alien to me. In any case, all I see seems to come directly/indirectly from my IP address, and I have long thought that usually different computers in the same wireless network would be assigned different addresses. Am I wrong? If not, then I feel very confused about what information is actually being captured (potentially by other users in the network, since I don't think I could capture activities of others in the same network anyway), and whether it's safe to use the network at all. (Gambling on others in the same network showing good behaviour is apparently not an option.) Thank you.

    Read the article

  • Cisco RV042 VPN with Dynamic IPs - Remote Gateway Not Resolving

    - by Rister
    I have an existing network setup that I inherited from my predecessor. Currently there are two sites, each with a Linksys RV042 VPN router running the 1.3.12.19-tm firmware. They are currently set up with a Gateway to Gateway VPN. One site has a static IP, the other has a Dynamic IP with a hostname set up on no-ip.com. My company is looking to set up another site so I purchased another RV042 only this one was Cisco branded and it is running the latest firmware. I had assumed that I would be able to configure a vpn from our main office (the dynamic ip) to the new site with this router quite easily. However when I set up a new VPN tunnel on either device, it stays on Waiting for Connection and the Remote Gateway shows an ip address of 0.0.0.0 rather than the remote ip address. The other VPN tunnel is still working and I don't see any obvious misconfiguration on the new router. It seems that the router is not resolving the Dynamic DNS address and therefore not giving me the option to connect the VPN. Does a Gateway to Gateway VPN work with Dynamic IP addresses on each end? Are the firmware versions not compatible? Is there something I've missed?

    Read the article

  • Undeliverable e-mail message from [email protected]

    - by QGfisher
    I am responsible for IT for a small charity and we have a problem with a few individuals who e-mail us on our hosted e-mail addresses. The individual is on btconnect and our server is also on BT broadband and using MSExchange. I understand that the message from [email protected] are generated by Exchange but can't tell whether this is a problem with our server (seems unlikely as most people send and receive e-mails perfectly well) or with the sender's server. I have copied a sample test message below and would be very grateful if somebody can explain what is causing this problem. I have * the personal details - hope that's acceptable but I don't want to compromise the individual's identity/security. ----- Original Message ----- From: "System Administrator" To: "****" <****.***@btconnect.com Sent: Tuesday, April 06, 2010 3:26 PM Subject: Undeliverable: Test Message Your message To: ***** Subject: Test Message Sent: Tue, 6 Apr 2010 15:25:59 +0100 did not reach the following recipient(s): ***@quiltersguild.org.uk on Tue, 6 Apr 2010 15:26:07 +0100 The e-mail account does not exist at the organization this message was sent to. Check the e-mail address, or contact the recipient directly to find out the correct address.

    Read the article

  • How to limit reverse SSH tunelling ports?

    - by funktku
    We have a public server which accepts SSH connections from multiple clients behind firewalls. Each of these clients create a Reverse SSH tunnel by using the ssh -R command from their web servers at port 80 to our public server. The destination port(at the client side) of the Reverse SSH Tunnel is 80 and the source port(at public server side) depends on the user. We are planning on maintaining a map of port addresses for each user. For example, client A would tunnel their web server at port 80 to our port 8000; client B from 80 to 8001; client C from 80 to 8002. Client A: ssh -R 8000:internal.webserver:80 clienta@publicserver Client B: ssh -R 8001:internal.webserver:80 clientb@publicserver Client C: ssh -R 8002:internal.webserver:80 clientc@publicserver Basically, what we are trying to do is bind each user with a port and not allow them to tunnel to any other ports. If we were using the forward tunneling feature of SSH with ssh -L, we could permit which port to be tunneled by using the permitopen=host:port configuration. However, there is no equivalent for reverse SSH tunnel. Is there a way of restricting reverse tunneling ports per user?

    Read the article

  • Network structure --> Server 2k8r2 <--> Livebox <--> Router <--> Other PCs

    - by Yusuf
    I have a Livebox connection to the Internet and I have set up my network as follows: - Livebox <--> Win2k8R2 Server - Livebox <--> Netgear N150 Router - Router <--> Other PCs Therefore, in my LAN, - the Livebox has IP address 192.168.1.1, - the Router 192.168.1.12 (when accessed from the Livebox or the server), - the Router 10.0.0.1 (when accessed from the PCs connected to the Router), - the server 192.168.1.2, - the PCs 10.0.0.x I was using a previous configuration, which was as follows: - Livebox <--> Netgear N150 Router - Router <--> Win2k8R2 Server - Router <--> Other PCs Everything was simple, and I just had to forward all ports for incoming connection on the Livebox to the Router, and then forward the specific ports to the Server as needed (it must be however noted that any server I use is found on the Win2k8R2 server itself). In this previous configuration, the IP addresses were as follows: - Livebox 192.168.1.1 - Router 192.168.1.12 (when seen from Livebox) - Router 10.0.0.1 (when seen from server & PCs connected to it) - Server 10.0.0.2 - PCs 10.0.0.x So now of course, my port-forwarding does not work anymore since the server is not connected (directly) to the Router. What I would like to know is how do I configure the Livebox and Router to still have the features like before? From what I understand of networks (which is very limited, btw), I see these options: Make the router assign IPs like 192.168.1.x (but then I want the forwarding to be done from the router itself, is it possible?) The forwarding on the router to the server uses IP address 10.0.0.2. I could change it to 192.168.1.2 (Is that even possible, does it work?) Forward all ports from the Livebox itself to the server, and then manage them there (Is software-based port-forwarding as secure as hardware-based?)

    Read the article

  • How to reject messages to unknown user in sendmail cooperating with MS-Exchange?

    - by user71061
    Hi! I have an MS Exchange 2003 configured as a mail server for an organization. As this server is located in this organization internal network and I don't want to expose it directly over internet, I have second server - linux box with sendmail - configured as intelligent relay (it accept all messages from internet addressed to @my_domain, and forward it to internal Exchange serwer, and accepts all messages from this internal Exchange server and forward it over internet). This configuration work's fine, but I want to eliminate messages addressed to not exiting users as early as possible. Good solution could be Enabling on Exchange server function of filtering recipients together with "tar pitting", but in my case this dosn't solve problem, because before any message reach my Exchange server (which could eventually reject it), it has to be already accepted by sendmail server, sitting in front of this Exchange server. So, I want to configure my sendmail server in such a way, that during initial SMTP conversation it could query somehow my Exchange server checking whether recipient address is valid or not, and based on result of this query, accept or reject (possibly with some delay) incoming message in a very early phase. In fact, I have already solved this issue by writing my own, simple sendmail milter program which checks recipient address against text file with list of valid addresses. But this solution is not satisfying me any longer, because it requires frequent updates of this file, and due to lack of time/motivation/programming skills, I don't want to cope further with my source code, adding to it functionality of querying my Exchange server. Maybe I can achieve desired effect by configuring any component of already available linux software. Any ideas?

    Read the article

  • Switch to IPv6 and get rid of NAT? Are you kidding?

    - by Ernie
    So our ISP has set up IPv6 recently, and I've been studying what the transition should entail before jumping into the fray. I've noticed three very important issues: Our office NAT router (an old Linksys BEFSR41) does not support IPv6. Nor does any newer router, AFAICT. The book I'm reading about IPv6 tells me that it makes NAT "unnecessary" anyway. If we're supposed to just get rid of this router and plug everything directly to the Internet, I start to panic. There's no way in hell I'll put our billing database (With lots of credit card information!) on the internet for everyone to see. Even if I were to propose setting up Windows' firewall on it to allow only 6 addresses to have any access to it at all, I still break out in a cold sweat. I don't trust Windows, Windows' firewall, or the network at large enough to even be remotely comfortable with that. There's a few old hardware devices (ie, printers) that have absolutely no IPv6 capability at all. And likely a laundry list of security issues that date back to around 1998. And likely no way to actually patch them in any way. And no funding for new printers. I hear that IPv6 and IPSEC are supposed to make all this secure somehow, but without physically separated networks that make these devices invisible to the Internet, I really can't see how. I can likewise really see how any defences I create will be overrun in short order. I've been running servers on the Internet for years now and I'm quite familiar with the sort of things necessary to secure those, but putting something Private on the network like our billing database has always been completely out of the question. What should I be replacing NAT with, if we don't have physically separate networks?

    Read the article

  • Port forwarding with multiple IP's

    - by Jon
    I work at a company which uses a Fortigate 60 router, something I'm not really familiar with. Everything worked fine with it until a week ago when Comcast came in and replaced our modem. It seemed as though the process went smoothly - our connection came back up and our static IP remained the same. However, none of our port forwarding is working. What has me confused is the Comcast modem apparently has two IP addresses. The WAN2 interface for it in the Fortigate router is set to 10.1.10.10. However, all of our port forwarding settings are set to an external IP address of 10.1.10.50. Now this setup used to work fine, so something with the Comcast modem must have changed. How can I find out what? I tried setting a computer to a local IP of 10.1.10.15 so I could open up the web interface for the modem, but I can't even ping 10.1.10.10 when I do that. Any ideas? Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Migrating to AWS Cloud with auto-scaling - where to put Redis and ElasticSearch?

    - by RobMasters
    I've been trying to research this topic but haven't found anywhere that recommends where to install services such as Redis and ElasticSearch when migrating to a cloud framework. I'm currently running a Symfony2 application on 2 static servers - one is running MySQL and the other is the public facing web server, which also has Redis and ElasticSearch running on it. Both of these servers are virtualised, but they're static in terms of not being able to replicate at present (various aspects are still dependent on the local filesystem). The goal is to migrate to AWS and use auto-scaling to be able to spin up and kill web servers as required, but I'm not clear on what I should put on each EC2 instance. Should they be single-responsibility only? i.e. Set up individual instances for the web server(s), Redis, and ElasticSearch and most likely an RDS instance for MySQL and only set up auto-scaling on the web server(s)? I don't foresee having to scale the ElasticSearch server anytime soon as it's only driving the search functionality, but it's possible that Redis may need to be replicated at some point - but should this be done manually? I'm not sure of how this could be done automatically as each instance needs to be configured to know about it's master/slave(s) as far as I know. I'd appreciate advice on this. One more quick question while I'm here - how would I be able to deploy code changes when there are X web servers currently active? I'm using a Capifony deployment script (Symfony2 version of Capistrano), which I think can handle multiple servers easily enough by specifying an array of :domain addresses...but how can should this be handled when the number of web servers can vary?

    Read the article

  • IPTABLE & IP-routed netwok solution for HOST net and VM's subnet

    - by Daniel
    I've got ProxmoxVE2.1 ruled KVM node on Debian and bunch of VM's guests machine. That is how my networking looks like: # network interface settings auto lo iface lo inet loopback # device: eth0 auto eth0 iface eth0 inet static address 175.219.59.209 gateway 175.219.59.193 netmask 255.255.255.224 post-up echo 1 > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/conf/eth0/proxy_arp And I've got two working subnet solution auto vmbr0 iface vmbr0 inet static address 10.10.0.1 netmask 255.255.0.0 bridge_ports none bridge_stp off bridge_fd 0 post-up ip route add 10.10.0.1/24 dev vmbr0 This way I can reach internet, to resolve outside hosts, update and download everything I need but can't reach one guest VM out of any other VM's inside my network. The second solution allows me to communicate between VM's: auto vmbr1 iface vmbr1 inet static address 10.10.0.1 netmask 255.255.255.0 bridge_ports none bridge_stp off bridge_fd 0 post-up echo 1 > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_forward post-up iptables -t nat -A POSTROUTING -s '10.10.0.0/24' -o vmbr1 -j MASQUERADE post-down iptables -t nat -D POSTROUTING -s '10.10.0.0/24' -o vmbr1 -j MASQUERADE I can even NAT internal addresses: -t nat -I PREROUTING -p tcp --dport 789 -j DNAT --to-destination 10.10.0.220:345 My inexperienced mind is ready to double VM's net adapters: one for the first solution and another - for second (with slightly different adresses) but I'm pretty sure that it's a dumb way to resolve the problem and everything can be resolved via iptables/ip route rules that I can't create. I've tried a dozen of "wizard manuals" and "howto's" to mix both solution but without success. Looking for an advice (and good reading links for networking begginers).

    Read the article

  • Configure linux machine as bridge/switch and end device

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

    Read the article

  • How to remove NTFS system files from a previous Vista installation

    - by Boldewyn
    I'm trying to shrink my system partition under Win Vista. It's all fine, except that in front of the last 300MB of the volume sits a single file, that cannot be moved by defrag or other means from its position. It's called C:\$Extend\$UsnJrnl:$J, and my assumtion is, that it is left from a previous installation of Vista, when I re-set up the system. Now, googling for this kind of files brings interesting results, but no solution to my problem: Files left on the disk can become ownerless in a new setup of Windows and inaccessible (even for administrators). To be able to access them again, I found the tip to use takeown to re-assign them to the Admin group (or anyone else). Works like a charm for normal files, but not for the C:\$Extend stuff. The C:\$Extend folder is a system folder of the NTFS file system, where the journal is stored (especially in a file called $UsnJrnl:$Data, whose name is surprisingly close to mine). You can delete the journal with fsutil usn /delete C:, however, this doesn't work from within the booted system (as I found out trying). Also, I'm not quite sure of the side effects. You can't move the NTFS own files with standard defrag tools. The same holds, by the way, for not accessible files. Every bit of knowledge out there is targeted to either not accessible files or the $Extend NTFS stuff, but noone addresses my problem involving both, an inaccessible system file. Question: How can I remove this file, or at least how can I move it on the disk?

    Read the article

  • Windows Server 2008 R2 Virtual Network Setup

    - by jpearl01
    Hi all, Some background: I'm very much new to networking in general, and virtualization in particular. I'm trying to set up a series of VMs as we are transitioning to a thin client setup. I have been supplied a limited number of static ip addresses. The server is located in an offsite building which houses the network we use to connect to the internet, share folders etc. The setup I've been trying to go for is this: The host OS (Windows Server 2008 R2) is bound to one nic using one of the static ips (say, Nic1 and ip 10.255.6.61). I've set up another external virtual network attached to another physical nic , and a virtual private network attached to no nic. There is one VM running the same os (as the host). This VM is connected to both the external virtual network (and uses another static ip say Nic2 and ip 10.255.6.62) and also to the virtual private network (I gave it a static random ip 192.168.88.1 subnet mask 255.255.255.0). This virtual private network is connected to all the other VMs. I'd like to share the internet connection with all the other VMs on the private virtual network, and so I installed the RRAS role on the server connected to Nic2, and selected the option to share the internet over the vpn. I've run through the RRAS wizard a few times, trying different configurations, but none of them seem to be letting the other vms connect to the 'net. The vms seem to connect to the virtual private network fine, they are assigned an ip address and everything, but no internet, and no rest of the network either. The other problem is in general I connect to the vms with RDP. Will that be possible with a setup like this? i.e. will the vms show up as computers on the network? If not, what are my other options? Thanks! ~josh

    Read the article

  • Last (I think and hope) problems configuring SSL certificate with Apache and VirtualHosts

    - by user65567
    Finally I set apache2 to get a single certificate for all subdomains. [...] # Go ahead and accept connections for these vhosts # from non-SNI clients SSLStrictSNIVHostCheck off # Apache setup which will listen for and accept SSL connections on port 443. Listen 443 # Listen for virtual host requests on all IP addresses NameVirtualHost *:443 # Because this virtual host is defined first, it will # be used as the default if the hostname is not received # in the SSL handshake, e.g. if the browser doesn't support # SNI. <VirtualHost *:443> ServerName domain.localhost DocumentRoot "/Users/<my_user_name>/Sites/domain/public" <Directory "/Users/<my_user_name>/Sites/domain/public"> Order allow,deny Allow from all </Directory> # SSL Configuration SSLEngine on ... </VirtualHost> <VirtualHost *:443> ServerName subdomain1.domain.localhost DocumentRoot "/Users/<my_user_name>/Sites/subdomain1/public" <Directory "/Users/<my_user_name>/Sites/subdomain1/public"> Order allow,deny Allow from all </Directory> # SSL Configuration SSLEngine on ... </VirtualHost> <VirtualHost *:443> ServerName subdomain2.domain.localhost DocumentRoot "/Users/<my_user_name>/Sites/subdomain2/public" <Directory "/Users/<my_user_name>/Sites/subdomain2/public"> Order allow,deny Allow from all </Directory> # SSL Configuration SSLEngine on ... </VirtualHost> So, for example, I can correctly access https://subdomain1.domain.localhost https://subdomain2.domain.localhost ... Now, anyway, I have problems on accessing http://subdomain1.domain.localhost http://subdomain2.domain.localhost ... Since I use a Mac Os, on accessing the "http: version", I get a default page "Your website." (instead of a error). Why does it happen?

    Read the article

  • Switch Before Firewall / Router - Multiple public IPs

    - by rii
    I currently Have a 10Mbit Full duplex circuit connected to a small unmanaged switch which then connects to a Sonicwall Firewall / Router. I have several public IP addresses (/28) that are assigned to several devices in my setup. Now the problem is the small switch I have was lent to me and needs to be returned, I have replaced this switch with several other switches but for some reason any other switch I use causes the network to become extremely slow. I believe this is a problem with the autonegotiation of theses hubs, so I am thinking of purchasing a small managed switch (cisco 300 series) and making the receiving port on the swith Explicitly 10Mbit Full Duplex and see if this works. My question is, being that this is a managed switch and needs an IP, will I still be able to run my public ips through it? Say the circuit has 70.80.4.1 - 7 will I still be able to assign 70.80.4.2 to my firewall and 70.80.4.3 to my router connected to some other port in the switch? Will I have to assign the switch a public IP address in this range as well for it to "route" to those other devices or does the switch does not care what IPs goes through it while operating as a Layer 2 Switch? Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thanks in advanced!

    Read the article

  • Setting Remote Desktop to allows IPv6 connections

    - by Garrett
    Setup: Basically I have 3 machines (2 virtual and 1 physical) that I would like to be able to RDP in to from outside my NAT (a router). The VMs are Windows 7 and Windows XP, both fully patched with Teredo installed and working, both running in VirtualBox (their host also has Teredo working, though I'm not sure if that matters). They both have bridged network adapters with promiscuous mode enabled. The physical machine is Windows 7 fully patched with an HFS server running on it and a dynamic DNS set up for my public IPv4 address and port forwarded. It also has Teredo installed and working. Symptoms: According to http://test-ipv6.com/ all 3 have public IPv6 addresses, and they can all connect to http://ipv6.google.com/. I can ping the XP VM from the host it's running on but I cannot ping it from any other machine. Also, I cannot ping either of the other machines from anywhere. I cannot connect to any of them over RDP from IPv6, however I can connect to all of them through IPv4. Any ideas what is going wrong?

    Read the article

  • Server 2003 and XP Client; Why are HTTP connections being silently dropped.

    - by Asa Yeamans
    On my network, my edge-router, a windows 2003 r2 server router with all the latest updates, will drop packets, but only under specific circumstances. I have troubleshot and isolated it down to the most simple configuration i can. There is NO NAT involved. Only fully-public IP addresses. No Firewalls are running either, all ahve been disabled. no packet filters on any interfaces anywhere either. I have a single Windows XP virtual machine and my edge-router(the windows 2003 r2 server, and also a virtual machine) running on a windows 2008 x64 r2 system (running virtual server 2005 as i dont have Intel-VT compatible chip yet). The edge router can access any external http site just fine, no issues. However the windows XP machine is only able to access certain sites. These work: www.google.com www.txstate.edu www.workintexas.com www.thedailywtf.com . These Dont: www.yahoo.com www.utexas.edu en.wikipedia.org slashdot.org www.bing.com. I have removed all possibility of DNS issues by connecting with net-cat from the XP box and sending GET /\r\nHost: \r\n\r\n and that connection replicates the issue as well. The network setup: My statically assigned IP block: x.x.x.168/29 DSL Modem -----PPPoE Connection---- x.x.x.169[EdgeRouter] [EdgeRouter]x.x.x.170 -----Virtual Ethernet----- x.x.x.174 [Test2] Test2's Default gateway is x.x.x.170 and test2 can ping any and every valid, accessible, public IP address with no packet loss what-so-ever. If i connect directly over PPPoE from test2 (the XP box) everything works just fine... Im at my wits end, i have NO IDEA whats causing this.

    Read the article

  • Virus cleanup; Windows Automatic Updates service crashes in esent.dll

    - by quack quixote
    Background I'm doing system recovery on an old WinXP SP1 system brought to me on suspicion of virus infection. After taking preliminary backups, I used MalwareBytes to detect and clean the infection. I might've even gotten it all. In the process, I've discovered (a) the system drive is showing signs of impending failure, and (b) the owner has been using the system's old crusty IE-6 instead of the up-to-date Firefox I've provided for him. So naturally, thinking I had a relatively stable system, I tried to hit the Windows Update site to install IE-8, in case further training doesn't stick. The update site told me it needed to update the installer, and I started that process. Soon after, wuauclt.exe started crashing, reporting addresses in module esent.dll. There's a Microsoft KB (910437) on a problem with that DLL, so I downloaded the hotfix and installed. The crashing did not stop. I attempted to install SP3 from the offline installer, but that didn't fix the issue either. The system is reporting a few hard drive / IDE controller errors, but they don't correlate to the crashes, so they aren't the direct cause. I've also attempted to rollback to the time between the infection removal and the first crashes, but that doesn't help. Question The hotfix I tried to install dealt with problem in transaction logs of the Extensible Storage Engine (ESE) database. I suspect this issue is similar, but that the database itself (whatever the ESE database is) is corrupted. Is there a way to clean or clear this database so that system operation returns to normal? Can someone enlighten me as to what the ESE database actually is, and where it resides? Can I just locate some files and delete them to bring this under control?

    Read the article

  • dnsmasq Client TTL

    - by user548971
    I have a situation where my hosts file is constantly changing. Because of this I don't want clients to cache ip addresses resolved using the hosts file. Here is the command that starts dnsmasq for me: /usr/sbin/dnsmasq -K -R -y -Z -b -E -S 8.8.8.8 -l /tmp/dhcp.leases -r /tmp/resolv.conf.auto --stop-dns-rebind --rebind-localhost-ok --dhcp-range=lan,192.168.2.2,192.168.2.249,255.255.255.0,12h -2 eth0 In looking at this site: http://www.thekelleys.org.uk/dnsmasq/docs/dnsmasq-man.html I see that the -T option has this description: -T, --local-ttl=<time> When replying with information from /etc/hosts or the DHCP leases file dnsmasq by default sets the time-to-live field to zero, meaning that the requester should not itself cache the information. This is the correct thing to do in almost all situations. This option allows a time-to-live (in seconds) to be given for these replies. This will reduce the load on the server at the expense of clients using stale data under some circumstances. My command doesn't have the -T option. Do I need it or does dnsmasq default TTL to zero without it?

    Read the article

  • do I need to create an AD site for VPN network

    - by ykyri
    I have Windows Domain level 2008 R2. There are four GC DC in four different physical locations. I have Kerio-based VPN network for replication and remote administration. Here is how network configured: dc1: local IP: 192.168.0.10 VPN IP: 192.168.1.10 dc2: local IP: 10.10.8.11 VPN IP: 192.168.1.11 dc3: local IP: 10.10.9.12 VPN IP: 192.168.1.12 dc4: local IP: 10.10.10.13 VPN IP: 192.168.1.13 That's simple, replication and all works fine but when running dcdiag on dc3 I have an error: A warning event occurred. EventID: 0x000016AF During the past 4.12 hours there have been 216 connections to this Domain Controller from client machines whose IP addresses don't map to any of the existing sites in the enterprise. <...> The log(s) may contain additional unrelated debugging information. To filter out the needed information, please search for lines which contain text 'NO_CLIENT_SITE:'. The first word after this string is the client name and the second word is the client IP address. Here is netlogon.log lines example: 05/30 12:07:39 DOMAIN.NAME: NO_CLIENT_SITE: dc2 192.168.1.11 05/31 09:52:11 DOMAIN.NAME: NO_CLIENT_SITE: dc4 192.168.1.13 05/31 19:49:31 DOMAIN.NAME: NO_CLIENT_SITE: adm-note 192.168.1.101 07/01 05:16:26 DOMAIN.NAME: NO_CLIENT_SITE: dc1 192.168.1.10 All VPN-joined computers are generates same log line as above. Computer amd-note is for example administrator's notebook, also have VPN. Question is should I add new AD site and bind VPN subnet 192.168.1.0/24 with that site?

    Read the article

  • Juniper SSG20 IP settings for email server

    - by codemonkie
    We have 5 usable external static IP addresses leased by our ISP: .49 to .53, where .49 is assigned to the Juniper SSG20 firewall and NATed for 172.16.10.0/24 .50 is assigned to a windows box for web server and domain controller .51 is assigned to another windows box with exchange server (domain: mycompany1.com) mx record is pointing to 20x.xx.xxx.51 Currently there is a policy set for all SMTP incoming traffic addressed to .51 forward to the NATed address of the exchange server box (private IP: 172.16.10.194). We can send and receive emails for both internal and external, but the gmail is saying mails from mycomany1.com is not sent from the same IP as the mx lookup however is from 20x.xx.xxx.49: Received-SPF: neutral (google.com: 20x.xx.xxx.49 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of [email protected]) client-ip=20x.xx.xxx.49; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=neutral (google.com: 20x.xx.xxx.49 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of [email protected]) [email protected] and the mx record in global dns space as well as in the domain controller .50 for mail.mycompany1.com is set to 20x.xx.xxx.51 My attempt to resolve the above issue is to Update the mx record from 20x.xx.xxx.51 to 20x.xx.xxx.49 Create a new VIP for SMTP traffic addressed to 20x.xx.xxx.49 to forward to 172.16.10.194 After my changes incoming email stopped working, I believe it has something to do with the Juniper setting that SMTP addressed to .49 is not forwarded to 172.16.10.194 Also, I have been wondering is it mandatory to assign an external static IP address to the Juniper firewall? Any helps appreciated. TIA

    Read the article

  • Random and Selective ARP blindness in VMWare ESXi 4.1

    - by Peter Grace
    We have multiple VMWare ESX servers spread out amongst our company, doing various tasks. One particular ESXi host is exhibiting very peculiar behavior. We detect it when our monitoring system (Orion) notifies us that it can no longer ping the box. Upon jumping on the local console of the guest in question, we see that it cannot ping any new addresses that aren't already in its ARP table. At first we thought that the problem was just related to one of our guests, as the problem seemed to always happen to another guest, DevRedis. However, this afternoon the problem swapped and started happening on ApacheBox rather than DevRedis. When I have been fortunate to catch the problem, I have run tcpdump on both sides of the connection (one side being vmware, the other side being a physical webserver) and have noticed the following course of events: Guest ApacheBox sends an ARP request for the physical address of server WindowsBeast WindowsBeast tenders an ARP is-at back to the network indicating its physical mac address. ApacheBox never sees the ARP is-at response. The ESX host in question is running VMware ESXi, 4.1.0, 348481 The two guests (DevRedis and ApacheBox) are both running CentOS 6.3, however they are running two separate kernel versions ( 2.6.32-279.9.1.el6.x86_64 and 2.6.32-279.el6.x86_64 ) so I'm not entirely sure it's a CentOS problem. Does anyone have any thoughts on what might cause this? Has anyone run into it before?

    Read the article

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

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

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114  | Next Page >